Cattle have had tags that help their handlers track them for decades. You people asked for this so you could feel safe, and you kept asking for it, by voting for the same corporate shills who are delighted that you've been so distracted by "teh terrorists" (and gay marriage, and abortions) that you're not paying attention to what's been happening. No move along, before we get out the prod.
Companies won't pay for infinite bandwidth, so they will throttle you eventually.
TCP_WINDOWS_SIZE will put a maximum on how much you can download based on how far away the server is. Anything more than 20 to 30ms and it won't be much faster than what we have today.
Anything that is encrypted is limited to the computational capacity of the CPU, unless you have an encryption acceleration chip. Around 25 to 35Mbps depending on the encryption method and how much load that crypt takes. More secure means more CPU, right now arc_four being the fastest, but least secure.
Well, now. Those are some of the most ignorant, non-arguments for higher bandwidth that we've seen today. So I shouldn't have something many parts of the world already have because, what, TCP window size? Huh? Using encryption would make something more than my 20 Mbps cable connection economically unfeasible? WTF? The plain fact is (and has been for some time) that we are getting screwed by ineffective regulation of monopoly telecom companies who are screwing us even worse. Competition scares the shit out of these companies so they are spending tons of money fighting it wherever they can. So access to a thing that is not available on "free market" terms is always going to set up an economic divide. For those on the right side of that divide, that's a good thing.
I suspect for the vast majority of swarms this will be zero or near zero. Most people who use torrents for piracy generally aren't too keen on paying up for it.
I believe what you're calling "politics" is something more fundamentally important. In the '60's everyone just knew what it was silly to suggest that anyone without a penis could be an astronaut. That notion is stupid of course, but there are still a lot of us who don't fully get that; even today, in 2014.
BTW, thanks to OP for sharing this. I don't think I'd ever heard of Jerrie Cobb before today. I did, however, immediately reflect on one of her peers, Pancho Barnes, who probably taught several hundred pilots of the Mercury 7 generation to fly.
It's part of a paid smear campaign, intended to establish a belief that Linux is difficult and unreliable. Have you noticed how every discussion about Linux/Foss on Slashdot is centered on these weird corner-cases that almost nobody in the real world ever sees?
Well... in this case, not so much. When it comes to audio support the linux landscape is a minefield of poorly documented, often unstable crap with poor interoperability. In other words, most of it is shit. None of it works well without considerable tweaking, after spending far to much time and effort running down solutions in those support forums.
Don't get me wrong. I make my living running linux boxen. I am also a semi-serious audiophile and would love to use linux in that pursuit as well. Can't do it.
This kind of thing is inexcusable. It is clearly unethical and it should be illegal. Think we'll get a law like that passed? No, I mean one that doesn't tie the hands of our friend, the government, whom we must entrust with secret powers to keep us safe. I just mean shady operators like Whisper..., and Google.
Actually, if I can run all the magic on hardware that I control, it's every bit of that idealistic utopia. Oh, wait. That's virtualization, not "cloud technology". My mistake.
"Yeah. We're all about the 'free market', until we're not. Then we're just blatantly hypocritical pricks." No wait, that's our stance on personal liberty, except when it's women or gays we're talking about."
Cultures are different. East is East, West is West.
Yes, but rational behavior transcends culture, does it not? What possible rational reason could an adult have for denying that which is patently obvious to anyone who cares to look?
Bullshit. A natural monopoly exists WRT the distribution media. It is not in any way reasonable to expect a free and open market when all comers are allowed to string their own copper or fiber. We can argue about who gets to own the infrastructure, but until real competition is enabled, we will always have the abuses typified by the current crop of monopoly holders.
I guess. But WTF were you people thinking? That course of action was a not only a colossal blunder, it was an obviously colossal blunder. What twisted reasoning could possibly have made that seem like a good idea.?
You keep using that word. I do not think that it means what you think it means. More to the point, the income inequality issue exists, independent of your personal definition of capitalism, or the word "less".
What is it about the Chinese that compels them to grin and flatly deny that which is clearly and demonstrably so? No reasonable person above the age of three would be so disingenuous, so why the stupid and childish denials?
I have a perfect, 100% effective solution to this problem: I don't, and never have used 'The Cloud' in the first place. It's a stupid concept, it's poor data security, it's a waste of money, and you're asking for trouble if you use it. Store your data some other way that you have 100% control over, don't let complete strangers do it for you.
I beg to differ. We use cloud storage to keep copies of some very important documents (compliance requirements) that are central to several business processes. One copy we store locally, and the other we store in the cloud. Both are encrypted before storage so the security question is meaningless. You could lift all those files, from either location, and have nothing without the key. What's not meaningless is the savings we gain by using the cloud for that backup copy. Duplicating that store, including the geography, using hardware we own is certainly possible, but nowhere near as cost effective.
I find that local backups are better than cloud backups. I have a 1TB external hard drive that's nearly filled up.
What you have described is not a backup. It's a copy, a copy which is sitting right next to your original; subject to most of the same threats as the original. I wish you luck.
I hate hardware and for all intents and purposes it can go shove itself up its own ass. As a result I very much love the cloud, no matter how much of a buzzword it is. Let someone else worry about the tedious busywork it is to get one piece of hardware to talk to another. Oh what's that? A disk died? I don't give a damn because I don't have to drive 30 minutes each direction just to change it. Ha!
You aren't encumbered by any compliance regulations, are you. Just sayin'...
People don't listen to that preflight announcement stuff because they've heard it a hundred times before. People who've flown even a couple of times before don't need to listen. People who are on their first flight, where it's all new and exciting are paying attention.
So, no - I know how to wear a seatbelt and that my seat cushion can be used as a floatation device and to check where the nearest exit row is...yadda yadda yadda. I can stick my nose into my phone and I won't miss anything important.
What's needed is either to make those instructions INTERESTING (like the Southwest Airlines people often do) - or to only give the routine instructions to people who need it. That way, when something truly important comes up, people will pay attention.
You make a good point, but I have seen way too many heads-down-and-texting fucktards walking or at the wheel to believe that there aren't a few first-time fliers in that same group on every flight. 'Cause you just know what what Suzie just tweeted is way more important than what the cabin crew has to say. Right? So things go badly, and we have to evacuate, and clueless fucktard, sitting one row in front of the over-wing exits, decides he has to get out the same way he got on. I'll not lose any sleep over that risk, but anyone who wants to smack clueless texting fucktards around for not paying attention when they should, even if its only the pre-flight safety brief, gets a thumbs up from me.
The image app gladly backed-up the new images to apple cloud. They were not or they did intend to put it on the internet. Your argument is completely invalid
Bullshit. Ignorance is not an excuse. True they didn't intend to "put it on the Internet" but that is unequivocally precisely what they did, trusting that whatever security measures the custodian of those images was adequate. It should be clear by now that placing sensitive data, of any kind, onto networks that you don't control is a bad idea.
...sending them into the cloud is stupid. At some point, we have to take responsibility for protecting our own privacy and I'm sorry, but handing my private shit off to someone else, who offers only a vague promise of privacy (made via a totally opaque ToS agreement) qualifies as "stupid enough that you don't get to bitch about it" when the inevitable happens. Does that excuse the perpetrators of the crime? Not in the least, but jeezuz, let's at least give a nod towards common sense here. Why would you do with your digital images what you'd never have thought of doing with the same images printed on paper? Hmm?
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't smart enough to track trends, but it does do graphs so you can easily see where your headed and how fast.
Cattle have had tags that help their handlers track them for decades. You people asked for this so you could feel safe, and you kept asking for it, by voting for the same corporate shills who are delighted that you've been so distracted by "teh terrorists" (and gay marriage, and abortions) that you're not paying attention to what's been happening. No move along, before we get out the prod.
Because employers being forced to pay more than someone is worth is a big problem in present-day America...
I see what you did there. Almost got me, with your uber-subtle sarcasm. Nicely done, sir.
More on that:
Companies won't pay for infinite bandwidth, so they will throttle you eventually.
TCP_WINDOWS_SIZE will put a maximum on how much you can download based on how far away the server is. Anything more than 20 to 30ms and it won't be much faster than what we have today.
Anything that is encrypted is limited to the computational capacity of the CPU, unless you have an encryption acceleration chip. Around 25 to 35Mbps depending on the encryption method and how much load that crypt takes. More secure means more CPU, right now arc_four being the fastest, but least secure.
Well, now. Those are some of the most ignorant, non-arguments for higher bandwidth that we've seen today. So I shouldn't have something many parts of the world already have because, what, TCP window size? Huh? Using encryption would make something more than my 20 Mbps cable connection economically unfeasible? WTF? The plain fact is (and has been for some time) that we are getting screwed by ineffective regulation of monopoly telecom companies who are screwing us even worse. Competition scares the shit out of these companies so they are spending tons of money fighting it wherever they can. So access to a thing that is not available on "free market" terms is always going to set up an economic divide. For those on the right side of that divide, that's a good thing.
Full mod points for parent, please. This citizen gets it.
...yet another reason to not trust the Google. I have no doubt that those who don't value privacy will be all over the new hotness. I won't.
Why pay for TV when you can download the shows you care about?
Really? And where can I do this? Most of the "shows that I care about" are completely unavailable via the medium you're suggesting.
I suspect for the vast majority of swarms this will be zero or near zero. Most people who use torrents for piracy generally aren't too keen on paying up for it.
[citation needed]
I believe what you're calling "politics" is something more fundamentally important. In the '60's everyone just knew what it was silly to suggest that anyone without a penis could be an astronaut. That notion is stupid of course, but there are still a lot of us who don't fully get that; even today, in 2014.
BTW, thanks to OP for sharing this. I don't think I'd ever heard of Jerrie Cobb before today. I did, however, immediately reflect on one of her peers, Pancho Barnes, who probably taught several hundred pilots of the Mercury 7 generation to fly.
Beat me to it, but yeah, Fidonet and ZMH. Nice shot there, old timer.
It's part of a paid smear campaign, intended to establish a belief that Linux is difficult and unreliable. Have you noticed how every discussion about Linux/Foss on Slashdot is centered on these weird corner-cases that almost nobody in the real world ever sees?
Well... in this case, not so much. When it comes to audio support the linux landscape is a minefield of poorly documented, often unstable crap with poor interoperability. In other words, most of it is shit. None of it works well without considerable tweaking, after spending far to much time and effort running down solutions in those support forums. Don't get me wrong. I make my living running linux boxen. I am also a semi-serious audiophile and would love to use linux in that pursuit as well. Can't do it.
This kind of thing is inexcusable. It is clearly unethical and it should be illegal. Think we'll get a law like that passed? No, I mean one that doesn't tie the hands of our friend, the government, whom we must entrust with secret powers to keep us safe. I just mean shady operators like Whisper..., and Google.
Actually, if I can run all the magic on hardware that I control, it's every bit of that idealistic utopia. Oh, wait. That's virtualization, not "cloud technology". My mistake.
"Yeah. We're all about the 'free market', until we're not. Then we're just blatantly hypocritical pricks." No wait, that's our stance on personal liberty, except when it's women or gays we're talking about."
Cultures are different. East is East, West is West.
Yes, but rational behavior transcends culture, does it not? What possible rational reason could an adult have for denying that which is patently obvious to anyone who cares to look?
Bullshit. A natural monopoly exists WRT the distribution media. It is not in any way reasonable to expect a free and open market when all comers are allowed to string their own copper or fiber. We can argue about who gets to own the infrastructure, but until real competition is enabled, we will always have the abuses typified by the current crop of monopoly holders.
I guess. But WTF were you people thinking? That course of action was a not only a colossal blunder, it was an obviously colossal blunder. What twisted reasoning could possibly have made that seem like a good idea.?
less capitalist
You keep using that word. I do not think that it means what you think it means. More to the point, the income inequality issue exists, independent of your personal definition of capitalism, or the word "less".
What is it about the Chinese that compels them to grin and flatly deny that which is clearly and demonstrably so? No reasonable person above the age of three would be so disingenuous, so why the stupid and childish denials?
I have a perfect, 100% effective solution to this problem: I don't, and never have used 'The Cloud' in the first place. It's a stupid concept, it's poor data security, it's a waste of money, and you're asking for trouble if you use it. Store your data some other way that you have 100% control over, don't let complete strangers do it for you.
I beg to differ. We use cloud storage to keep copies of some very important documents (compliance requirements) that are central to several business processes. One copy we store locally, and the other we store in the cloud. Both are encrypted before storage so the security question is meaningless. You could lift all those files, from either location, and have nothing without the key. What's not meaningless is the savings we gain by using the cloud for that backup copy. Duplicating that store, including the geography, using hardware we own is certainly possible, but nowhere near as cost effective.
I find that local backups are better than cloud backups. I have a 1TB external hard drive that's nearly filled up.
What you have described is not a backup. It's a copy, a copy which is sitting right next to your original; subject to most of the same threats as the original. I wish you luck.
I hate hardware and for all intents and purposes it can go shove itself up its own ass. As a result I very much love the cloud, no matter how much of a buzzword it is. Let someone else worry about the tedious busywork it is to get one piece of hardware to talk to another. Oh what's that? A disk died? I don't give a damn because I don't have to drive 30 minutes each direction just to change it. Ha!
You aren't encumbered by any compliance regulations, are you. Just sayin'...
People don't listen to that preflight announcement stuff because they've heard it a hundred times before. People who've flown even a couple of times before don't need to listen. People who are on their first flight, where it's all new and exciting are paying attention.
So, no - I know how to wear a seatbelt and that my seat cushion can be used as a floatation device and to check where the nearest exit row is...yadda yadda yadda. I can stick my nose into my phone and I won't miss anything important.
What's needed is either to make those instructions INTERESTING (like the Southwest Airlines people often do) - or to only give the routine instructions to people who need it. That way, when something truly important comes up, people will pay attention.
You make a good point, but I have seen way too many heads-down-and-texting fucktards walking or at the wheel to believe that there aren't a few first-time fliers in that same group on every flight. 'Cause you just know what what Suzie just tweeted is way more important than what the cabin crew has to say. Right? So things go badly, and we have to evacuate, and clueless fucktard, sitting one row in front of the over-wing exits, decides he has to get out the same way he got on. I'll not lose any sleep over that risk, but anyone who wants to smack clueless texting fucktards around for not paying attention when they should, even if its only the pre-flight safety brief, gets a thumbs up from me.
The image app gladly backed-up the new images to apple cloud. They were not or they did intend to put it on the internet. Your argument is completely invalid
Bullshit. Ignorance is not an excuse. True they didn't intend to "put it on the Internet" but that is unequivocally precisely what they did, trusting that whatever security measures the custodian of those images was adequate. It should be clear by now that placing sensitive data, of any kind, onto networks that you don't control is a bad idea.
...sending them into the cloud is stupid. At some point, we have to take responsibility for protecting our own privacy and I'm sorry, but handing my private shit off to someone else, who offers only a vague promise of privacy (made via a totally opaque ToS agreement) qualifies as "stupid enough that you don't get to bitch about it" when the inevitable happens. Does that excuse the perpetrators of the crime? Not in the least, but jeezuz, let's at least give a nod towards common sense here. Why would you do with your digital images what you'd never have thought of doing with the same images printed on paper? Hmm?