The president of unWired (a much more reputable ISP) has also blocked the same server. A DDoS was apparently attacking said server which wast travelling over both lines. According to this post, the block was due solely to stop the DDoS.
The reason films are acceptable at 24 frames is because there's a very large amount of motion blur inherent to the format. This blur smooths out movement and hides the low frame rate. Stop-motion animation *doesn't* have this motion blur, which becomes obvious whenever you see it.
If you had W-Item, you would select and use an item, then use it again, then unselect it. This would give you an extra item. You could do this with any item and suddenly have 99 Elixirs.
This was doubly useful in the last dungeon, when you had an enemy that would give you a large amount of experience, but was only defeatable after being given an Elixir.
One issue is the fact that there is usually an entrenched monopoly or duopoly in most markets. This is due usually to two reasons:
Creating a brand-new ISP usually has an extremely high barrier to entry, in that you would have to lay down cable to every possible premise in the market. This is *extremely* expensive, and the situation naturally lends itself to a monopoly.
Less common, but still a factor, is a *legally mandated* monopoly. Some communities sign exclusivity agreements with providers, meaning you only can have just the one provider.
In addition, the control of deciding the path of your packets is something that actually lies in the routers that are on the path between you and your target. You don't control it, and it is decided according to algorithms that determine the path of least resistance for your data. You really *can't* have the control necessary to decide the best path for *you*. This automated routing actually a necessary element in load balancing that is inherent to the Internet, and couldn't really be removed without damaging the usability of the internet.
Giving these ISPs the kind of control necessary to overcome network neutrality means that they can give themselves what is effectively censorship control over the communities they serve. Some of us consider preventing that level of control is worth regulating the control ISPs have over their own networks.
Oh yeah.. "their own"...
A significant portion of their networks is actually funded by the taxpayer. The U.S. government gave them $200 billion in order to expand their networks. Government money should come with government regulations.
What will you do to change the balance of copyright to be more in favor of the average citizen and less in favor of the large media companies? Will you work to overturn the DMCA and the PRO-IP acts (and other, similar legislation)?
Had MS come up with a truly better standard and had attempted to see it passed legitimately, I doubt we'd see the complaints we do now. I have seen no one with a specific problem over the VC-1 standard, despite the fact that it is based off of an MS-created codec. If they had truly been interested in actually furthering the state of the art and technical quality, I would personally defend them for actually doing a good job.
why only in this one case are you so willing to claim fraud
We've seen blatant, ample evidence that this was a bought vote. We've seen MS bribe normally uninterested countries into voting their way. We've seen them manage to fast-track a standard when it is obviously due more scrutiny (if nothing else, due to its larger size compared to the earlier ODF standard). And we've seen *blatant* vote tampering with Norway, which voted yes despite a majority of its technical advisors voting no.
The ISO's complicity in all this cheating is plain and obvious to anyone who cares to look. Their attitude of blaming the observers is, frankly, insulting to the morals and intelligence of anyone who is speaking the truth.
Yes, this does bring suspicion on the validity of the other standards. However, the other standards do not have the blatant, obvious process tampering that this one did, nor (to my knowledge) the enormous, unscrupulous corporation with an interest in seeing the standard passed.
He's calling it the "Middle Path". Having autonomy instead of independence (kinda like what Hong Kong has right now) is intended to be a compromise that the Chinese government is supposed to find more agreeable.
The great irony is that you've made this comment using copies of things made by other people. People worked their asses off creating the English Language. It's a vitally important medium of communication, and yet no one's being compensated here. Someone (a whole lot of people, really) had to think up grammar rules, vocabularies, and alphabets, and they aren't even acknowledged.
The RadeonHD driver *is* GPL'd, and all the specifications necessary for writing your own drivers from scratch are in the process of being released. Significant amounts have already been released after being checked out by AMD's lawyers.
And the closed-source, binary module is still making progress while all that other stuff happens.
The originating poster was speaking of the USB Mass Storage Device class. Other devices of this class include USB flash memory sticks, iPod Classics, and any plain HDD-only device that interfaces with a computer through USB. Usage of such a device is supported by most computers with USB ports without installation of any special drivers.
The iPod Touch and the iPhone is not a device of this class unless such a workaround is installed for the firmware that is already preinstalled onto the device.
If we don't ask the question, how will we know who shares the positions? It isn't automatically a given that any candidate holds these positions simply because of political party. Obama largely does, but (as far as I know) Hillary does not, despite the fact that both are currently campaigning for the same position under the same party.
We hate telcos because they spy on us willingly, they have no problems filtering what we do with the internet for their own benefits, and they overcharge us.
We hate owners of IP because of the ridiculous lawsuits they start, and because they've turned the conversation from a respectful one that balances the needs of the IP owner and the citizen to one that rips into the latter for the benefit of the former.
We want the government to force net neutrality on everyone because we *know* that without it, the telcos *will* take advantage of their position and block traffic simply because they don't like it.
The discussion on these points has happened elsewhere, and we've come up with good, valid positions. It is not then unreasonable to find a candidate that shares these positions.
Slashdot Mirror
I haven't tried this myself, but the spacebar should give you a click when the browser is in hover-mode.
http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/msg19609.html
The president of unWired (a much more reputable ISP) has also blocked the same server. A DDoS was apparently attacking said server which wast travelling over both lines. According to this post, the block was due solely to stop the DDoS.
The reason films are acceptable at 24 frames is because there's a very large amount of motion blur inherent to the format. This blur smooths out movement and hides the low frame rate. Stop-motion animation *doesn't* have this motion blur, which becomes obvious whenever you see it.
I'm currently playing MGS4 on an SDTV and... good god, everything's tiny. It's nearly impossible to read half the material on the screen!
I was in this chat, and here's a partial summary of what was discussed:
The current behavior is this:
The redirected urls are of the form www.*.com/net/org
They have partnered with Yahoo to give the results, and are using this as an excuse for the ads.
They do not deny this is a revenue source, and claim it's for "adding speed", etc.
They claim they will not block port 53.
Don't blame me, I voted for Cromartie!
It would take a miracle worker to run the State of California
Montgomery Scott?
If, before you could eat it, you were somehow required to add Monopolorton(tm) brand Sodium, and they somehow stuck you with the sodium chromate?
I'd call that the restaurant's problem.
I love how the previous story was this one:
http://mobile.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/09/220244
I remember an item duplication bug from FF7..
If you had W-Item, you would select and use an item, then use it again, then unselect it. This would give you an extra item. You could do this with any item and suddenly have 99 Elixirs.
This was doubly useful in the last dungeon, when you had an enemy that would give you a large amount of experience, but was only defeatable after being given an Elixir.
One issue is the fact that there is usually an entrenched monopoly or duopoly in most markets. This is due usually to two reasons:
Creating a brand-new ISP usually has an extremely high barrier to entry, in that you would have to lay down cable to every possible premise in the market. This is *extremely* expensive, and the situation naturally lends itself to a monopoly.
Less common, but still a factor, is a *legally mandated* monopoly. Some communities sign exclusivity agreements with providers, meaning you only can have just the one provider.
In addition, the control of deciding the path of your packets is something that actually lies in the routers that are on the path between you and your target. You don't control it, and it is decided according to algorithms that determine the path of least resistance for your data. You really *can't* have the control necessary to decide the best path for *you*. This automated routing actually a necessary element in load balancing that is inherent to the Internet, and couldn't really be removed without damaging the usability of the internet.
Giving these ISPs the kind of control necessary to overcome network neutrality means that they can give themselves what is effectively censorship control over the communities they serve. Some of us consider preventing that level of control is worth regulating the control ISPs have over their own networks.
Oh yeah.. "their own"...
A significant portion of their networks is actually funded by the taxpayer. The U.S. government gave them $200 billion in order to expand their networks. Government money should come with government regulations.
How fitting that his name means "stupid" in Japanese...
What will you do to change the balance of copyright to be more in favor of the average citizen and less in favor of the large media companies? Will you work to overturn the DMCA and the PRO-IP acts (and other, similar legislation)?
..and why exactly is the GPL unethical?
They are greatly appreciated.
Had MS come up with a truly better standard and had attempted to see it passed legitimately, I doubt we'd see the complaints we do now. I have seen no one with a specific problem over the VC-1 standard, despite the fact that it is based off of an MS-created codec. If they had truly been interested in actually furthering the state of the art and technical quality, I would personally defend them for actually doing a good job.
We've seen blatant, ample evidence that this was a bought vote. We've seen MS bribe normally uninterested countries into voting their way. We've seen them manage to fast-track a standard when it is obviously due more scrutiny (if nothing else, due to its larger size compared to the earlier ODF standard). And we've seen *blatant* vote tampering with Norway, which voted yes despite a majority of its technical advisors voting no.
The ISO's complicity in all this cheating is plain and obvious to anyone who cares to look. Their attitude of blaming the observers is, frankly, insulting to the morals and intelligence of anyone who is speaking the truth.
Yes, this does bring suspicion on the validity of the other standards. However, the other standards do not have the blatant, obvious process tampering that this one did, nor (to my knowledge) the enormous, unscrupulous corporation with an interest in seeing the standard passed.
Its purr could attract law enforcement officials.
He's calling it the "Middle Path". Having autonomy instead of independence (kinda like what Hong Kong has right now) is intended to be a compromise that the Chinese government is supposed to find more agreeable.
The great irony is that you've made this comment using copies of things made by other people. People worked their asses off creating the English Language. It's a vitally important medium of communication, and yet no one's being compensated here. Someone (a whole lot of people, really) had to think up grammar rules, vocabularies, and alphabets, and they aren't even acknowledged.
The RadeonHD driver *is* GPL'd, and all the specifications necessary for writing your own drivers from scratch are in the process of being released. Significant amounts have already been released after being checked out by AMD's lawyers.
And the closed-source, binary module is still making progress while all that other stuff happens.
The originating poster was speaking of the USB Mass Storage Device class. Other devices of this class include USB flash memory sticks, iPod Classics, and any plain HDD-only device that interfaces with a computer through USB. Usage of such a device is supported by most computers with USB ports without installation of any special drivers.
The iPod Touch and the iPhone is not a device of this class unless such a workaround is installed for the firmware that is already preinstalled onto the device.
If we don't ask the question, how will we know who shares the positions? It isn't automatically a given that any candidate holds these positions simply because of political party. Obama largely does, but (as far as I know) Hillary does not, despite the fact that both are currently campaigning for the same position under the same party.
We hate telcos because they spy on us willingly, they have no problems filtering what we do with the internet for their own benefits, and they overcharge us.
We hate owners of IP because of the ridiculous lawsuits they start, and because they've turned the conversation from a respectful one that balances the needs of the IP owner and the citizen to one that rips into the latter for the benefit of the former.
We want the government to force net neutrality on everyone because we *know* that without it, the telcos *will* take advantage of their position and block traffic simply because they don't like it.
The discussion on these points has happened elsewhere, and we've come up with good, valid positions. It is not then unreasonable to find a candidate that shares these positions.
I said the exact same damn thing when these things were first proposed. http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=132241&threshold=1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=11048222