This is the correct answer or at least i'd take it as a right answer.. Underground systems are usually tunnels, tunnels happen to be circular, why are tunnels circular? If everything was square, triangle, etc there would be some seriously poor dynamics involvings things like wind, pressure and sound which in turn would cause emergency systems and evacuation plans (flooding, fire, repair) to be more dangerous than they already are and highly problematic. Also structurally they can bear more load, are more cost effective etc etc you could go on and on about the benefits of round tunnels.
You could try building a triangular or square tunnel but I wouldn't drive a heavy truck over that road. The pressure would easily collapse such a structure without the proper support.
Or you know what would be even better.. If the Right hand recognized that it can only design for the right hand but bring in someone who understands the left hand to help design something that is fun and usable for both parties. This way you get the balance that you seek, the problem really isn't with the designers as it is with their abstract ideas of themselves playing the game. To them; the game is great, to the left hand the game isn't. The deeper problem is that there needs to be more female game designers who can bring a female point of view to the situation. That is the problem that needs to be addressed and sadly the article doesn't discuss the need for more female game designers, programmers and mathmeticians. It simply says designers need to be more aware. It's an almost hit; They can't be aware all of the time because no matter how hard they try they'll always think that a hot chick with nice boobs even if shes fully clothed is better than your realistic average chick with hair on her legs. Emphasis would be put on females sexual prowess and attributes because thats the way males naturally think. They want to mate with the opposite sex they find ideal.
Also this female complained about artists drawing the pictures but from what i've seen alot of artists for Rpg's etc etc are female and it's the management who happen to be male that wan't to see bikini clad women. I also found it odd that she would except that game where the girls are blantantly being trampled about as beach girls who can barely speak, slapping a volleyball around while those arttibutes are personified. There is even a commercial that shows a bunch of teenage guys sitting around the tv getting a wood over these girls playing volleyball. If those girls were Orc's would they buy the game? Most likely not, i'm not saying the game is bad or should be pulled off the shelves or any nonsense like that i'm just making a correlation of how men view women and how they are personfied in these games.
I'd also like to point out that my girlfriend is a model and she loves playing games, all types of video games infact I believe she is a bit of a video game junkie and she always points out to me that games that operate on the "me man - strong" "me woman - smart" basis usually suck as the outcomes and playability are too predictable for her liking. The most fun games are the games where the characters really aren't objectified in one manner or the next regardless of their looks. She always makes the reference to mario kart and how regardless of how pink and pretty princess is she can still shoot red shells and has super fast acceleration. Also the objectification of what is considered beauty by others when it comes to herself isn't always flattering but usually based on pie in the sky ideas. IE: because she looks good she's a nice person. etc etc..
Anyway i'm gonna start rambling so i'll stop here. The jist is that if women want games that don't objectify them physically they need to take a part in shaping what they think would be a good game and men need to give them the chance to do so. Female designers, programmers, artists; step up.
...and believe it or not, that "fine tuning" is a little more complex than "picking which set of packages to install" and "how we market it". Novell is, in fact, the perfect example of the power of a ground-up, purpose-built server platform. Linux's weakness is that it has NO equivalent; your precious Debian has no core, ground-up focus on being a server distro and ONLY a server distro.
Are you aware that you're talking out of your ass? I'm not a debian user, I've used it before and simply can attest that it's a server capable distro. They are in a constant state of testing, infact so much so that people trying to use it for desktop purposes feel the pinch of having to get all of their packages from an unstable branch. Also if i'm not mistaken, feel free to correct me but didn't Novell run ontop of dos? I mean, dos isn't really a desktop operating system to begin with.
3) All these residential users should be using their ISP as a relay. That's what the ISP is there for.
No; My ISP is here to offer me a connection to the internet. Hence the acronym definition Internet Service Provider. I don't need my isp as a relay and if you run your own mail server you should make sure it adheres as closely as possbile to RFC's. If you diverge then it's worth pointing out why and for what reasons.
I'm generally against crippling services on the ISP end, but I've even thought that maybe it's high time that ISPs do what AOL does, and block outbound port 25.
Where does the port blocking stop then?? I mean you are actually condoning blocking the outbound email port instead of tracing down the spammers and holding them legally liable. If they aren't from the country then appropriate IP's need to be blocked or the use of blocking lists.
Incomming is another story, but as the parent and I have pointed out- the residential users should be using their ISP's mail servers as relay hosts.
No. The residential users should have the option of relaying if they see fit (to anywhere) otherwise they should be able to send mail from whereever they want. However, the idea of blocking dynamic ip's would only make sense if ISP's offered static ip's for purchase. You can't offer only dynamic and then demand the relaying of ones private email through public servers without offering them an option to keep it private. That's if you even run with an idea like the above.
Side note, I think that apple is the only manufacturer with the chance of pulling this off, primarily because of OS X and the apps they pump out. What they really need is a new chip and fast.
Will be around for a while longer... What I see in the future is the letting go of legacy and the refinement of the beige box into a hub of sorts. The embedded segment still has poor input devices and no matter how small and useful they could be until headway is made in the usability arena specifically regarding input then they are pretty tough and difficult to use for any long period of time.
The first manufacturer to start pumping out non-legacy machines that are smaller more aesthetic and can hold current media yet allow for new functionality that is found in stuff like MythTv, Freevo, Tivo, Windows Media OS etc etc etc with ease will be the next big computer manufacturer.. That is till the guys/gals over at the mit media lab find out a way to get better input devices for smaller devices. Whether it be voice operated or whatever etc etc etc.. you get the idea.
are you wasting everyones time with this lawsuit? You do know that if SCO played nice and put itself in a position to be bought out it's quite possible someone would buy you out. The way things are going right now you are just wasting time and money. The likelyhood of you winning any money at all is so nil that it's pointless. In any event, preface over; Where do you see SCO in the next 5 yrs, what's your current business plan or model to retain revenue in today's rough economy especially in regards to Unix(tm)?
I got maybe halfway into it when he started talking the same old bullshit about higher level languages etc etc. His intro "Until Unix and Linux programmers get over their macho love for low-level programming lanaguages, the security holes will continue to flow freely."
Sure, but ummm the same goes for every other programmer. Just not Unix or Linux programmers. What about your favorite Windows programmers? Is not their system based on a low level language? Even in comparison to high level languages the security holes still flow freely on that platform.
Then the author took the time to point out security holes in popular unix software. I'm glad he did this because you couldn't do the same for other systems. All in all the author is reinforcing the fact that here in nixland we have stronger peer review than anywhere else. We hold each other to as critical standards as possible and are happy to find errors in others code not just for the hell of it but because it makes all of us safer.
Next he talks about the programmer given up his ability to control a system by using higher level languages. That's cute but sadly in this field to become the best you have to understand the low-level stuff and they happen to be techniques and are not language specific. Moving memory around or conserving it is a technique and not a black magic art. Once you learn it you can apply the idea to other low-level languages you encounter. Writing a new algorithim at the lowest level possible isn't some black magic art it's a technique and can be taught to others.
I'm not saying that writing an email client in C is good or bad but the choice is of the programmer and not for you to make Mr. Lasser. That's the whole point of this OpenSource thing and as the particular package becomes more useful and needed in this community it will encounter more peer review than anywhere else. People can learn from others mistakes and hopefully we end up with better, more featureful and more secure code. Surely this has been happening for quite sometime now. In comparison to other closed systems where the amount of security holes are theoretically infinitely higher than the community we work within. The answer is clear; your take on it? Instead of writing an email client in C write it in perl? It doesn't matter.
Most states allow for the expungement of an arrest record, often regardless as to whether the arrest was legitimate or not. Of course probably many individuals that are victims of a frivolous arrest are unaware of that option.
That's not an option it's either automatic or doesn't exist at all. It's called an ACD (adjournment in contemplation of dismissal). It means that the case will be dismissed after a certain period of time whether it be 6 months, a year or whatever it is in that state. That is, so long as the person stays out of trouble.
I live in Brooklyn, NYC; I'm a black male. I was arrested outside the front of my house.. ON my steps for no reason. The reason on paper says "disorderly conduct". You watch too much TV.. Those males, who emulate a bunch of thugs, who largely prey on their own people are already in jail for entirely different reasons. I bet you also didn't know that out of every 8 black males you see during the day; 1 is in jail. While I was in central bookings in Downtown Brooklyn about 100% of the people in the cells were black so I asked what the hell is everyone in here for. "Jay walking", "Had no id on me", "Told a cop to fucking stop following me", "Didn't have my license".. Most of the things ran off were ticket offenses. One guy was caught racing his car down by Hunts Point and ended all the way in Brooklyn? Wtf is that? (I'd also like to point out that discon; disorderly conduct is a ticket offense). Surely some of these guys had to be lying but as I waited in the court room; they weren't.
I'd also like to point out that up until that point I never had a problem with the "law". Infact until my honorable discharge on Dec 5th 2002 I was an intel analyst for a Military Police Battalion and knew a truck load of police officers. The difference I realize is that I used to live in Suburbia.. Moving to Brooklyn changed the ideologies. Says alot about white people huh?
That incident, however, hasn't gone without challenge and the officers of the 79th precint who did this are being raked over the coals. The difference here is that my parents have money and my dad is in a position where he can make calls. Alot of the other black males out there don't have that. The contempt passes just the cops to their skin colors and this is why you sit there at your keyboard and make such assumptions about the social character of a black male in an urban area? You know nothing about it until you see it or experience it. So please, keep your ideas to yourself.
There is a big difference between Closed Source and Open Source as I'm sure you know. The CIFS conference was put together by a host of companies to basically get more information, converse, document etc etc the protocol and some of the implementations that exist. Microsoft happens to be one of these companies, they didn't release any CIFS specs at the conference, at least not that I'm aware of so basically it was a bunch of companies, programmers, engineers sharing their reverse engineered information. Which is what conferences are meant for, to share information on a certain topic.
Now if Microsoft shows up and wants to talk about Open Source then thats great, more power to them but what I forsee this turning into is a case of let all the Open Source people slam Microsoft publically about their practices. This will detract from the conference in a major way and do more to make the opensource community look childish than not.
To summarize; Microsoft is free to attend, when they want to talk about OpenSource at the OpenSource conference about OpenSource. Anything else is pretty much not condusive to anything involved in the conference I would think. If that's not the case then they need to change the name from the "OpenSource Conf" to "OpenSource with some Closed source mixed in".
I was arrested and put into jail for a night infront of my house for telling an officer to "get off of my property". No exagerrations, no lies, no stretches of the truth; none of that. He came to talk to the chick upstairs, making my life miserable. Maybe this has only made me see the bad in cops. The most fucked up thing about it though is that I found out an officer of the law can throw you into jail for anything if they want, it's just that a large number of them don't like paper work. Silly shit like parking too close to a curb etc etc.
Actually the problem is that I think we differ on what the word "waste" means. See, you're operating under the notion that this fiber; someday down the line will get usage. That is not the case even for the foreseeable future which is a good 15-20 yrs. Now investment wise I see this as a waste, I also see it as waste period.
I don't consider a car insurance premium "wasted" because I receive the value of knowing I'm covered should I get into an accident. The logic doesn't apply; as you said the future is uncertain, the fiber isn't being used and probably will never be used. So what you have is byproduct, waste or whatever you want to call it. If you don't see this as a waste then it's because somehow you think someone will receive return on this. Meaning that because they dumped all the fibre they could into the ground someday, someone will use it; yippee you saved money because you don't have to dig it up again. Of course no one is gonna use it for the forseeable future if at all. Did you really save money? Or is it a waste.. be honest now.
What don't you understand about there being no customers on that fiber? Not one hundred, not ten, ZERO. It nets ZERO profit.. there is no INCOME from it. Lets use some numbers to get the idea across.
I spend $1000 to dig the trench, and $20 to add an additional fiber while the trench is open. There is no cost to "light the fibre" because it isn't being used. So thats $1020.. I have zero customers and the fibre isn't lit. I have gained nothing. WASTE.
I'm not confusing anything, you're confused; a 5 yr old could grasp this idea. If you buy a car and sit it in your driveway, don't put any gas into it, don't use it. It's just sitting there, it's a waste.
Is this Enron economics?? Someone has to pay for the fibre; it's sitting unused because the people that could use it are out of business or don't have the money to do so, or because of the last mile problem. You're not stating anything anyone doesn't know, broadband isn't big yet, so invest now get the pay off later; MAYBE. However the fibre isn't lit it's laying there being unused as it is now it might never get used therefore it's a waste because someone paid for the fibre and then paid to have it laid with hopes of it being used to offset the cost. It might or might not return money at some point.
If you practice your way you waste money on a investment you might not win. Infact the way it's looking that cable might not get lit for a couple of years you'll get higher return from your savings account. If you savings account returns more on the dollar than the fibre well it's not that smart of an investment.
You can't be serious.. This is a troll right? There is no such thing as GIVING UP YOUR FREEDOM, it's not a sacrifice, it's not a convience, it's givng away of your freedom. Parents and grandparents during WWII did not give up their freedom they fought for it. Which is what we need to fucking do, fight for our freedoms. Man you're really brainwashed; thinking that things can be undone. Once you give up your freedoms you just don't fucking say ok I want them back now. That's not how it works MeatMan, when you give them up they are GONE and the only way to get them back would be to get a mass gathering of people to vote for it. However, there are laws in place that already do away with "your vote counts" so the only other way is bloodshed because what's left in essence is a country run by the few. Trust me, the war on terrorism is screwing and will screw alot of people over in the future and it can and probably will happen to you. Can't you people see that the only people being litigated against are people who have done nothing wrong?! This war on terrorism has caught how many terrorists?!
You're a fucking idiot; What you're saying is absolute bullshit. If you really believe that make the fucking government tell Microsoft to get their fucking act together. More damage has been done by their products alone than anything else on the net. WiFi isn't what is insecure its corporate networks that are the core of the problem. Most corporate networks run Microsoft software; what the fuck does that tell you?
Better laws would mandate that servers be patched and such.
No No No, there is no need for laws; there is no need for regulation. There is no need for any of that; if you want a secure network, HIRE someone to do it or do it yourself. Everyone is always running off at the mouth with make this law, forge this law. Law, law, law for the most stupid bullshit. Our legal system is already filled with enough bullshit.
Wifi is NOT insecure; just like anything else so long as the system administrator secures the network it will be a secure as possible until an exploit is found and an exploit will be found. Wifi networks don't need regulation.. fucking think for yourself man.
Slashdot Mirror
When you say easier, what exactly is it that you mean? I've seen Kazaa in use it doesn't look too hard to me :)
This is the correct answer or at least i'd take it as a right answer.. Underground systems are usually tunnels, tunnels happen to be circular, why are tunnels circular? If everything was square, triangle, etc there would be some seriously poor dynamics involvings things like wind, pressure and sound which in turn would cause emergency systems and evacuation plans (flooding, fire, repair) to be more dangerous than they already are and highly problematic. Also structurally they can bear more load, are more cost effective etc etc you could go on and on about the benefits of round tunnels.
You could try building a triangular or square tunnel but I wouldn't drive a heavy truck over that road. The pressure would easily collapse such a structure without the proper support.
Or you know what would be even better.. If the Right hand recognized that it can only design for the right hand but bring in someone who understands the left hand to help design something that is fun and usable for both parties. This way you get the balance that you seek, the problem really isn't with the designers as it is with their abstract ideas of themselves playing the game. To them; the game is great, to the left hand the game isn't. The deeper problem is that there needs to be more female game designers who can bring a female point of view to the situation. That is the problem that needs to be addressed and sadly the article doesn't discuss the need for more female game designers, programmers and mathmeticians. It simply says designers need to be more aware. It's an almost hit; They can't be aware all of the time because no matter how hard they try they'll always think that a hot chick with nice boobs even if shes fully clothed is better than your realistic average chick with hair on her legs. Emphasis would be put on females sexual prowess and attributes because thats the way males naturally think. They want to mate with the opposite sex they find ideal.
Also this female complained about artists drawing the pictures but from what i've seen alot of artists for Rpg's etc etc are female and it's the management who happen to be male that wan't to see bikini clad women. I also found it odd that she would except that game where the girls are blantantly being trampled about as beach girls who can barely speak, slapping a volleyball around while those arttibutes are personified. There is even a commercial that shows a bunch of teenage guys sitting around the tv getting a wood over these girls playing volleyball. If those girls were Orc's would they buy the game? Most likely not, i'm not saying the game is bad or should be pulled off the shelves or any nonsense like that i'm just making a correlation of how men view women and how they are personfied in these games.
I'd also like to point out that my girlfriend is a model and she loves playing games, all types of video games infact I believe she is a bit of a video game junkie and she always points out to me that games that operate on the "me man - strong" "me woman - smart" basis usually suck as the outcomes and playability are too predictable for her liking. The most fun games are the games where the characters really aren't objectified in one manner or the next regardless of their looks. She always makes the reference to mario kart and how regardless of how pink and pretty princess is she can still shoot red shells and has super fast acceleration. Also the objectification of what is considered beauty by others when it comes to herself isn't always flattering but usually based on pie in the sky ideas. IE: because she looks good she's a nice person. etc etc..
Anyway i'm gonna start rambling so i'll stop here. The jist is that if women want games that don't objectify them physically they need to take a part in shaping what they think would be a good game and men need to give them the chance to do so. Female designers, programmers, artists; step up.
...and believe it or not, that "fine tuning" is a little more complex than "picking which set of packages to install" and "how we market it". Novell is, in fact, the perfect example of the power of a ground-up, purpose-built server platform. Linux's weakness is that it has NO equivalent; your precious Debian has no core, ground-up focus on being a server distro and ONLY a server distro.
Are you aware that you're talking out of your ass? I'm not a debian user, I've used it before and simply can attest that it's a server capable distro. They are in a constant state of testing, infact so much so that people trying to use it for desktop purposes feel the pinch of having to get all of their packages from an unstable branch. Also if i'm not mistaken, feel free to correct me but didn't Novell run ontop of dos? I mean, dos isn't really a desktop operating system to begin with.
I was fine, up to #3
3) All these residential users should be using their ISP as a relay. That's what the ISP is there for.
No; My ISP is here to offer me a connection to the internet. Hence the acronym definition Internet Service Provider. I don't need my isp as a relay and if you run your own mail server you should make sure it adheres as closely as possbile to RFC's. If you diverge then it's worth pointing out why and for what reasons.
I'm generally against crippling services on the ISP end, but I've even thought that maybe it's high time that ISPs do what AOL does, and block outbound port 25.
Where does the port blocking stop then?? I mean you are actually condoning blocking the outbound email port instead of tracing down the spammers and holding them legally liable. If they aren't from the country then appropriate IP's need to be blocked or the use of blocking lists.
Incomming is another story, but as the parent and I have pointed out- the residential users should be using their ISP's mail servers as relay hosts.
No. The residential users should have the option of relaying if they see fit (to anywhere) otherwise they should be able to send mail from whereever they want. However, the idea of blocking dynamic ip's would only make sense if ISP's offered static ip's for purchase. You can't offer only dynamic and then demand the relaying of ones private email through public servers without offering them an option to keep it private. That's if you even run with an idea like the above.
already has this.. AOL is behind the times in the "features" category regarding im. At least the features they think people want/need.
Side note, I think that apple is the only manufacturer with the chance of pulling this off, primarily because of OS X and the apps they pump out. What they really need is a new chip and fast.
Will be around for a while longer... What I see in the future is the letting go of legacy and the refinement of the beige box into a hub of sorts. The embedded segment still has poor input devices and no matter how small and useful they could be until headway is made in the usability arena specifically regarding input then they are pretty tough and difficult to use for any long period of time.
The first manufacturer to start pumping out non-legacy machines that are smaller more aesthetic and can hold current media yet allow for new functionality that is found in stuff like MythTv, Freevo, Tivo, Windows Media OS etc etc etc with ease will be the next big computer manufacturer.. That is till the guys/gals over at the mit media lab find out a way to get better input devices for smaller devices. Whether it be voice operated or whatever etc etc etc.. you get the idea.
are you wasting everyones time with this lawsuit? You do know that if SCO played nice and put itself in a position to be bought out it's quite possible someone would buy you out. The way things are going right now you are just wasting time and money. The likelyhood of you winning any money at all is so nil that it's pointless. In any event, preface over; Where do you see SCO in the next 5 yrs, what's your current business plan or model to retain revenue in today's rough economy especially in regards to Unix(tm)?
What does "other systems" have to do with anything about MS software?
I got maybe halfway into it when he started talking the same old bullshit about higher level languages etc etc. His intro "Until Unix and Linux programmers get over their macho love for low-level programming lanaguages, the security holes will continue to flow freely."
Sure, but ummm the same goes for every other programmer. Just not Unix or Linux programmers. What about your favorite Windows programmers? Is not their system based on a low level language? Even in comparison to high level languages the security holes still flow freely on that platform.
Then the author took the time to point out security holes in popular unix software. I'm glad he did this because you couldn't do the same for other systems. All in all the author is reinforcing the fact that here in nixland we have stronger peer review than anywhere else. We hold each other to as critical standards as possible and are happy to find errors in others code not just for the hell of it but because it makes all of us safer.
Next he talks about the programmer given up his ability to control a system by using higher level languages. That's cute but sadly in this field to become the best you have to understand the low-level stuff and they happen to be techniques and are not language specific. Moving memory around or conserving it is a technique and not a black magic art. Once you learn it you can apply the idea to other low-level languages you encounter. Writing a new algorithim at the lowest level possible isn't some black magic art it's a technique and can be taught to others.
I'm not saying that writing an email client in C is good or bad but the choice is of the programmer and not for you to make Mr. Lasser. That's the whole point of this OpenSource thing and as the particular package becomes more useful and needed in this community it will encounter more peer review than anywhere else. People can learn from others mistakes and hopefully we end up with better, more featureful and more secure code. Surely this has been happening for quite sometime now. In comparison to other closed systems where the amount of security holes are theoretically infinitely higher than the community we work within. The answer is clear; your take on it? Instead of writing an email client in C write it in perl? It doesn't matter.
Most states allow for the expungement of an arrest record, often regardless as to whether the arrest was legitimate or not. Of course probably many individuals that are victims of a frivolous arrest are unaware of that option.
That's not an option it's either automatic or doesn't exist at all. It's called an ACD (adjournment in contemplation of dismissal). It means that the case will be dismissed after a certain period of time whether it be 6 months, a year or whatever it is in that state. That is, so long as the person stays out of trouble.
I live in Brooklyn, NYC; I'm a black male. I was arrested outside the front of my house.. ON my steps for no reason. The reason on paper says "disorderly conduct". You watch too much TV.. Those males, who emulate a bunch of thugs, who largely prey on their own people are already in jail for entirely different reasons. I bet you also didn't know that out of every 8 black males you see during the day; 1 is in jail. While I was in central bookings in Downtown Brooklyn about 100% of the people in the cells were black so I asked what the hell is everyone in here for. "Jay walking", "Had no id on me", "Told a cop to fucking stop following me", "Didn't have my license".. Most of the things ran off were ticket offenses. One guy was caught racing his car down by Hunts Point and ended all the way in Brooklyn? Wtf is that? (I'd also like to point out that discon; disorderly conduct is a ticket offense). Surely some of these guys had to be lying but as I waited in the court room; they weren't.
I'd also like to point out that up until that point I never had a problem with the "law". Infact until my honorable discharge on Dec 5th 2002 I was an intel analyst for a Military Police Battalion and knew a truck load of police officers. The difference I realize is that I used to live in Suburbia.. Moving to Brooklyn changed the ideologies. Says alot about white people huh?
That incident, however, hasn't gone without challenge and the officers of the 79th precint who did this are being raked over the coals. The difference here is that my parents have money and my dad is in a position where he can make calls. Alot of the other black males out there don't have that. The contempt passes just the cops to their skin colors and this is why you sit there at your keyboard and make such assumptions about the social character of a black male in an urban area? You know nothing about it until you see it or experience it. So please, keep your ideas to yourself.
There is a big difference between Closed Source and Open Source as I'm sure you know. The CIFS conference was put together by a host of companies to basically get more information, converse, document etc etc the protocol and some of the implementations that exist. Microsoft happens to be one of these companies, they didn't release any CIFS specs at the conference, at least not that I'm aware of so basically it was a bunch of companies, programmers, engineers sharing their reverse engineered information. Which is what conferences are meant for, to share information on a certain topic.
Now if Microsoft shows up and wants to talk about Open Source then thats great, more power to them but what I forsee this turning into is a case of let all the Open Source people slam Microsoft publically about their practices. This will detract from the conference in a major way and do more to make the opensource community look childish than not.
To summarize; Microsoft is free to attend, when they want to talk about OpenSource at the OpenSource conference about OpenSource. Anything else is pretty much not condusive to anything involved in the conference I would think. If that's not the case then they need to change the name from the "OpenSource Conf" to "OpenSource with some Closed source mixed in".
If they don't offer a static ip I'm up shit creek without a paddle. So is my email, ftp and everything else. I need static ip. needs it.
I was arrested and put into jail for a night infront of my house for telling an officer to "get off of my property". No exagerrations, no lies, no stretches of the truth; none of that. He came to talk to the chick upstairs, making my life miserable. Maybe this has only made me see the bad in cops. The most fucked up thing about it though is that I found out an officer of the law can throw you into jail for anything if they want, it's just that a large number of them don't like paper work. Silly shit like parking too close to a curb etc etc.
Actually the problem is that I think we differ on what the word "waste" means. See, you're operating under the notion that this fiber; someday down the line will get usage. That is not the case even for the foreseeable future which is a good 15-20 yrs. Now investment wise I see this as a waste, I also see it as waste period.
I don't consider a car insurance premium "wasted" because I receive the value of knowing I'm covered should I get into an accident. The logic doesn't apply; as you said the future is uncertain, the fiber isn't being used and probably will never be used. So what you have is byproduct, waste or whatever you want to call it. If you don't see this as a waste then it's because somehow you think someone will receive return on this. Meaning that because they dumped all the fibre they could into the ground someday, someone will use it; yippee you saved money because you don't have to dig it up again. Of course no one is gonna use it for the forseeable future if at all. Did you really save money? Or is it a waste.. be honest now.
What don't you understand about there being no customers on that fiber? Not one hundred, not ten, ZERO. It nets ZERO profit.. there is no INCOME from it. Lets use some numbers to get the idea across.
I spend $1000 to dig the trench, and $20 to add an additional fiber while the trench is open. There is no cost to "light the fibre" because it isn't being used. So thats $1020.. I have zero customers and the fibre isn't lit. I have gained nothing. WASTE.
I'm not confusing anything, you're confused; a 5 yr old could grasp this idea. If you buy a car and sit it in your driveway, don't put any gas into it, don't use it. It's just sitting there, it's a waste.
How often do you plan on posting the EXACT same thing? Moderators take note. I'm sick of seeing this troll modded up.
Is this Enron economics?? Someone has to pay for the fibre; it's sitting unused because the people that could use it are out of business or don't have the money to do so, or because of the last mile problem. You're not stating anything anyone doesn't know, broadband isn't big yet, so invest now get the pay off later; MAYBE. However the fibre isn't lit it's laying there being unused as it is now it might never get used therefore it's a waste because someone paid for the fibre and then paid to have it laid with hopes of it being used to offset the cost. It might or might not return money at some point.
If you practice your way you waste money on a investment you might not win. Infact the way it's looking that cable might not get lit for a couple of years you'll get higher return from your savings account. If you savings account returns more on the dollar than the fibre well it's not that smart of an investment.
You can't be serious.. This is a troll right? There is no such thing as GIVING UP YOUR FREEDOM, it's not a sacrifice, it's not a convience, it's givng away of your freedom. Parents and grandparents during WWII did not give up their freedom they fought for it. Which is what we need to fucking do, fight for our freedoms. Man you're really brainwashed; thinking that things can be undone. Once you give up your freedoms you just don't fucking say ok I want them back now. That's not how it works MeatMan, when you give them up they are GONE and the only way to get them back would be to get a mass gathering of people to vote for it. However, there are laws in place that already do away with "your vote counts" so the only other way is bloodshed because what's left in essence is a country run by the few. Trust me, the war on terrorism is screwing and will screw alot of people over in the future and it can and probably will happen to you. Can't you people see that the only people being litigated against are people who have done nothing wrong?! This war on terrorism has caught how many terrorists?!
You're a fucking idiot; What you're saying is absolute bullshit. If you really believe that make the fucking government tell Microsoft to get their fucking act together. More damage has been done by their products alone than anything else on the net. WiFi isn't what is insecure its corporate networks that are the core of the problem. Most corporate networks run Microsoft software; what the fuck does that tell you?
Well said..
Better laws would mandate that servers be patched and such.
No No No, there is no need for laws; there is no need for regulation. There is no need for any of that; if you want a secure network, HIRE someone to do it or do it yourself. Everyone is always running off at the mouth with make this law, forge this law. Law, law, law for the most stupid bullshit. Our legal system is already filled with enough bullshit.
Wifi is NOT insecure; just like anything else so long as the system administrator secures the network it will be a secure as possible until an exploit is found and an exploit will be found. Wifi networks don't need regulation.. fucking think for yourself man.