I'm not disagreeing with you, but *if* you take their assertion that the usage of the 3% is adversely affecting the network you have 2 general options:
1. Allow the network quality to degrade and have the other 97% be unhappy and leave to competitors
2. Address the situation and change the contract terms to reign in the 'offending' parties.
I agree 'unlimited' should be unlimited, but in reality it never really is. There isn't an unlimited amount of bandwidth available. I'd personally like to see the courts side with consumers on contract law, or at least prevent people from being bound by obviously invalid contracts.
never said it was shocking. Many times though, the usage statistics are simply made up (72.4% of them in fact!).
But assuming the figure is accurate for the moment, the problem is when the Telco devises a cost per MB/GB plan that ends up charging 80% of their customers more. If 3% are the problem, then change the plans so that 3% see the costs incurred by their excessive usage. The normal result is a 'cap' set so low just about everybody gets into the metered range. Which is exactly *not* what they were claiming in the first place.
Telco solution: We must charge everyone based on usage!
If they can identify 3% of people are using 40%, then by all means put a 'cap' on the fixed price service that *doesn't* affect the 97% of normal users. Charge for extra service for the offending 3%. They just use this as an excuse to slap everyone with higher rates.
The fluidity of the IT sector and the associated 'black magic' it is to non-techies allowed many people to be 'managers'. Since Mgmt didn't understand the tech, put a somewhat techy person into the Manager role.
This is why many technical people don't take mgmt seriously.
Good managers are worth far more than their weight in gold, but they are also few and far between unfortunately. Especially when IT is involved.
No need to apologize, actual reasoned responses such as yours are quite welcomed;-)
Indeed, we don't yet know how things will turn out. I don't know that I'd even give 50-50 odds of success.
But I'd still rather have the 'words' Obama has uttered which point to, at the very least, actual consideration of the actions to be taken and the risks associated with them.
As opposed to the 'facts be damned' approach taken by the last administration.
We did keep voting Ted Kennedy and Barney Frank into the senate, where they helped create the mortgage crisis.
Hmm, the mortgage crisis was actually and primarily caused by the removal of the Glass–Steagall Act in the late 90s. Freddie and Fannie certainly played a part but without this act being removed, there wouldn't have been the mortgage security mess that ended up causing the crisis in the first place. No investment banks merging with real banks to create the massively screwed up financial instruments nobody understood. And of course you had Dubya (and everybody else) massively encouraging loans for everybody. Almost the definition of a perfect storm.
We did vote Barak Obama into the white house, believing that he would somehow SAVE us money by giving everyone government-funded health care
Single payer healthcare would in fact SAVE the country money. Even the completely stripped, watered down Bill currently in the Senate will save something like 600 BILLION dollars going forward. Imagine how much more it would save if we had actual health care reform and choices. Yet the Republicans are fighting giving people CHOICE. Funny they usually like the 'free market'.
lower taxes to the point where no one making less than what, $200K will have to pay any taxes.
I don't know that anyone promised anything like that unless you're talking Dubya who cut taxes by a TRILLION dollars and then started 2 wars that he wouldn't account for in the budget. Everything Obama has done has a plan to pay for it.
He was also going to get us out of the middle east. How is all of that working out?
Last I checked, Iraq is doing well enough that we might actually get out earlier than planned. The GOP has harped on Obama precisely BECAUSE he is planning for our withdrawal from Afghanistan.
If we were smart as a whole, we'd be voting libertarians into government, keeping government at a minimal size, government "services" (as in defense, police, and maybe infrastructure) would be funded by tariffs, and private citizens would be able to help the less fortunate. We wouldn't be demanding a nanny state.
Libertarian policy is putting your head in the sand. It works great until there are disagreements about who can take what resources. That's exactly what government is for. Anti-trust laws exist because the libertarian philosophy run amok. Monopolies need to be regulated hence the need for government.
You can claim less is better, but then you need to also claim that the most recent financial crisis was just 'works as designed'.
then perhaps the 'closed' code is in a firmware portion you can't wipe or after wiping you're left with a phone that won't access the network - I don't really know.
I would bet quite a bit of money that Verizon didn't all of a sudden open source the code that controls access to their network...
Open Source only applies to the 'open' code. I can release an Open Source program that contains proprietary code as long as I release all the 'open' code I used. The 'closed' code is never released. Obviously the interfaces of the 'closed' code can be gleaned from reading the 'open' code but no more than that.
And since these handsets are specific to a carrier (Sprint/Verizon/etc) there is private code being accessed to actually connect to the systems.
But even that is irrelevant....they don't tap these things on the front end. It's done back at the ranch so to speak. Unless your handset is managing to encrypt it's data before it is sent, the network operator has it (and always will). Even if you can, big brother would pretty quickly note that all the data it's getting is encrypted and lock the handset out;-)
The argument that just isn't being made is that while renewable energy is not as cheap as oil 'today', it won't be going up. Oil, as you say, *will* be going up tremendously in the next 30-50 years.
We can either start with renewable now and pay a little more, or we can wait until we absolutely *need* another source of energy and pay a boatload later.
I doubt it. raise the price too high and even addicts will find another drug....
Certainly the Saudi's will get much richer, but 'Big Oil' business is mostly a middleman these days. They make a good profit, but the vast bulk of the cost is for the crude from producers.
When traveling at speed even minor bumps can greatly affect the handling of a car.
If you're hitting a car that now has a blown tire, I imagine it's that much worse.
My original post was mostly that this was *not* an automated roadway; these 'trains' would be traveling on open roadways with 'regular' traffic. A fully automated system would be better I think because you'd have the 'swarm' type of reactions with computers rather than mixing human and computer decision making with split second requirements.
I missed that part I guess. That seems to be even less likely to succeed. Now you need a professional driver going primarily where you're going as well? Obviously on well traveled routes such as commuting this might work, but carpooling does much the same thing without any added risks.
Someone mentioned handling characteristics of different cars. A good point if the lead car has to make emergency maneuvers...how does the tail end of the train react?
ever notice the cars that do have problems on the road?
It's pretty frequent, as in a *daily* occurrence. If any of those cars were near or in the trains, it's just something that has to be dealt with and accounted for.
Modern cars are pretty good on average, but the law of averages always catches up eventually. Steering rods, brakes, alternators...lots of potential problems. Hell I've even seen someone's wheel literally come off at highway speeds; as in the lug nuts were either rusted through or they didn't tighten them properly. That's the type of thing that a 'train' would have to deal with.
except at 55-75 mph there's that much less room to react when the tire of the car in front of you blows out...
Unless you're building in sensors that can check for each and every possible change to the front vehicles ability to maintain speed and safety.
An automated roadway seems a better bet than semi-autonomous 'trains' on an uncontrolled road. The 'trains' would by their definition need to interact in real-time with humans driving cars the old fashioned way. Trying to get a computer to react properly to independent human behavior at that speed in unknown conditions seems a steep steep hill to climb.
I think the 'scientific types', of which I consider myself one, generally don't make snap decisions about something without other factors being involved.
The 'flow' argument doesn't generally work with groundwater since it's not moving very fast if at all. But flows can have effects outside of their influence. Certainly metal pipes can distort an existing magnetic field such as to be easily discerned by someone with tools and/or sensitivity to such things.
The problem is every study published on the subject has definitively not found any evidence that divining performed any better than random chance. That's where I think the perception that science people tend to 'snap shut' on such subjects exists. They've seen evidence before and it has been clearly disproved as anything other than random chance.
Most science types would love to see some repeatable, testable theories supported by evidence confirming divining. It would be something that seems like magic, but has a scientific basis. Geeks love that stuff;-)
The reason the devices cost $16,000 versus $0.50 is because someone is bribing the officials in charge of acquiring the devices. I obviously have no proof of this, but I'd say it's a pretty good theory given the culture. It certainly happens here on occasion, but we're *much* more beholden to actual proof of ability and less likely to have corruption when purchasing such expensive tools.
It's called a water 'table' for a reason. It spreads horizontally and follows the contours of the land generally. So pretty much anywhere you dig, if you dig far enough, you're going to find water.
Now, if they are dousing out individual springs, that might be something, but as others have mentioned, proof that it happens any better than random is lacking.
Even when they 'find' water, proof that other places didn't have water is required for any substantive belief that they 'found' anything on a better than random chance.
Slashdot Mirror
which slows my fall
Of course it does. Anything held in your hand as you freefall will exert at least *some* air resistance.
Upon landing I get the adoration of anyone lucky enough to have seen it.
I'm sure he'll clap right before he gets out the scraper and mop...
I'm not disagreeing with you, but *if* you take their assertion that the usage of the 3% is adversely affecting the network you have 2 general options:
1. Allow the network quality to degrade and have the other 97% be unhappy and leave to competitors
2. Address the situation and change the contract terms to reign in the 'offending' parties.
I agree 'unlimited' should be unlimited, but in reality it never really is. There isn't an unlimited amount of bandwidth available. I'd personally like to see the courts side with consumers on contract law, or at least prevent people from being bound by obviously invalid contracts.
never said it was shocking. Many times though, the usage statistics are simply made up (72.4% of them in fact!).
But assuming the figure is accurate for the moment, the problem is when the Telco devises a cost per MB/GB plan that ends up charging 80% of their customers more. If 3% are the problem, then change the plans so that 3% see the costs incurred by their excessive usage. The normal result is a 'cap' set so low just about everybody gets into the metered range. Which is exactly *not* what they were claiming in the first place.
Claim: 3% of users consume 40% of bandwidth
Telco solution: We must charge everyone based on usage!
If they can identify 3% of people are using 40%, then by all means put a 'cap' on the fixed price service that *doesn't* affect the 97% of normal users. Charge for extra service for the offending 3%. They just use this as an excuse to slap everyone with higher rates.
The fluidity of the IT sector and the associated 'black magic' it is to non-techies allowed many people to be 'managers'. Since Mgmt didn't understand the tech, put a somewhat techy person into the Manager role.
This is why many technical people don't take mgmt seriously.
Good managers are worth far more than their weight in gold, but they are also few and far between unfortunately. Especially when IT is involved.
No need to apologize, actual reasoned responses such as yours are quite welcomed ;-)
Indeed, we don't yet know how things will turn out. I don't know that I'd even give 50-50 odds of success.
But I'd still rather have the 'words' Obama has uttered which point to, at the very least, actual consideration of the actions to be taken and the risks associated with them.
As opposed to the 'facts be damned' approach taken by the last administration.
yep, delivery is scheduled for 2012....or if nobody's home delivery is rescheduled for 2029
Hmm, the mortgage crisis was actually and primarily caused by the removal of the Glass–Steagall Act in the late 90s. Freddie and Fannie certainly played a part but without this act being removed, there wouldn't have been the mortgage security mess that ended up causing the crisis in the first place. No investment banks merging with real banks to create the massively screwed up financial instruments nobody understood. And of course you had Dubya (and everybody else) massively encouraging loans for everybody. Almost the definition of a perfect storm.
Single payer healthcare would in fact SAVE the country money. Even the completely stripped, watered down Bill currently in the Senate will save something like 600 BILLION dollars going forward. Imagine how much more it would save if we had actual health care reform and choices. Yet the Republicans are fighting giving people CHOICE. Funny they usually like the 'free market'.
I don't know that anyone promised anything like that unless you're talking Dubya who cut taxes by a TRILLION dollars and then started 2 wars that he wouldn't account for in the budget. Everything Obama has done has a plan to pay for it.
Last I checked, Iraq is doing well enough that we might actually get out earlier than planned. The GOP has harped on Obama precisely BECAUSE he is planning for our withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Libertarian policy is putting your head in the sand. It works great until there are disagreements about who can take what resources. That's exactly what government is for. Anti-trust laws exist because the libertarian philosophy run amok. Monopolies need to be regulated hence the need for government.
You can claim less is better, but then you need to also claim that the most recent financial crisis was just 'works as designed'.
then perhaps the 'closed' code is in a firmware portion you can't wipe or after wiping you're left with a phone that won't access the network - I don't really know.
I would bet quite a bit of money that Verizon didn't all of a sudden open source the code that controls access to their network...
the answer would be 'no'.
;-)
Open Source only applies to the 'open' code. I can release an Open Source program that contains proprietary code as long as I release all the 'open' code I used. The 'closed' code is never released. Obviously the interfaces of the 'closed' code can be gleaned from reading the 'open' code but no more than that.
And since these handsets are specific to a carrier (Sprint/Verizon/etc) there is private code being accessed to actually connect to the systems.
But even that is irrelevant....they don't tap these things on the front end. It's done back at the ranch so to speak. Unless your handset is managing to encrypt it's data before it is sent, the network operator has it (and always will). Even if you can, big brother would pretty quickly note that all the data it's getting is encrypted and lock the handset out
it's not a bug it's a feature!
;-)
Microsoft heard all the buzz about 'skinning' apps and figured they'd one up them and skin an integral part of windoze
no no...CowboyNeal is the 'darkmatter' of the intarwebs
if the gas was massive enough and in the right position, sure it could cause energy gain, no?
first you get a *really* long network cable...
agreed.
The argument that just isn't being made is that while renewable energy is not as cheap as oil 'today', it won't be going up. Oil, as you say, *will* be going up tremendously in the next 30-50 years.
We can either start with renewable now and pay a little more, or we can wait until we absolutely *need* another source of energy and pay a boatload later.
well that explains the Iraq invasion ;-)
I doubt it. raise the price too high and even addicts will find another drug....
Certainly the Saudi's will get much richer, but 'Big Oil' business is mostly a middleman these days. They make a good profit, but the vast bulk of the cost is for the crude from producers.
When traveling at speed even minor bumps can greatly affect the handling of a car.
If you're hitting a car that now has a blown tire, I imagine it's that much worse.
My original post was mostly that this was *not* an automated roadway; these 'trains' would be traveling on open roadways with 'regular' traffic. A fully automated system would be better I think because you'd have the 'swarm' type of reactions with computers rather than mixing human and computer decision making with split second requirements.
I missed that part I guess. That seems to be even less likely to succeed. Now you need a professional driver going primarily where you're going as well? Obviously on well traveled routes such as commuting this might work, but carpooling does much the same thing without any added risks.
Someone mentioned handling characteristics of different cars. A good point if the lead car has to make emergency maneuvers...how does the tail end of the train react?
ever notice the cars that do have problems on the road?
It's pretty frequent, as in a *daily* occurrence. If any of those cars were near or in the trains, it's just something that has to be dealt with and accounted for.
Modern cars are pretty good on average, but the law of averages always catches up eventually. Steering rods, brakes, alternators...lots of potential problems. Hell I've even seen someone's wheel literally come off at highway speeds; as in the lug nuts were either rusted through or they didn't tighten them properly. That's the type of thing that a 'train' would have to deal with.
except at 55-75 mph there's that much less room to react when the tire of the car in front of you blows out...
Unless you're building in sensors that can check for each and every possible change to the front vehicles ability to maintain speed and safety.
An automated roadway seems a better bet than semi-autonomous 'trains' on an uncontrolled road. The 'trains' would by their definition need to interact in real-time with humans driving cars the old fashioned way. Trying to get a computer to react properly to independent human behavior at that speed in unknown conditions seems a steep steep hill to climb.
I think the 'scientific types', of which I consider myself one, generally don't make snap decisions about something without other factors being involved.
;-)
The 'flow' argument doesn't generally work with groundwater since it's not moving very fast if at all. But flows can have effects outside of their influence. Certainly metal pipes can distort an existing magnetic field such as to be easily discerned by someone with tools and/or sensitivity to such things.
The problem is every study published on the subject has definitively not found any evidence that divining performed any better than random chance. That's where I think the perception that science people tend to 'snap shut' on such subjects exists. They've seen evidence before and it has been clearly disproved as anything other than random chance.
Most science types would love to see some repeatable, testable theories supported by evidence confirming divining. It would be something that seems like magic, but has a scientific basis. Geeks love that stuff
The reason the devices cost $16,000 versus $0.50 is because someone is bribing the officials in charge of acquiring the devices. I obviously have no proof of this, but I'd say it's a pretty good theory given the culture. It certainly happens here on occasion, but we're *much* more beholden to actual proof of ability and less likely to have corruption when purchasing such expensive tools.
well if you want to play nitpick nazi...
I didn't say 'proved', I said 'disproved'.
It's called a water 'table' for a reason. It spreads horizontally and follows the contours of the land generally. So pretty much anywhere you dig, if you dig far enough, you're going to find water.
Now, if they are dousing out individual springs, that might be something, but as others have mentioned, proof that it happens any better than random is lacking.
Even when they 'find' water, proof that other places didn't have water is required for any substantive belief that they 'found' anything on a better than random chance.
Wikipedia/Dousing has some links to studies that disproved it completely.