Additionally, within milliseconds of the first handshake both ends should have enough to know what the connection is really going to support.
Again, the resistor example. For the first few milliseconds, the current is basically 1A, and then it starts to drop only after some time (depending on the power dissipation capability of the resistor). There are non-linearities in the system, different effects become significant over different time periods. E.g., the handshaking happens in a few milliseconds, but it's only after 100-500ms under high load that the data rate tanks.
I'm not disagreeing with you about the map. They probably don't go and actually test the signal everywhere, they just say "we put a tower here that can theoretically reach this far so that area is covered".
I'm just saying that based on the physics and engineering behind how these systems work, it is absolutely possible that your phone says you have good signal when you actually don't. It doesn't mean your phone is lying to you.
There is some speculation that Manafort got played and was used to play Trump. The trap isn't just set, it's already been sprung.
Notice that they said Manafort was lying very soon after Trump gave his written answers to Mueller. Manafort's legal team and Trump's legal team were known to still be conferring even after Manafort began "cooperating". So likely Manafort was planning to feed Trump info on the investigation...
Except Mueller is wise to this, and is feeding Manafort BS, knowing the stable genius will get wind. Trump answers the questions thinking he knows what Mueller's "got" on him and that he can't be caught lying. Of course he lied, because it's Trump, but in this case it matters because he lied about material things in writing which Mueller already has the hard evidence for.
The other possibility I've heard is that if it's actually Trump's answers Mueller is using as evidence that Manafort lied... then Manafort's only defence becomes proving that Trump lied. He might get a pardon, but Mueller has state charges lined up as well just in case. Even if Manafort's not up for perjury, it's pretty damning for your character if the evidence you're a liar is a sworn statement by the POTUS.
It's actually pretty fucking funny when you think about it.
Not to defend ISPs/telecoms but... it's very possible that you can have a good signal but not a good connection. The value shown on your phone comes from the RSSI, which is measured at the phone. It tells you how strongly you see the tower, but it doesn't mean the tower also sees you just as well.
Now, of course there's a bit of handshaking so that the phone can tell the difference, but there are a lot of reasons this may not work correctly in specific circumstances. The phone could "think" there's a good connection, until you actually try to push any real data through it and suddenly it tanks. There may also be an asymmetry in the direction (e.g. you can transmit faster than you can receive). The bars you see are only an indication of how good the connection should be, based on what the phone and tower can measure about each other's signals... but it's not exact.
It's kinda like if you measure a resistor and you say "Ok that's 1ohm, so if I put 1V on it I should get 1A through it." Except the second you actually put 1A through the resistor it heats up which means the resistance goes up and suddenly the current starts dropping (assuming in this case you are using a constant voltage supply). It doesn't mean your ohmmeter lied to you - or that Ohm's Law is wrong, it just means that the system under load behaves differently.
The fact that you indicate it's a specific location (i.e. exact street corners) indicates that it's probably something environmental which is causing what you're seeing.
Verizon is probably full of shit about a lot of things... but this isn't necessarily one of them.
Doesn't the constant disappointment of loot boxes act as an early lesson that gambling kind of sucks and you can find way cooler uses for money?
Yeah, I mean it's not like they have algorithms that have been developed to give you enough wins at exactly the right rate so that you stay hooked. After all, if they did, gambling would be a huge business!
To all the idiots saying this is just about iPhones and those are a luxury item so therefore blah blah blah.
Read the title again. Iphones and and laptops from China. Nowadays, I would not consider a personal computer to be a luxury item. If you're a student for example, you pretty much need a laptop.
Anyone who repeats that crap is just as stuck up and elitist as Trump.
Lol, let me tell you something. You cannot miss a flight by 1 minute. If you have flown significantly in your life, I'm sure you will remember waiting on the plane with everyone else until suddenly 2-3 people board and sit. And then the plane leaves. Of course you can miss a flight, but not by 1 minute.
That means that 1 minute was on top of the time they would have waited for you after everyone else boarded. If you said your download was delayed by 10 or 15 minutes, then maybe I would be more sympathetic. So yes, absolutely this is poor planning and nothing else.
And again, it isn't you vs. one person. This is not like when you had dial-up and your Mom was on the phone so you couldn't play Unreal Tournament. Network management doesn't work that way. For every one person "yapping" there could be another making a 911 call.
The customers paid for the bandwidth and throttling denies them what they paid for.
Yes, well this is an entirely different problem altogether. When ISPs give you a download/upload speed, that is your theoretical maximum. You will almost never get the speed you pay for. The problem is in the way ISPs sell and advertise their speeds, not in how QoS manages the network.
There is such a thing called the "over-subscription rate", which is how much the ISP oversells their bandwidth. I.e. let's say the ISP has a 1 TB pipe to a neighborhood to sell. What they actually do is sell 10 TB of bandwidth to customers in that area, i.e. an over-subscription rate of 10.
No system works the way you describe. If everyone tries to make a call, no one can make a call. If everyone tries to take their money out of the bank, there is not enough cash in existence to match actual wealth. If everyone was guaranteed their advertised speeds from their ISP, everyone would get shitty speeds. We design these systems with the amount of simultaneous usage in mind, and that way we can actually achieve higher performance.
The only correct solutions are to increase the capacity or to reduce the traffic.
Uhh, yeah, you're right. That's why they reduce the traffic by dropping packets, i.e. throttling...
Prioritization is also very subjective. What if you're mindlessly yapping about nothing on the phone, but if my download takes a minute more, I'll miss my flight?
If you miss a flight because a download took a minute longer, then you are to blame for incredibly poor planning. But aside from that, in order for this kind of QoS to impact a bulk download on the order of minutes requires it to be a download that is large enough to take many minutes. Over that kind of time, you would never be able to blame one particular person's usage on your delay. Now the question is no longer "my download vs. your phone call", but actually "my download vs. many other peoples' phone calls". Suddenly the prioritization isn't so subjective.
Of course you think that. I just wanted you to say it.
Because your actual opinion relies on information not in the original article you linked, but actually your pre-existing conspiratorial mindset. Your source says that Twitter admitted their automated system deleted tweets. That's it.
Your opinion, however, is that they were clearly running impromptu damage control for the Democrats, because all technology companies are in the pockets of Democrats, etc. etc. However, none of that is in the article you linked, so it doesn't actually support the viewpoint you have. So citing this source as evidence of all these conspiratorial conclusions is misleading.
I don't appreciate it when people cite sources in a deliberately misleading way. Even Breitbart was less full of shit than you were.
Posting the same reply I gave you last time you linked the same article, which you didn't answer. Presumably because you couldn't find a Breitbart article that had an answer and you're not capable of coming up with one by yourself.
No, they admitted under oath that their automated system deleted 48% of the tweets. Breitbart didn't omit those details, why did you?
Also, why continue to vote for the Republicans in charge of that committee who failed to do anything after Twitter admitted that? They don't advocate for you, so why do you still support them? They took the side of big business, as usual, yet I doubt you're gonna vote to remove any of them from office in 2 weeks, are yah?
Generally trade secrets are things that aren't patentable or worth patenting. They're usually highly esoteric, whereas patents are supposed to have utility beyond a single immediate application (or else it would be a very weak patent).
The classic example is the formula for Coca-Cola. It's not patentable because it likely doesn't have any novelty, but it's obviously highly valuable. And that value somewhat depends on it remaining a secret.
In fact, say Coca-Cola was able to, and did, patent their formula. Well, at that point it would become public knowledge that anyone with access to the USPTO site could lookup. While Coca-Cola would have the 20 year (or however long) exclusivity to the patent, that only restricts monetization. I could start making Coca-Cola in my bathtub, legally, immediately, as long as I don't sell it. Also anyone would be free to innovate on the recipe even while the patent is active.
Confused former Muslim here. Why did they change the clocks for Ramadan exactly? I've literally never heard of such a thing.
Of course, that doesn't mean you're wrong. Even before I turned to apostasy, I was a pretty terrible Muslim.
I do get the not knowing until the morning of (or actually the night before). The start of Ramadan is based on the Moon, so you don't know the exact date until the night before (although you usually know it's going to be one of 2-3 days).
Oh, and I also just realized, you probably don't understand which of 2 things "former" and "latter" refer to. They probably taught you that in school, too.
Do you think Islamic terrorism or Christian terrorism is a bigger problem? I would say the former, personally, is currently a much bigger problem. Obviously, however, I'm against both.
Much in the same way, white supremacism is a much bigger problem than black supremacism. But yeah, I'm against both.
I dunno what laws you think Democrats don't want enforced. Probably the ones that disenfranchise people you don't like voting. Unjust laws shouldn't be enforced, and should be resisted. The country was founded on that very idea. I'm not a Democrat, that's a personal conviction.
The reason it matters is because of the implication of why the tweets were removed. If it was automated, then it means that the tweets triggered existing pattern recognition and got flagged as bots/spam. If it wasn't automated, the implication is that Twitter was doing some sort of impromptu damage control for the Democrats.
I almost guarantee the GP I originally responded to believes the latter.
Against Nazis and white supremacists. Uh oh, slashdot didn't delete my comment, it must be biased too!
I mean, what are the chances that Nazis and KKK members are hated by most of society, and that it becomes reflected in a platform used by large portions of society?
No, they admitted under oath that their automated system deleted 48% of the tweets. Breitbart didn't omit those details, why did you?
Also, why continue to vote for the Republicans in charge of that committee who failed to do anything after Twitter admitted that? They don't advocate for you, so why do you still support them? They took the side of big business, as usual, yet I doubt you're gonna vote to remove any of them from office in 2 weeks, are yah?
Slashdot Mirror
Additionally, within milliseconds of the first handshake both ends should have enough to know what the connection is really going to support.
Again, the resistor example. For the first few milliseconds, the current is basically 1A, and then it starts to drop only after some time (depending on the power dissipation capability of the resistor). There are non-linearities in the system, different effects become significant over different time periods. E.g., the handshaking happens in a few milliseconds, but it's only after 100-500ms under high load that the data rate tanks.
I'm not disagreeing with you about the map. They probably don't go and actually test the signal everywhere, they just say "we put a tower here that can theoretically reach this far so that area is covered".
I'm just saying that based on the physics and engineering behind how these systems work, it is absolutely possible that your phone says you have good signal when you actually don't. It doesn't mean your phone is lying to you.
access to you is just an asset for your ISP to sell to other companies
That is a fantastic way to put it.
There is some speculation that Manafort got played and was used to play Trump. The trap isn't just set, it's already been sprung.
Notice that they said Manafort was lying very soon after Trump gave his written answers to Mueller. Manafort's legal team and Trump's legal team were known to still be conferring even after Manafort began "cooperating". So likely Manafort was planning to feed Trump info on the investigation...
Except Mueller is wise to this, and is feeding Manafort BS, knowing the stable genius will get wind. Trump answers the questions thinking he knows what Mueller's "got" on him and that he can't be caught lying. Of course he lied, because it's Trump, but in this case it matters because he lied about material things in writing which Mueller already has the hard evidence for.
The other possibility I've heard is that if it's actually Trump's answers Mueller is using as evidence that Manafort lied... then Manafort's only defence becomes proving that Trump lied. He might get a pardon, but Mueller has state charges lined up as well just in case. Even if Manafort's not up for perjury, it's pretty damning for your character if the evidence you're a liar is a sworn statement by the POTUS.
It's actually pretty fucking funny when you think about it.
Not to defend ISPs/telecoms but... it's very possible that you can have a good signal but not a good connection. The value shown on your phone comes from the RSSI, which is measured at the phone. It tells you how strongly you see the tower, but it doesn't mean the tower also sees you just as well.
Now, of course there's a bit of handshaking so that the phone can tell the difference, but there are a lot of reasons this may not work correctly in specific circumstances. The phone could "think" there's a good connection, until you actually try to push any real data through it and suddenly it tanks. There may also be an asymmetry in the direction (e.g. you can transmit faster than you can receive). The bars you see are only an indication of how good the connection should be, based on what the phone and tower can measure about each other's signals... but it's not exact.
It's kinda like if you measure a resistor and you say "Ok that's 1ohm, so if I put 1V on it I should get 1A through it." Except the second you actually put 1A through the resistor it heats up which means the resistance goes up and suddenly the current starts dropping (assuming in this case you are using a constant voltage supply). It doesn't mean your ohmmeter lied to you - or that Ohm's Law is wrong, it just means that the system under load behaves differently.
The fact that you indicate it's a specific location (i.e. exact street corners) indicates that it's probably something environmental which is causing what you're seeing.
Verizon is probably full of shit about a lot of things... but this isn't necessarily one of them.
Doesn't the constant disappointment of loot boxes act as an early lesson that gambling kind of sucks and you can find way cooler uses for money?
Yeah, I mean it's not like they have algorithms that have been developed to give you enough wins at exactly the right rate so that you stay hooked. After all, if they did, gambling would be a huge business!
Oh, wait.
Yes, and we also criticize our leaders in America too. How's that work in China? When's the ban on Winnie the Pooh being lifted again?
That would be like Trump trying to ban Cheetos.
"Hey, I just bought the slaves. It's not like I sold them!"
- You, an idiot
To all the idiots saying this is just about iPhones and those are a luxury item so therefore blah blah blah.
Read the title again. Iphones and and laptops from China. Nowadays, I would not consider a personal computer to be a luxury item. If you're a student for example, you pretty much need a laptop.
Anyone who repeats that crap is just as stuck up and elitist as Trump.
You're dumb enough to fuck yourself in the process and call it a win, aren't you.
Necessary condition of being a Trump voter. Or actually a Republican voter in general.
Sure, everyone could handle a 10% tax very easily. Oh unless you're super rich, then you need a tax cut.
Either that, or just secure a small million dollar loan from your daddy.
Our President is a stuck up, toffee nosed, elitist twat.
Lol, let me tell you something. You cannot miss a flight by 1 minute. If you have flown significantly in your life, I'm sure you will remember waiting on the plane with everyone else until suddenly 2-3 people board and sit. And then the plane leaves. Of course you can miss a flight, but not by 1 minute.
That means that 1 minute was on top of the time they would have waited for you after everyone else boarded. If you said your download was delayed by 10 or 15 minutes, then maybe I would be more sympathetic. So yes, absolutely this is poor planning and nothing else.
And again, it isn't you vs. one person. This is not like when you had dial-up and your Mom was on the phone so you couldn't play Unreal Tournament. Network management doesn't work that way. For every one person "yapping" there could be another making a 911 call.
The customers paid for the bandwidth and throttling denies them what they paid for.
Yes, well this is an entirely different problem altogether. When ISPs give you a download/upload speed, that is your theoretical maximum. You will almost never get the speed you pay for. The problem is in the way ISPs sell and advertise their speeds, not in how QoS manages the network.
There is such a thing called the "over-subscription rate", which is how much the ISP oversells their bandwidth. I.e. let's say the ISP has a 1 TB pipe to a neighborhood to sell. What they actually do is sell 10 TB of bandwidth to customers in that area, i.e. an over-subscription rate of 10.
No system works the way you describe. If everyone tries to make a call, no one can make a call. If everyone tries to take their money out of the bank, there is not enough cash in existence to match actual wealth. If everyone was guaranteed their advertised speeds from their ISP, everyone would get shitty speeds. We design these systems with the amount of simultaneous usage in mind, and that way we can actually achieve higher performance.
The only correct solutions are to increase the capacity or to reduce the traffic.
Uhh, yeah, you're right. That's why they reduce the traffic by dropping packets, i.e. throttling...
Prioritization is also very subjective. What if you're mindlessly yapping about nothing on the phone, but if my download takes a minute more, I'll miss my flight?
If you miss a flight because a download took a minute longer, then you are to blame for incredibly poor planning. But aside from that, in order for this kind of QoS to impact a bulk download on the order of minutes requires it to be a download that is large enough to take many minutes. Over that kind of time, you would never be able to blame one particular person's usage on your delay. Now the question is no longer "my download vs. your phone call", but actually "my download vs. many other peoples' phone calls". Suddenly the prioritization isn't so subjective.
One misplaced space in the source code could mean a whole new backdoor to let the Russians in.
Could you please cite this vulnerability? I'm genuinely curious.
Of course you think that. I just wanted you to say it.
Because your actual opinion relies on information not in the original article you linked, but actually your pre-existing conspiratorial mindset. Your source says that Twitter admitted their automated system deleted tweets. That's it.
Your opinion, however, is that they were clearly running impromptu damage control for the Democrats, because all technology companies are in the pockets of Democrats, etc. etc. However, none of that is in the article you linked, so it doesn't actually support the viewpoint you have. So citing this source as evidence of all these conspiratorial conclusions is misleading.
I don't appreciate it when people cite sources in a deliberately misleading way. Even Breitbart was less full of shit than you were.
Yeah but photons only have zero rest mass, they still have relativistic mass.
Also anti-matter does not have negative mass. Matter with negative mass is called exotic matter, and may or may not exist at all.
Posting the same reply I gave you last time you linked the same article, which you didn't answer. Presumably because you couldn't find a Breitbart article that had an answer and you're not capable of coming up with one by yourself.
No, they admitted under oath that their automated system deleted 48% of the tweets. Breitbart didn't omit those details, why did you?
Also, why continue to vote for the Republicans in charge of that committee who failed to do anything after Twitter admitted that? They don't advocate for you, so why do you still support them? They took the side of big business, as usual, yet I doubt you're gonna vote to remove any of them from office in 2 weeks, are yah?
Generally trade secrets are things that aren't patentable or worth patenting. They're usually highly esoteric, whereas patents are supposed to have utility beyond a single immediate application (or else it would be a very weak patent).
The classic example is the formula for Coca-Cola. It's not patentable because it likely doesn't have any novelty, but it's obviously highly valuable. And that value somewhat depends on it remaining a secret.
In fact, say Coca-Cola was able to, and did, patent their formula. Well, at that point it would become public knowledge that anyone with access to the USPTO site could lookup. While Coca-Cola would have the 20 year (or however long) exclusivity to the patent, that only restricts monetization. I could start making Coca-Cola in my bathtub, legally, immediately, as long as I don't sell it. Also anyone would be free to innovate on the recipe even while the patent is active.
Confused former Muslim here. Why did they change the clocks for Ramadan exactly? I've literally never heard of such a thing.
Of course, that doesn't mean you're wrong. Even before I turned to apostasy, I was a pretty terrible Muslim.
I do get the not knowing until the morning of (or actually the night before). The start of Ramadan is based on the Moon, so you don't know the exact date until the night before (although you usually know it's going to be one of 2-3 days).
Oh, and I also just realized, you probably don't understand which of 2 things "former" and "latter" refer to. They probably taught you that in school, too.
Taxes are laws, genius.
Do you think Islamic terrorism or Christian terrorism is a bigger problem? I would say the former, personally, is currently a much bigger problem. Obviously, however, I'm against both.
Much in the same way, white supremacism is a much bigger problem than black supremacism. But yeah, I'm against both.
I dunno what laws you think Democrats don't want enforced. Probably the ones that disenfranchise people you don't like voting. Unjust laws shouldn't be enforced, and should be resisted. The country was founded on that very idea. I'm not a Democrat, that's a personal conviction.
The reason it matters is because of the implication of why the tweets were removed. If it was automated, then it means that the tweets triggered existing pattern recognition and got flagged as bots/spam. If it wasn't automated, the implication is that Twitter was doing some sort of impromptu damage control for the Democrats.
I almost guarantee the GP I originally responded to believes the latter.
Funny. I'm not worried that the "Nazi" label will ever encompass me at all. I'm also not afraid of anyone in my past accusing me of sexual assault.
If you are, maybe some introspection is due. Maybe other people aren't the problem.
Against Nazis and white supremacists. Uh oh, slashdot didn't delete my comment, it must be biased too!
I mean, what are the chances that Nazis and KKK members are hated by most of society, and that it becomes reflected in a platform used by large portions of society?
No, they admitted under oath that their automated system deleted 48% of the tweets. Breitbart didn't omit those details, why did you?
Also, why continue to vote for the Republicans in charge of that committee who failed to do anything after Twitter admitted that? They don't advocate for you, so why do you still support them? They took the side of big business, as usual, yet I doubt you're gonna vote to remove any of them from office in 2 weeks, are yah?