I work for a small ISP here in NYC. We resell Time Warner Cable and we have no limits on usage for residential customers. You can call Anthony at 212 293 2620, e-mail him at Sales@NYCT.net or visit our website. I do know certain ports are blocked so you can't host a server but to the best of my knowledge there are no other limits. If you are in NYC and need cable, give Anthony a call. He'll give you the details.
You're comparing apples and oranges. Eisenhower never claimed he invented the interstate. He just made it happen here. Al Gore claimed he invented the Internet yet he never made it happen here. One accomplished something and the other just lied.
It is an interesting article but way too short to tell us anything. With just 15 subjects the sample group is likely way too small to draw any conclusions. It may be enough however to secure more research money.
That is a seriously naive statement. Both parties send people to die in wars that could have been prevented. How easily you forget that both parities joined the "remove Sadam" bandwagon. Each party made very loud and grand pronouncements that said we had to do this. Bill Cliinton sent US troops into Somalia and Yugoslavia. ALL presidents in the last fifty years (at least) have sent US troops in combat somewhere.
There are a number of questions about this tax. Small providers have some of the same concerns and some different ones. Calculating the tax could be a major issue. Large Telcos have accounting departments to handle and hide revenues and taxes. Smaller providers may not. Additionally the tax may reduce the attractiveness of VoIP and this may may a smaller provider's business model less viable. A company like Verizon or Bell South (AT&T) may have the resources to fight the taxing authority wheras a smaller provider may not. For example, the regulation says that 64.9% of revenues will be assumed to come from long distance. If I am providing unlimited nationwide calling does that mean that I'm not receiving revenue from long distance since I don't charge by the minute? Verizon has the pull to make that argument stick but my company won't have that kind of influence. Calculating that would be very difficult and a serious pain in the neck. There are other issues that could affect smaller companies differently.
A lot of writers have missed the point of the proposed vehicle. It is an unmanned vehicle desigend to loiter for long periods of time while having the ability to strike quickly. It will be usefull against conventional as well as unconventional targets. With today's precision munitions it will be able to strike a range of targets based upon the threat. In effect it will do what we are doing today but more efficiently and without the risk to a crew.
Saying that money could be better spent elsewhere is rather naive. There will always be a threat somewhere, at least in our lifetime. The article doesn't provide enough information for us to determine if it is a viable and cost effective solution so we can't say for sure if it warrants testing. In theory, this design will allow for a lighter and stronger design than a conventional swing wing design. Being lighter and stronger allows for greater payload and/or range so it may work out well.
The empires you list didn't fall because they spent too much on the military. The Roman empire fell because of a collection of problems including corruption, poor strategic decisions, internal strife, moral decay, and a loss of unity. Napoleon's empire fell for various reasons, chiefly several poor military decisions including but not limited to the invasion of Russia and delay at Waterloo. The Nazi empire fell for various reasons, chiefly increasingly maniacal interference by Hitler into military strategy. Even as late as mid 1944 they could have survived with a draw. The Soviet empire fell because of several reasons including a flawed economic model, a desire for social, economic and religious freedoms, internal strife, etc. The over spending on things millitarty was a contributing factor to the soviet demise but was't by any means the only reason. Even if they didn't overspend the soviet empire would have collapsed eventually.
Theft of bandwidth is different in some cases than watching a broadcast. Some ISPs sometimes charge an over limit fee. This could cost the actual customer money. Additionally, stealing a wireless connection can reduce the bandwidth available to the paying customer and in some cases, this may degrade the service for the legitimate users, depending upon various factors such as applications used, etc. In some ways it is similar to stealing cable. It is still a theft of a service according to the law. The fact that the bandwidth is delivered wirelessly instead of over a cable of some type is irrelevant. He clearly knew that he wasn't paying for a service that he was receiving and it appears he made no attempt to correct the situation.
Calling 911 for this may not be quite the over reaction it first seems. Here in New York we have a 311 number to call for non emergencies. Not all municipalities have this and some ask if the call is an emergency. If not, they then direct the call to a department instead of an emergency dispatcher. It does seem however that the store should have had a contact at the police department and probably should have called him or her first instead of 911. They probably could have called the local precinct also.
The story doesn't give us a lot of information. The fact that he's a level one predator isn't really an issue in his arrest although he could face additional charges if as a result of this the authorities discover other crimes in the process of arresting him. The story also fails to mention what if any protective measures the store took to prevent the action. The biggest story however seems to be that the person arrested was stupid. He was warned several times and he was blatantly obvious. It is sort of like someone with a warrant speeding, ignoring traffic lights, etc.
This has nothing to do with the US military watching us. First, the computer belonged to a Veterans Affairs employee and not a US military serviceman or civilian. Second, if yor're referring to the domestic survaillance, all of the press lately is about the NSA and other civilian agencies.
You do however bring up something that is quite interesting. The former East Germany was suffocated due to too much information. They had, according to some reports, up to one third of their population providing information on each other to the security services. They had so much information that they were overloaded and couldn't keep track of what was happening to themselves!
It is an interesting read for sure. I don't however see clear proof that the NSA is listening in on our converstations. I see that there is monitoring but the articles don't say how the data is being used. It seems more like it is looking for patterns but it is way too soon to say for sure. If this is the case, I'm not sure how that is any different that the looking for patterns such astransactions for $10,000 or more (used to fight laundering, etc). A pattern is a pattern and this time it may just be a pattern in a new medium.
It is also significant to note that this is nothing new. In the mid nineties Al Gore was involved in a meeting where the government tried to have listening devices built into every phone manufactured. Unfortunately as society "progresses", there is more and more personal information that is disseminated, stolen, viewed, etc but companies, governments, crooks, friends, etc. I work for an ISP and quite often we receive notices from some organization telling us that one of our customers is distributing illegal copies of something or using a name, photo, logo, etc illegally. Some one somewhere is monitoring their patterns. Some of our connections have restrictions on certain activites, e.g. web hosting and we can tell if their pattern confirms or suggests inappropriate usage.
The author is clearly opiniated and sometimes makes judgement calls. One example is "The telltale sign of an illicit government spy operation is the fact that only people with security clearance from the National Security Agency can enter this room." The fact that security clearances are requried is not proof of an illicit operation. The article presents a small but important part of a much larger discussion. I will withhold judgement until I have more information.
I think some people are confused about net neutrality verses QOS (You really believe this FUD). We offer different connections. We generally don't charge for QOS but a better connection will cost more, e.g. more bandwidth, PVC DSL vs ADSL, etc. In our lit buildings we sometimes charge extra if the customer wants to host a website because that can consume significant bandwidth. What we don't do is tell them that certain sites they visit will have priority over others. We provide the bandwidth and the customer chooses what they want to do with it. This is drastically different than charging sites for preferential treatment by those visiting them.
This would be similar to saying that we're going to charge you to make a phone call AND charge the receiver of the call. Hmmm, K-mart customers will be able to call and have a clear phone call but Walmart customers can expect choppy calls because they didn't pay enough to Verizon.
Re:Business voip?
on
Vonage IPO
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
Hello and good evening,
I'm sure that many have offered their services by now. If you are interested in one more recommendation, check us out. We are New York Connect and we can offer what you are looking for and at a very competative rate. We are a boutique service and we have large and small companies who use us. We are a small company with excellent service. Some who use us are Jordache, Al Roker, David Bowie and many other companies. If you would like to learn more I can be reached at 212 293 2620 or DaveB@NYCT.net. If you send me your e-mail address I will gladly send you some informtion and questions that will assist us in getting you the appropriate service. Thank you for your time.
Regards,
Dave Borgioli
Anyone who thinks that they are going to get the cheapest VoIP and have it be as good as their POTS trunk or T-1 PRI is sadly mistaken. I work for an ISP here in New York City. We are offering VoIP now in addition to our other offerings. I would never have a business take VoIP without at leat one POTS trunk as a back up. Usually there will be several POTS trunks as back up. There are many factors that can affect the quality and reliablility of the VoIP. I've had people do it themselves (to save money) and ended up spending more for a worse product.
There are many factors that one can do to improve their quality and reliability. These range from having the ISP prioritize the voice packets (if they'll do that), to using better hubs/switches, etc to using a better Internet connection, to selecting the optimum compression method and IAD. VoIP is also close to having line powered VoIP also. I have some using a UPS (battery back up) to provide power for minor outages. Keep in mind that if you are using a key or PBX phone system and you lose power you will not be able to call with POTS or T-1 trunks unless you have a UPS.
VoIP is a good system and when used correctly can be a good solution. It may offer families a second trunk that they other wise wouldn't get. It may save businesses money and/or offer features that they couldn't get before. Like any tool it can be a disaster if used incorrectly.
Slashdot Mirror
I work for a small ISP here in NYC. We resell Time Warner Cable and we have no limits on usage for residential customers. You can call Anthony at 212 293 2620, e-mail him at Sales@NYCT.net or visit our website. I do know certain ports are blocked so you can't host a server but to the best of my knowledge there are no other limits. If you are in NYC and need cable, give Anthony a call. He'll give you the details.
You're comparing apples and oranges. Eisenhower never claimed he invented the interstate. He just made it happen here. Al Gore claimed he invented the Internet yet he never made it happen here. One accomplished something and the other just lied.
It is an interesting article but way too short to tell us anything. With just 15 subjects the sample group is likely way too small to draw any conclusions. It may be enough however to secure more research money.
That is a seriously naive statement. Both parties send people to die in wars that could have been prevented. How easily you forget that both parities joined the "remove Sadam" bandwagon. Each party made very loud and grand pronouncements that said we had to do this. Bill Cliinton sent US troops into Somalia and Yugoslavia. ALL presidents in the last fifty years (at least) have sent US troops in combat somewhere.
There are a number of questions about this tax. Small providers have some of the same concerns and some different ones. Calculating the tax could be a major issue. Large Telcos have accounting departments to handle and hide revenues and taxes. Smaller providers may not. Additionally the tax may reduce the attractiveness of VoIP and this may may a smaller provider's business model less viable. A company like Verizon or Bell South (AT&T) may have the resources to fight the taxing authority wheras a smaller provider may not. For example, the regulation says that 64.9% of revenues will be assumed to come from long distance. If I am providing unlimited nationwide calling does that mean that I'm not receiving revenue from long distance since I don't charge by the minute? Verizon has the pull to make that argument stick but my company won't have that kind of influence. Calculating that would be very difficult and a serious pain in the neck. There are other issues that could affect smaller companies differently.
A lot of writers have missed the point of the proposed vehicle. It is an unmanned vehicle desigend to loiter for long periods of time while having the ability to strike quickly. It will be usefull against conventional as well as unconventional targets. With today's precision munitions it will be able to strike a range of targets based upon the threat. In effect it will do what we are doing today but more efficiently and without the risk to a crew. Saying that money could be better spent elsewhere is rather naive. There will always be a threat somewhere, at least in our lifetime. The article doesn't provide enough information for us to determine if it is a viable and cost effective solution so we can't say for sure if it warrants testing. In theory, this design will allow for a lighter and stronger design than a conventional swing wing design. Being lighter and stronger allows for greater payload and/or range so it may work out well.
The empires you list didn't fall because they spent too much on the military. The Roman empire fell because of a collection of problems including corruption, poor strategic decisions, internal strife, moral decay, and a loss of unity. Napoleon's empire fell for various reasons, chiefly several poor military decisions including but not limited to the invasion of Russia and delay at Waterloo. The Nazi empire fell for various reasons, chiefly increasingly maniacal interference by Hitler into military strategy. Even as late as mid 1944 they could have survived with a draw. The Soviet empire fell because of several reasons including a flawed economic model, a desire for social, economic and religious freedoms, internal strife, etc. The over spending on things millitarty was a contributing factor to the soviet demise but was't by any means the only reason. Even if they didn't overspend the soviet empire would have collapsed eventually.
Theft of bandwidth is different in some cases than watching a broadcast. Some ISPs sometimes charge an over limit fee. This could cost the actual customer money. Additionally, stealing a wireless connection can reduce the bandwidth available to the paying customer and in some cases, this may degrade the service for the legitimate users, depending upon various factors such as applications used, etc. In some ways it is similar to stealing cable. It is still a theft of a service according to the law. The fact that the bandwidth is delivered wirelessly instead of over a cable of some type is irrelevant. He clearly knew that he wasn't paying for a service that he was receiving and it appears he made no attempt to correct the situation. Calling 911 for this may not be quite the over reaction it first seems. Here in New York we have a 311 number to call for non emergencies. Not all municipalities have this and some ask if the call is an emergency. If not, they then direct the call to a department instead of an emergency dispatcher. It does seem however that the store should have had a contact at the police department and probably should have called him or her first instead of 911. They probably could have called the local precinct also. The story doesn't give us a lot of information. The fact that he's a level one predator isn't really an issue in his arrest although he could face additional charges if as a result of this the authorities discover other crimes in the process of arresting him. The story also fails to mention what if any protective measures the store took to prevent the action. The biggest story however seems to be that the person arrested was stupid. He was warned several times and he was blatantly obvious. It is sort of like someone with a warrant speeding, ignoring traffic lights, etc.
This has nothing to do with the US military watching us. First, the computer belonged to a Veterans Affairs employee and not a US military serviceman or civilian. Second, if yor're referring to the domestic survaillance, all of the press lately is about the NSA and other civilian agencies. You do however bring up something that is quite interesting. The former East Germany was suffocated due to too much information. They had, according to some reports, up to one third of their population providing information on each other to the security services. They had so much information that they were overloaded and couldn't keep track of what was happening to themselves!
It is an interesting read for sure. I don't however see clear proof that the NSA is listening in on our converstations. I see that there is monitoring but the articles don't say how the data is being used. It seems more like it is looking for patterns but it is way too soon to say for sure. If this is the case, I'm not sure how that is any different that the looking for patterns such astransactions for $10,000 or more (used to fight laundering, etc). A pattern is a pattern and this time it may just be a pattern in a new medium. It is also significant to note that this is nothing new. In the mid nineties Al Gore was involved in a meeting where the government tried to have listening devices built into every phone manufactured. Unfortunately as society "progresses", there is more and more personal information that is disseminated, stolen, viewed, etc but companies, governments, crooks, friends, etc. I work for an ISP and quite often we receive notices from some organization telling us that one of our customers is distributing illegal copies of something or using a name, photo, logo, etc illegally. Some one somewhere is monitoring their patterns. Some of our connections have restrictions on certain activites, e.g. web hosting and we can tell if their pattern confirms or suggests inappropriate usage. The author is clearly opiniated and sometimes makes judgement calls. One example is "The telltale sign of an illicit government spy operation is the fact that only people with security clearance from the National Security Agency can enter this room." The fact that security clearances are requried is not proof of an illicit operation. The article presents a small but important part of a much larger discussion. I will withhold judgement until I have more information.
I think some people are confused about net neutrality verses QOS (You really believe this FUD). We offer different connections. We generally don't charge for QOS but a better connection will cost more, e.g. more bandwidth, PVC DSL vs ADSL, etc. In our lit buildings we sometimes charge extra if the customer wants to host a website because that can consume significant bandwidth. What we don't do is tell them that certain sites they visit will have priority over others. We provide the bandwidth and the customer chooses what they want to do with it. This is drastically different than charging sites for preferential treatment by those visiting them. This would be similar to saying that we're going to charge you to make a phone call AND charge the receiver of the call. Hmmm, K-mart customers will be able to call and have a clear phone call but Walmart customers can expect choppy calls because they didn't pay enough to Verizon.
Hello and good evening, I'm sure that many have offered their services by now. If you are interested in one more recommendation, check us out. We are New York Connect and we can offer what you are looking for and at a very competative rate. We are a boutique service and we have large and small companies who use us. We are a small company with excellent service. Some who use us are Jordache, Al Roker, David Bowie and many other companies. If you would like to learn more I can be reached at 212 293 2620 or DaveB@NYCT.net. If you send me your e-mail address I will gladly send you some informtion and questions that will assist us in getting you the appropriate service. Thank you for your time. Regards, Dave Borgioli
Anyone who thinks that they are going to get the cheapest VoIP and have it be as good as their POTS trunk or T-1 PRI is sadly mistaken. I work for an ISP here in New York City. We are offering VoIP now in addition to our other offerings. I would never have a business take VoIP without at leat one POTS trunk as a back up. Usually there will be several POTS trunks as back up. There are many factors that can affect the quality and reliablility of the VoIP. I've had people do it themselves (to save money) and ended up spending more for a worse product. There are many factors that one can do to improve their quality and reliability. These range from having the ISP prioritize the voice packets (if they'll do that), to using better hubs/switches, etc to using a better Internet connection, to selecting the optimum compression method and IAD. VoIP is also close to having line powered VoIP also. I have some using a UPS (battery back up) to provide power for minor outages. Keep in mind that if you are using a key or PBX phone system and you lose power you will not be able to call with POTS or T-1 trunks unless you have a UPS. VoIP is a good system and when used correctly can be a good solution. It may offer families a second trunk that they other wise wouldn't get. It may save businesses money and/or offer features that they couldn't get before. Like any tool it can be a disaster if used incorrectly.