If you're going to give us some B.S. about "building OC3's and I know personally these cost $xxxx/month and if you take the cost of that, and when you use your 20mb/s connection, you're costing the equivalent of $$$$ per month so it's a bargain..." you're merely showing your knowledge of how the internet worked in 1994.
Screw OC3s, more like lots of OC192s. No OC768s though, overpriced especially on T640s. Afraid in 1994 I was on the Enterprise side of networking, not on the Service Provider side; so my '94 knowledge is more about Ethernet switching and Novell NOSes. Only moved to Service Provider Architecture in the last 3 years, so generally my knowledge is hopefully up to date, but maybe not.
In 2009, you correctly note the transit bandwidth charges but these are not likely to be a significant cost to somebody like Comcast. Their bulk of their cost is *fixed* since it's the physical maintenance of their own network. The charges to connect to the backbone? Almost nothing compared with the fixed costs.
They do have lots of Capital Expenditures to purchase all that gear on the edge and their metro networks. And if they're paying about 4-5% (for Cisco/Scientific Atlanta) of their actual costs after discounts for hardware/software/support maintenance (OpEx) on all that equipment, then that is a really large number. However, generally those numbers aren't too variable. They only have to upgrade when the peak averages increase. If the peaks just last longer each day but the absolute maxes do not increase, they're not spending more CapEx and thus no more OpEx. So the Transit BW costs are a pretty big part of what is costing them OIBDA dollars, and to top it off, their customers control whether they have to pay more one more month or not.
Besides, if you look at TW's annual report, you'll see their cost for bandwidth is going down, despite bandwidth use going up from their subscribers.
What does that tell you?
That Level 3 is charging them less per Mbps now? Maybe $8? It can never be free. Maybe they get to Cogent pricing at $5/Mbps, but it will always cost money to run backbone networks for people who need transit. TWC (and other eyeball networks) will always pay for their transit. No one else is getting Settlement Free Peering.
I know what it tells me. It says that if TW keeps at it, NYS should do their best to heavily tax TW's "bandwidth overage charges" so that there is no financial advantage for TW to charge people for additional bandwidth. It goes against my laisse-faire instincts of many decades, but these guys are crooks who lie with a straight face.
No wonder people hate cable companies.
I do not disagree that they are milking this. However I also believe that their highest profits come from the Cable TV side of the house. They don't have to upgrade capacity for that side of the house. Most folks just watch those broadcast channels and pay massive amounts for the pay subscription movie channels, again no real incremental costs, nearly pure profit once they have the infrastructure built out. For the less watched channels that aren't always broadcast, they don't even send the signal if no one is watching. If someone does start watching, they multicast those channels in case a second person down from the Head End starts watching. Again, once you get the first person watching, there are no additional costs, unlike when two people decide to download an episide of the Daily Show and start minutes apart from one another.
Now if more and more folks all decide they don't need to pay for all of that TV and instead all want to watch The Daily Show as a download whenever they want to, then they are all getting those bits from a CDN server somewhere on the Internet. It is likely that TWC won't pay for transit to get to that CDN provider though. Comedy Central uses Akamai (at least from my Comcast home network) for their CDN. AKAM might have caches at e
Does this just mean that Time Warner is big enough to only have settlement-free peering instead of paying anyone else for connectivity, or does it mean that their connectivity is priced by pipe size rather than data transfer?
Disappointed in the "research" that went into the original article. Most definitely if everyone didn't use any bandwidth for a day or two, then a cable company would likely pay less that month for the their transit bandwidth. In Time Warner Cable's case, they get their transit bandwidth from Level 3.
I'd guess Time Warner Cable is paying about $10/mbps (or less) on the 95th percentile. So if the top 5% five-minute averages of traffic to Level is thrown out, then the top average left is what they pay for. I would bet there are a few samples each night that are in that top 5% of samples, if everyone did NOT use the Internet one night during peak, the sample that is left at the 95th percentile would likely be less and they'd pay less that month for transit charges.
Each person should review the Terms of Service (ToS) they accepted (and most likely continue accept each time they use their Internet connection) and look to see what is stated there. Also, realize that the ISP's will update it with nearly no notice. Inside of those agreements that you agree to generally through your use of their services you'll find all kinds of interesting things. For example, here is some relevant quotes from Verizon's ToS in Section 14.4:
"You hereby consent to Verizon's monitoring of your Internet connection and network performance, and the access to and adjustment of your computer settings, as they relate to the Service, Software, or other services, which we may offer from time to time."
Who is to say that "adjustment of your computer settings" doesn't include adjustment of.html files being delivered to you. Oh and just in case that wasn't strong enough, in Section 15.8 you get:
"15.8 You agree that Verizon assumes no responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, quality completeness, usefulness or value of any Content, data, documents, graphics, images, information, advice, or opinion contained in any emails, message boards, chat rooms or community services, or in any other public services, and does not endorse any advice or opinion contained therein. Verizon does not monitor or control such services, although we reserve the right to do so. Verizon may take any action we deem appropriate, in our sole discretion, to maintain the high quality of our Service and to protect others and ourselves."
Similar allowances are inComcast's Acceptable Use Policy. Basically, folks have to understand what they are signing up for and how often it can change.
There are companies out there today, Phorm for example, who already are working with ISPs around the world in order to put their gear in the ISP networks to create targeting advertising based on all Internet habits, not just specific sites with specific cookies or the like. So far they all seem to be giving you an ability to Opt Out, but that appears to be a way to create good will for the moment. If there was case law backing them up, who knows if they'd continue the practice.
It would appear that the expiration is for 7 years, not 5.
"Your phone number with the last four digits 0000 was registered in the National Do Not Call Registry on 6/29/2003. Most telemarketers will be required to stop calling you 31 days from your registration date. Your registration will (or did) expire on 5/26/2010."
Still it should not expire and if you'd like to cancel it you could go to the website and do so. If your email address changes in the period, perhaps it could call your home phone and ask to be allowed to reset your email address so you can "re-register" or the like.
Perhaps a third word should be introduced, how about engaged. Whenever the student is engaged in what is being taught, they will learn more about that subject. That engagement could come because the student finds the material interesting for it's own worth; or perhaps the student is entertained by the teacher who keeps their attention while the student is learning.
I believe either method can be successful. For some students (yourself included) perhaps they would never allow themselves to be entertained while learning so that method will not work. I believe whatever method, and I am sure there are others, is employed as long as the student is engaged they will learn something. If the student simply does not care and is busy daydreaming or thinking about other classes they are engaged in, well, I can't believe they will ever gain knowledge on the subject.
I installed the extension in Firefox v1.5.0.4 on my 15" MacBook Pro running Mac OSX v10.4.6 (fully patched). No go when I try and restart Firefox. The initial startup the extension came up I typed in the configuration information then when it was sending the settings to Google, it just sat there until I did a OpenApple-Q to quit Firefox.
I had to bring Firefox up in safe mode (run "/Applications/Firefox.app/Contents/MacOS/firefox -safe-mode") then remove the extension from the Help Menu->Extensions window. I'll give it another shot here in a bit.
An excellent idea! While ATITD doesn't appear to be my kind of MMORPG, I really hope that the next MMORPG I sign up for has a 10 hour max on characters. I would gladly play on that server instead of the insano servers where folks are so addicted they have to eat dinner in front of the computer.
I really get tired of the folks without a real life (or a real job) that clog most MMORPGs.
I am amazed that Sys-Con would continue to allow Maureen O'Gara to write. They must be desperate for the controversy that her articles cause, because I really see no value in them after reading a couple of them this morning. The worst article , and the one in question, tries to paint quite the negative picture of Pamela Jones' sanity and lifestyle. Instead it leaves me questioning O'Gara's ethics and sanity. Quite the smear campaign on the part of O'Gara.
So, Pamela Jones could perhaps be a 61-year old Jehovah's Witness who lives in a not so nice apartment. What does that have to do with anything? O'Gara finishes the article hinting that perhaps it is all stolen identity, though she didn't present a news story that would lead you to that conclusion.
I spent the first 23 years of my life as a Jehovah's Witness. I do not believe I am scarred in anyway because of it. If anything, I think I have a lot more respect for my fellow human beings and in general have a deep desire to be a good person. Sure the methodology of learning about the religion is a bit like brainwashing, but they have their religious beliefs like most religions. They just are more strict about the belief and the punishment if one does constantly violates them. If you are going to have faith, I think most religious people would appreciate the JW's strictness.
Did the religion make me paranoid? No. Does it take a lot of your time? Yes, but if you are going to devote your life to being religious then it probably should take a lot of time. Personally I appreciated science too much to put so much faith in religion. I still believe that if any religion has it right though, it is probably the JW's. They read the bible and do what it says. They refuse to pick up arms against another human, they punish sinners through disfellowshipping (total cut off until they have repented of their sins), and they make worship the primary thing in their life not allowing anything else to come first. There are obviously more devoted JW's than others, but that is true of any religion.
So, after reading the crap that passes for journalism from O'Gara, I personally can't wait to see her unemployed. Perhaps she can go get a job at the National Inquirer.
As can be seen in this mozillaZine article the Back/Forward Cache is not enabled by default in the nightly build. If you want to test it, then you'll need to enable it by going into about:config and adding a new integer for:
Hopefully folks will appreciate the amount of sway that a good argument does have at AOL. If it wasn't for public discussion the TOS probably would not have been changed. But the public discussion happened and there will now be a more specific TOS statements. I wish folks would always give AOL a chance instead of immediately bashing. Was this enough to buy some good will from folks for the future?
Exactly! And M$ wouldn't have to worry with stocking it on shelves, creating the CD, arranging for distributors, etc.
Of course those items are not a significant amount of the cost of the software, but since M$ is running at like 40% profit margins, they could lower the price quite a bit just for those who take that distribution headache away from them.:)
Sure, just because a murderer is reformed from killing people where he learned lots about the inside of the human body, doesn't mean when he is reformed that he'd want othres to kill people like he did.
The vast majority of piracy acts I committed were games. Other than entertainment, I didn't learn much. Though when I was learning what Copy II PC was doing to avoid/recreate bad sectors and other copy protection methods, I guess I learned a bit there.
In the end though, if I had really appreciated morals and being a law-abiding person, I would not have done it. I was young, I thought the world owed me something still. Now I realize the world owes me nothing and I have to earn things I get, otherwise I'm just cheating and I hate to cheat.
But you do make a good point, there were some things that I learned thanks to my liberation of software... and I guess I am denying that experience to others. Hmmmm, have to think about that for a while. But pirating software is still against the law and being a law-abiding person I just can't say it is right, I was wrong when I was younger and now I'm remorseful for that.
Why did you have to work around the activation process? Did the activiation process give you the chance to call Microsoft? They just ask if you have it installed on any other machines and as long as you don't they just give you a new activiation code over the phone. The copy of Windows XP Pro that I have on my gaming machine has been re-registered via a telephone call to the 800# at Microsoft 3-4 times now with each call taking less than 5 minutes each.
I've had to re-activate so many times because I am CONSTANTLY uprading my machine. Before I actually called I was really pissed at MS the first time thinking it was going to waste my day and be painful. But it wasn't. I've had three difference motherboards (Asus P4C800 Delux, Gigabyte 8KNXP, and now a SuperMicro P4SCT+II) and two different CPUs (3.0Ghz 512k Cache, 800mhz FSB and now a 3.4Ghz 2MB Cache) and three different video cards (ATI 9800 Pro, 9800XT, and now a X800 Plat)... every time I've called like I said, it was a breeze.
Oh well, I hate Microsoft, but since I use their products I follow their procedures and so far they haven't hurt me... they might hurt my soul for giving Microsoft money... but my conscience is clear.
Vindictive? Pirates are STEALING copies of it. Personally I just don't feel good about stealing stuff anymore. What you call vindictive, I call fair play.
I did LOTS of software swapping growing up. I'm not sure I ever paid for a piece of software for the first 10-15 years of having a computer (starting in 1979 when I was 8). At some point though, I got a decent paying job and just didn't feel right about stealing any longer.
Just for the record my office desktop machine is running Fedora (though has an XP license that work paid for). My office laptop dual boots WinXP and Fedora. My home server is running slackware. My home main/gaming machine runs WinXP (which I bought as an OEM edition with all the parts). My home secondary machine runs Gentoo.
I prefer free software and even support the creators through donations. In my perfect world all software would be free. But in the current world someone has assigned a value to Windows XP. While I don't agree with that, I just can't bring myself to steal it either. Anything that can be done as corrective action to those who do steal things, I'm all for.
Why not just have SP2 install and patch the system then report in ANY WAY POSSIBLE that this is a pirated copy of Window XP. Try and send information to MS identifying the end user if possible through the IP Address, login name, Dial-Up Networking IP account, address, and provider. Gather information from Microsoft Office as well, any Word or Excel Documents that have addresses in them send those to MS as well.
Place something in the Word/Office documents stating this user is using illegal copies of Windows XP or such when opened by a non-pirated user. Then let folks turn other folks in for a reward. Have other systems on the same MS Networking Browser elections realizes which other machines are pirated when the Browser Election process happens, then have those other machines tattle tale to MS about the pirated machines.
Heck, some folks may not even realize they have a pirate copy. When SP2 installs, they could have it prompt the user and tell them, "you're currently using an illegal copy of MS Windows XP, would you like to pay for a legal version at this time?" and still patch them, but inform them and give them a chance to buy a cheap copy of XP.
Well, you can. You had just better make sure that the person's computer breaks right before a major paper (or deliverable in the real world) is due. Then fix it and save their butt. That'll generally ingratiate you to them and may even get you a wife... or a least a night of fun! The key is fixing it when they are desperate!
Well, just displaying the ad doesn't run up their ad budget. The ads have to actually be Clicked On as well for them to get charged. Also, the BBC would setup a daily ad budget as well so they only spend as much money as they can afford to.
Also, I'm not certain, but I'm pretty sure that they only charge for one click through from one IP address (maybe even cookied machine, never investigated) every so many hours or so. So if the same person clicks through a few times, the advertiser doesn't get charged for.
Google Ad Words really rock as far as I'm concerned. Small, unabtrusive, and targetted. If I have to have advertising I'll take mine that like!
If you are coming from behind the AOL Corporate Firewall and you try and visit the http://www.ex-mozilla.org/date.html webpage you get redirected to a sex site... Nothing like "Sex at 3550rpms" Flashing in large text on your screen!!!
Hilarious!!!:) Laughed out loud and had everyone in the office visit http://www.ex-mozilla.org/ !
I was getting worried there for a moment... I couldn't figure what the Internet Architecture Board was doing wanting to INCREASE Internet advertising. Maybe making a recommendation for the IETF to investigate a protocol enhancement to be able to easily identify ads for blocking... but definately not increase them!
I pay $200 a month. They gave me free install when I signed up in June of this year.
For the $200/month I have colocation of my own 1U server at a local place (in McLean, VA). The colo facility has a 1 gig Ethernet connection to gnaps.net (MAE-East). They also have a couple of T3s for backup to UU.NET and Level3. I have 50 gigabytes of transfer allowed per month, and pay $2/gigabyte over that if I exceed it. I have a 100mb/s Fast Ethernet port to the server. I can sustain about 60-70mb/s when I'm transfering files from my office to there. I have a single 120V 15A plug on their UPS with Diesel Generator backup.
The colo room isn't nearly as nice as our computer rooms here at work, but it is clean and not cluttered. The folks there are great to work with as well, and have did hands & eyes service for me when a kernel patch didn't work.
If we'd allow employees to colo here, then I'd obviously colocate here. But evidently some folks ruined that by hosting porn and businesses before I ever got here. Oh well!
I spent three years (1995-1998) at Perot Systems as a consultant designing and implementing hospital networks for Tenet Healthcare (2nd largest hospital chain in the US). There was at least one hospital that had the budget and the foresight to see that reliance on the network would do nothing but increase.
For that hospital, my network design was one that incorporated as much redundancy as possible at the time. For each patient care area, such as nurse's stations and ancillary areas such as radiology, cardiology, surgical theaters, etc. it was decided that each of the two network jacks would terminate in seperate closets. This meant doubling the number of closets required in order to meet distance limitations, but the hospital had already started working on allocating that space for the closets. Also for any important ancillary areas such as the lab, central supply, there also was two seperate networks. For the server farms theirselves, the Patient Care systems all had redundant connections to the primary and backup networks as well.
As each wall jack terminated into a different closet, each closet had two seperate networks as well. Each closet would house the primary network for half of the jacks served, and the backup network for the other half of the jacks served. The fiber paths from each closet took disparate paths back to seperate data center rooms, one external to the main building of the campus and one inside the main building. At the time layer 3 switches, or switch routers such as the Foundry Big Irons, or Cisco 6500s were not available. So as much as I dislike using Spanning Tree, I had used it at the time. All priorities were manually set though so there was no doubt where the root was and where it would move to in case of failure.
So, the switches terminated on another switch which was partitioned to several segments. Switch connections were made between the two data center as well. Each segment had a connection to a Cisco 7507 Fast Ethernet port local to that computer room, and another in the second computer room. Forming the core were two sets of two Cisco 7507s. In order to prevent one OSPF network from affecting the other OSPF network static routes were used (would use BGP if I had to do it over again). Outside WAN connections were terminated redundantly on the two patient care networks as well.
While the primary network in the hospital also supported the non-patient care areas (such as administration, the backup network was only for the patient care areas. That was just to prevent the type of thing that happened in the article, where something non-patient care related ends up taking everything down.
Reverting to backup paper systems would be nearly impossible once the "tube" systems were sealed up. Much like the movie Brazil, hospitals used to have pneumatic tubes running all over the place, especially between the lab and the nurse stations. Running samples and results back and forth would definately introduce a LOT of delay for a doctor trying to make a life and death decision.
I am sure that I would I design things different these days (for one, Layer 3 would go all the way to every single edge switch and collapse on a fast switch router) but I think the design probably held together well. I should check back in someday and see how long and well it lasted, if they did replace it.
I played the demo for over an hour last night with all options at their fullest at 1280x1024 with my ATI Radeon 9700 Pro on a P4 1.8Ghz, 512mb RDRAM. It was absolutely stunning! Had a great time playing it! I have XP SP1, and the latest ATI drivers that support XP SP1.
So, not sure what the discussion is about over on the boards there, but unless folks who have the setup are posting, then it is a lot of uninformed discussion. I have no problem and love it! Also is great in Asheron's Call 2 beta, Morrowind, and other games. Never had any driver problems yet, just keeping up with the latest drivers as they come out.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're going to give us some B.S. about "building OC3's and I know personally these cost $xxxx/month and if you take the cost of that, and when you use your 20mb/s connection, you're costing the equivalent of $$$$ per month so it's a bargain..." you're merely showing your knowledge of how the internet worked in 1994.
Screw OC3s, more like lots of OC192s. No OC768s though, overpriced especially on T640s. Afraid in 1994 I was on the Enterprise side of networking, not on the Service Provider side; so my '94 knowledge is more about Ethernet switching and Novell NOSes. Only moved to Service Provider Architecture in the last 3 years, so generally my knowledge is hopefully up to date, but maybe not.
In 2009, you correctly note the transit bandwidth charges but these are not likely to be a significant cost to somebody like Comcast. Their bulk of their cost is *fixed* since it's the physical maintenance of their own network. The charges to connect to the backbone? Almost nothing compared with the fixed costs.
They do have lots of Capital Expenditures to purchase all that gear on the edge and their metro networks. And if they're paying about 4-5% (for Cisco/Scientific Atlanta) of their actual costs after discounts for hardware/software/support maintenance (OpEx) on all that equipment, then that is a really large number. However, generally those numbers aren't too variable. They only have to upgrade when the peak averages increase. If the peaks just last longer each day but the absolute maxes do not increase, they're not spending more CapEx and thus no more OpEx. So the Transit BW costs are a pretty big part of what is costing them OIBDA dollars, and to top it off, their customers control whether they have to pay more one more month or not.
Besides, if you look at TW's annual report, you'll see their cost for bandwidth is going down, despite bandwidth use going up from their subscribers.
What does that tell you?
That Level 3 is charging them less per Mbps now? Maybe $8? It can never be free. Maybe they get to Cogent pricing at $5/Mbps, but it will always cost money to run backbone networks for people who need transit. TWC (and other eyeball networks) will always pay for their transit. No one else is getting Settlement Free Peering.
I know what it tells me. It says that if TW keeps at it, NYS should do their best to heavily tax TW's "bandwidth overage charges" so that there is no financial advantage for TW to charge people for additional bandwidth. It goes against my laisse-faire instincts of many decades, but these guys are crooks who lie with a straight face.
No wonder people hate cable companies.
I do not disagree that they are milking this. However I also believe that their highest profits come from the Cable TV side of the house. They don't have to upgrade capacity for that side of the house. Most folks just watch those broadcast channels and pay massive amounts for the pay subscription movie channels, again no real incremental costs, nearly pure profit once they have the infrastructure built out. For the less watched channels that aren't always broadcast, they don't even send the signal if no one is watching. If someone does start watching, they multicast those channels in case a second person down from the Head End starts watching. Again, once you get the first person watching, there are no additional costs, unlike when two people decide to download an episide of the Daily Show and start minutes apart from one another.
Now if more and more folks all decide they don't need to pay for all of that TV and instead all want to watch The Daily Show as a download whenever they want to, then they are all getting those bits from a CDN server somewhere on the Internet. It is likely that TWC won't pay for transit to get to that CDN provider though. Comedy Central uses Akamai (at least from my Comcast home network) for their CDN. AKAM might have caches at e
Does this just mean that Time Warner is big enough to only have settlement-free peering instead of paying anyone else for connectivity, or does it mean that their connectivity is priced by pipe size rather than data transfer?
No, they purchase transit from Level 3.
Disappointed in the "research" that went into the original article. Most definitely if everyone didn't use any bandwidth for a day or two, then a cable company would likely pay less that month for the their transit bandwidth. In Time Warner Cable's case, they get their transit bandwidth from Level 3.
I'd guess Time Warner Cable is paying about $10/mbps (or less) on the 95th percentile. So if the top 5% five-minute averages of traffic to Level is thrown out, then the top average left is what they pay for. I would bet there are a few samples each night that are in that top 5% of samples, if everyone did NOT use the Internet one night during peak, the sample that is left at the 95th percentile would likely be less and they'd pay less that month for transit charges.
Each person should review the Terms of Service (ToS) they accepted (and most likely continue accept each time they use their Internet connection) and look to see what is stated there. Also, realize that the ISP's will update it with nearly no notice. Inside of those agreements that you agree to generally through your use of their services you'll find all kinds of interesting things. For example, here is some relevant quotes from Verizon's ToS in Section 14.4:
"You hereby consent to Verizon's monitoring of your Internet connection and network performance, and the access to and adjustment of your computer settings, as they relate to the Service, Software, or other services, which we may offer from time to time."
Who is to say that "adjustment of your computer settings" doesn't include adjustment of .html files being delivered to you. Oh and just in case that wasn't strong enough, in Section 15.8 you get:
"15.8 You agree that Verizon assumes no responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, quality completeness, usefulness or value of any Content, data, documents, graphics, images, information, advice, or opinion contained in any emails, message boards, chat rooms or community services, or in any other public services, and does not endorse any advice or opinion contained therein. Verizon does not monitor or control such services, although we reserve the right to do so. Verizon may take any action we deem appropriate, in our sole discretion, to maintain the high quality of our Service and to protect others and ourselves."
Similar allowances are inComcast's Acceptable Use Policy. Basically, folks have to understand what they are signing up for and how often it can change.
There are companies out there today, Phorm for example, who already are working with ISPs around the world in order to put their gear in the ISP networks to create targeting advertising based on all Internet habits, not just specific sites with specific cookies or the like. So far they all seem to be giving you an ability to Opt Out, but that appears to be a way to create good will for the moment. If there was case law backing them up, who knows if they'd continue the practice.
It would appear that the expiration is for 7 years, not 5.
"Your phone number with the last four digits 0000 was registered in the National Do Not Call Registry on 6/29/2003. Most telemarketers will be required to stop calling you 31 days from your registration date. Your registration will (or did) expire on 5/26/2010."
Still it should not expire and if you'd like to cancel it you could go to the website and do so. If your email address changes in the period, perhaps it could call your home phone and ask to be allowed to reset your email address so you can "re-register" or the like.
Perhaps a third word should be introduced, how about engaged. Whenever the student is engaged in what is being taught, they will learn more about that subject. That engagement could come because the student finds the material interesting for it's own worth; or perhaps the student is entertained by the teacher who keeps their attention while the student is learning.
I believe either method can be successful. For some students (yourself included) perhaps they would never allow themselves to be entertained while learning so that method will not work. I believe whatever method, and I am sure there are others, is employed as long as the student is engaged they will learn something. If the student simply does not care and is busy daydreaming or thinking about other classes they are engaged in, well, I can't believe they will ever gain knowledge on the subject.
Hrmph.
I installed the extension in Firefox v1.5.0.4 on my 15" MacBook Pro running Mac OSX v10.4.6 (fully patched). No go when I try and restart Firefox. The initial startup the extension came up I typed in the configuration information then when it was sending the settings to Google, it just sat there until I did a OpenApple-Q to quit Firefox.
I had to bring Firefox up in safe mode (run "/Applications/Firefox.app/Contents/MacOS/firefox -safe-mode") then remove the extension from the Help Menu->Extensions window. I'll give it another shot here in a bit.
An excellent idea! While ATITD doesn't appear to be my kind of MMORPG, I really hope that the next MMORPG I sign up for has a 10 hour max on characters. I would gladly play on that server instead of the insano servers where folks are so addicted they have to eat dinner in front of the computer.
I really get tired of the folks without a real life (or a real job) that clog most MMORPGs.
I am amazed that Sys-Con would continue to allow Maureen O'Gara to write. They must be desperate for the controversy that her articles cause, because I really see no value in them after reading a couple of them this morning. The worst article , and the one in question, tries to paint quite the negative picture of Pamela Jones' sanity and lifestyle. Instead it leaves me questioning O'Gara's ethics and sanity. Quite the smear campaign on the part of O'Gara.
So, Pamela Jones could perhaps be a 61-year old Jehovah's Witness who lives in a not so nice apartment. What does that have to do with anything? O'Gara finishes the article hinting that perhaps it is all stolen identity, though she didn't present a news story that would lead you to that conclusion.
I spent the first 23 years of my life as a Jehovah's Witness. I do not believe I am scarred in anyway because of it. If anything, I think I have a lot more respect for my fellow human beings and in general have a deep desire to be a good person. Sure the methodology of learning about the religion is a bit like brainwashing, but they have their religious beliefs like most religions. They just are more strict about the belief and the punishment if one does constantly violates them. If you are going to have faith, I think most religious people would appreciate the JW's strictness.
Did the religion make me paranoid? No. Does it take a lot of your time? Yes, but if you are going to devote your life to being religious then it probably should take a lot of time. Personally I appreciated science too much to put so much faith in religion. I still believe that if any religion has it right though, it is probably the JW's. They read the bible and do what it says. They refuse to pick up arms against another human, they punish sinners through disfellowshipping (total cut off until they have repented of their sins), and they make worship the primary thing in their life not allowing anything else to come first. There are obviously more devoted JW's than others, but that is true of any religion.
So, after reading the crap that passes for journalism from O'Gara, I personally can't wait to see her unemployed. Perhaps she can go get a job at the National Inquirer.
You can see the full instructions in Chase Phillip's weblog post.
Hopefully folks will appreciate the amount of sway that a good argument does have at AOL. If it wasn't for public discussion the TOS probably would not have been changed. But the public discussion happened and there will now be a more specific TOS statements. I wish folks would always give AOL a chance instead of immediately bashing. Was this enough to buy some good will from folks for the future?
Exactly! And M$ wouldn't have to worry with stocking it on shelves, creating the CD, arranging for distributors, etc.
:)
Of course those items are not a significant amount of the cost of the software, but since M$ is running at like 40% profit margins, they could lower the price quite a bit just for those who take that distribution headache away from them.
Sure, just because a murderer is reformed from killing people where he learned lots about the inside of the human body, doesn't mean when he is reformed that he'd want othres to kill people like he did.
The vast majority of piracy acts I committed were games. Other than entertainment, I didn't learn much. Though when I was learning what Copy II PC was doing to avoid/recreate bad sectors and other copy protection methods, I guess I learned a bit there.
In the end though, if I had really appreciated morals and being a law-abiding person, I would not have done it. I was young, I thought the world owed me something still. Now I realize the world owes me nothing and I have to earn things I get, otherwise I'm just cheating and I hate to cheat.
But you do make a good point, there were some things that I learned thanks to my liberation of software... and I guess I am denying that experience to others. Hmmmm, have to think about that for a while. But pirating software is still against the law and being a law-abiding person I just can't say it is right, I was wrong when I was younger and now I'm remorseful for that.
Why did you have to work around the activation process? Did the activiation process give you the chance to call Microsoft? They just ask if you have it installed on any other machines and as long as you don't they just give you a new activiation code over the phone. The copy of Windows XP Pro that I have on my gaming machine has been re-registered via a telephone call to the 800# at Microsoft 3-4 times now with each call taking less than 5 minutes each.
I've had to re-activate so many times because I am CONSTANTLY uprading my machine. Before I actually called I was really pissed at MS the first time thinking it was going to waste my day and be painful. But it wasn't. I've had three difference motherboards (Asus P4C800 Delux, Gigabyte 8KNXP, and now a SuperMicro P4SCT+II) and two different CPUs (3.0Ghz 512k Cache, 800mhz FSB and now a 3.4Ghz 2MB Cache) and three different video cards (ATI 9800 Pro, 9800XT, and now a X800 Plat)... every time I've called like I said, it was a breeze.
Oh well, I hate Microsoft, but since I use their products I follow their procedures and so far they haven't hurt me... they might hurt my soul for giving Microsoft money... but my conscience is clear.
Vindictive? Pirates are STEALING copies of it. Personally I just don't feel good about stealing stuff anymore. What you call vindictive, I call fair play.
I did LOTS of software swapping growing up. I'm not sure I ever paid for a piece of software for the first 10-15 years of having a computer (starting in 1979 when I was 8). At some point though, I got a decent paying job and just didn't feel right about stealing any longer.
Just for the record my office desktop machine is running Fedora (though has an XP license that work paid for). My office laptop dual boots WinXP and Fedora. My home server is running slackware. My home main/gaming machine runs WinXP (which I bought as an OEM edition with all the parts). My home secondary machine runs Gentoo.
I prefer free software and even support the creators through donations. In my perfect world all software would be free. But in the current world someone has assigned a value to Windows XP. While I don't agree with that, I just can't bring myself to steal it either. Anything that can be done as corrective action to those who do steal things, I'm all for.
Why not just have SP2 install and patch the system then report in ANY WAY POSSIBLE that this is a pirated copy of Window XP. Try and send information to MS identifying the end user if possible through the IP Address, login name, Dial-Up Networking IP account, address, and provider. Gather information from Microsoft Office as well, any Word or Excel Documents that have addresses in them send those to MS as well.
Place something in the Word/Office documents stating this user is using illegal copies of Windows XP or such when opened by a non-pirated user. Then let folks turn other folks in for a reward. Have other systems on the same MS Networking Browser elections realizes which other machines are pirated when the Browser Election process happens, then have those other machines tattle tale to MS about the pirated machines.
Heck, some folks may not even realize they have a pirate copy. When SP2 installs, they could have it prompt the user and tell them, "you're currently using an illegal copy of MS Windows XP, would you like to pay for a legal version at this time?" and still patch them, but inform them and give them a chance to buy a cheap copy of XP.
Well, you can. You had just better make sure that the person's computer breaks right before a major paper (or deliverable in the real world) is due. Then fix it and save their butt. That'll generally ingratiate you to them and may even get you a wife... or a least a night of fun! The key is fixing it when they are desperate!
Well, just displaying the ad doesn't run up their ad budget. The ads have to actually be Clicked On as well for them to get charged. Also, the BBC would setup a daily ad budget as well so they only spend as much money as they can afford to.
Also, I'm not certain, but I'm pretty sure that they only charge for one click through from one IP address (maybe even cookied machine, never investigated) every so many hours or so. So if the same person clicks through a few times, the advertiser doesn't get charged for.
Google Ad Words really rock as far as I'm concerned. Small, unabtrusive, and targetted. If I have to have advertising I'll take mine that like!
If you are coming from behind the AOL Corporate Firewall and you try and visit the http://www.ex-mozilla.org/date.html webpage you get redirected to a sex site... Nothing like "Sex at 3550rpms" Flashing in large text on your screen!!!
:) Laughed out loud and had everyone in the office visit http://www.ex-mozilla.org/ !
Hilarious!!!
I was getting worried there for a moment... I couldn't figure what the Internet Architecture Board was doing wanting to INCREASE Internet advertising. Maybe making a recommendation for the IETF to investigate a protocol enhancement to be able to easily identify ads for blocking... but definately not increase them!
I pay $200 a month. They gave me free install when I signed up in June of this year.
For the $200/month I have colocation of my own 1U server at a local place (in McLean, VA). The colo facility has a 1 gig Ethernet connection to gnaps.net (MAE-East). They also have a couple of T3s for backup to UU.NET and Level3. I have 50 gigabytes of transfer allowed per month, and pay $2/gigabyte over that if I exceed it. I have a 100mb/s Fast Ethernet port to the server. I can sustain about 60-70mb/s when I'm transfering files from my office to there. I have a single 120V 15A plug on their UPS with Diesel Generator backup.
The colo room isn't nearly as nice as our computer rooms here at work, but it is clean and not cluttered. The folks there are great to work with as well, and have did hands & eyes service for me when a kernel patch didn't work.
If we'd allow employees to colo here, then I'd obviously colocate here. But evidently some folks ruined that by hosting porn and businesses before I ever got here. Oh well!
Jay
Cost in time for Mr.Tweak to send in /. article about his site: $2
/. for Mr.Tweak: $2
/. load: Priceless
Cost in time for Hemos to post article to
Cost of server able to handle
I spent three years (1995-1998) at Perot Systems as a consultant designing and implementing hospital networks for Tenet Healthcare (2nd largest hospital chain in the US). There was at least one hospital that had the budget and the foresight to see that reliance on the network would do nothing but increase.
For that hospital, my network design was one that incorporated as much redundancy as possible at the time. For each patient care area, such as nurse's stations and ancillary areas such as radiology, cardiology, surgical theaters, etc. it was decided that each of the two network jacks would terminate in seperate closets. This meant doubling the number of closets required in order to meet distance limitations, but the hospital had already started working on allocating that space for the closets. Also for any important ancillary areas such as the lab, central supply, there also was two seperate networks. For the server farms theirselves, the Patient Care systems all had redundant connections to the primary and backup networks as well.
As each wall jack terminated into a different closet, each closet had two seperate networks as well. Each closet would house the primary network for half of the jacks served, and the backup network for the other half of the jacks served. The fiber paths from each closet took disparate paths back to seperate data center rooms, one external to the main building of the campus and one inside the main building. At the time layer 3 switches, or switch routers such as the Foundry Big Irons, or Cisco 6500s were not available. So as much as I dislike using Spanning Tree, I had used it at the time. All priorities were manually set though so there was no doubt where the root was and where it would move to in case of failure.
So, the switches terminated on another switch which was partitioned to several segments. Switch connections were made between the two data center as well. Each segment had a connection to a Cisco 7507 Fast Ethernet port local to that computer room, and another in the second computer room. Forming the core were two sets of two Cisco 7507s. In order to prevent one OSPF network from affecting the other OSPF network static routes were used (would use BGP if I had to do it over again). Outside WAN connections were terminated redundantly on the two patient care networks as well.
While the primary network in the hospital also supported the non-patient care areas (such as administration, the backup network was only for the patient care areas. That was just to prevent the type of thing that happened in the article, where something non-patient care related ends up taking everything down.
Reverting to backup paper systems would be nearly impossible once the "tube" systems were sealed up. Much like the movie Brazil, hospitals used to have pneumatic tubes running all over the place, especially between the lab and the nurse stations. Running samples and results back and forth would definately introduce a LOT of delay for a doctor trying to make a life and death decision.
I am sure that I would I design things different these days (for one, Layer 3 would go all the way to every single edge switch and collapse on a fast switch router) but I think the design probably held together well. I should check back in someday and see how long and well it lasted, if they did replace it.
Jay
I played the demo for over an hour last night with all options at their fullest at 1280x1024 with my ATI Radeon 9700 Pro on a P4 1.8Ghz, 512mb RDRAM. It was absolutely stunning! Had a great time playing it! I have XP SP1, and the latest ATI drivers that support XP SP1.
So, not sure what the discussion is about over on the boards there, but unless folks who have the setup are posting, then it is a lot of uninformed discussion. I have no problem and love it! Also is great in Asheron's Call 2 beta, Morrowind, and other games. Never had any driver problems yet, just keeping up with the latest drivers as they come out.
jay
People, FROM Kernersville reading /. :) I moved away about 9 years ago. In the DC Metro area now.
Jay