You could have a 1.5Pbs (peta* bits per second) connection to your ISP, but when the rest of the Internet sucks, at what point does how big your pipe to your ISP become irrelevant.
I know that the big UK ISPs are all peered with the BBC so things like iPlayer don't even touch "the Internet" so it could be good from an IPTV point of view with established players, but that's only a transient benefit.
From a wider point of view, would I notice much difference between my current 8MB (give or take) ADLS and 1.5Gb fibre?
Surely the validity of any evidence citing party x having IP address a.b.c.d at time t comes down the accuracy of the clock on the server that logged the IP address allocation.
How do you prove in court that clock on a logging server was correct.
It's a long time since I had any involvement in corporate IT networks; and I realise that a lot is easier said than done, but if I were designing one from scratch today; I wouldn't treat any physical internal employee work location (ethernet at the desk or office-wide WiFi) as being any different to the wider Internet.
This would enable an infrastructure to be set-up where protection was focussed around the core services and the communications channel between them and the accessing client rather than having to worry about what is actually going on at the employee's desktop; because even if you do restrict external Internet access your employees are just going use dongles or their mobile phones.
...so it doesn't really matter. Big companies like Google etc. only have ToS because their lawyers said they must have a ToS (well they would, wouldn't they), and little companies only have ToS to make themselves look like big companies.
Automatic code generation sets of alarm bells in my mind;
You're reading too much into it. Just like when you're building a house; you put the Scaffolding up to give you something to work from. When you're done building your project, the Scaffolding is gone.
Rails has created quite a buzz in the Web 2.0 community, which means a lot of people jump straight into Rails without any prior knowledge of Ruby; and then when they find they can't get very far they blame that on Rails.
It's like hacking the Linux Kernel without ever having programmed in C. You're bound to think it sucks because you won't have a clue what's going on.
I'm not going to get too heated about this because there are probably very good reasons, but what exactly is the point of the "appeal" process.
A judge has ruled against you. DEAL WITH IT.
Does anyone know the legal/moral/constitutional requirement for the right to apeal? Why is the appeal Judge / Jury's virdict considered any more or less valid than the original?
There just doesn't seem to be any closure in legal processes involving tech companies, they just go on indefinitely.
None of these TCO studies seem to make any reference to the capabilities of your people.
It is well known amongst software engineering disciplines that 2 programmers of equal education and experience can vary in performance by as much as a factor of 10, and I'm sure a similar differential applies amongst sysadmin staff.
Therefore, I'd argue that people are perhaps the most significant contributing factor towards the TCO of any chosen vendor's platform. A Linux server farm managed by idiots is going to have a TCO far greater than a Windows farm managed by seasoned and competent Windows sysadmins, with licensing costs rendered as a negligable factor.
I think the point is that sysadmin's come under an dis-proportionate amount of flak from the end user community, as opposed to, say, the Payroll Clerk who shouldn't really attract anyone's negative attention unless _they_ screw up.
Sysadmins, on the other hand, seem to attract negative attention because YOU screwed up.
It costs very little to be innovative in Software.
The same cannot be said of innovation in pharmaceuticals.
From the article:
"They (those in favour of Software Patents) argue that intellectual property rights provide incentives for companies to innovate and invest in research and development."
What i'm saying is, that in my opinion, this argument is void because it is possible to innovate in Software without any considerable investment in anything other than your own time.
Programmers felt vindicated that the Y2K bug didn't turn out to be that big of a deal.
It was a big deal. Lot's of us here worked very hard to make sure that nothing bad happened and this really gets to me when people throw around the opinion that it was all a fuss over nothing.
Am I the only one who gets the impression that this whole social netbookblogmarkworking thingamebob is all a bit self referential at the moment.
blogs pointing to social booking marking tools linking to other blogs talking about syndication, itself syndicating another page talking about blogging that links to a social booking site...
I'm a bit worried about getting involved because I might not get out.
You heard about the two websites that accidetally syndicated each other didn't you? Right mess it was. In the data center of one of the servers the Janitor had to be called in - it was beyond anything a sysadmin could clear up.
Slashdot Mirror
...but I haven't hit it yet.
You could have a 1.5Pbs (peta* bits per second) connection to your ISP, but when the rest of the Internet sucks, at what point does how big your pipe to your ISP become irrelevant.
I know that the big UK ISPs are all peered with the BBC so things like iPlayer don't even touch "the Internet" so it could be good from an IPTV point of view with established players, but that's only a transient benefit.
From a wider point of view, would I notice much difference between my current 8MB (give or take) ADLS and 1.5Gb fibre?
* lots of
Surely the validity of any evidence citing party x having IP address a.b.c.d at time t comes down the accuracy of the clock on the server that logged the IP address allocation.
How do you prove in court that clock on a logging server was correct.
I don't think you can.
It's a long time since I had any involvement in corporate IT networks; and I realise that a lot is easier said than done, but if I were designing one from scratch today; I wouldn't treat any physical internal employee work location (ethernet at the desk or office-wide WiFi) as being any different to the wider Internet.
This would enable an infrastructure to be set-up where protection was focussed around the core services and the communications channel between them and the accessing client rather than having to worry about what is actually going on at the employee's desktop; because even if you do restrict external Internet access your employees are just going use dongles or their mobile phones.
...so it doesn't really matter. Big companies like Google etc. only have ToS because their lawyers said they must have a ToS (well they would, wouldn't they), and little companies only have ToS to make themselves look like big companies.
Didn't go down well at all.
. html
http://www.efc.ca/pages/media/e-telegraph.04jul95
while you still can.
Automatic code generation sets of alarm bells in my mind;
You're reading too much into it. Just like when you're building a house; you put the Scaffolding up to give you something to work from. When you're done building your project, the Scaffolding is gone.
Rails has created quite a buzz in the Web 2.0 community, which means a lot of people jump straight into Rails without any prior knowledge of Ruby; and then when they find they can't get very far they blame that on Rails.
It's like hacking the Linux Kernel without ever having programmed in C. You're bound to think it sucks because you won't have a clue what's going on.
Unless i'm on the wrong tariff, there's nothing "FREE" about the £19.99 I throw at my cable provider each month.
I'm not going to get too heated about this because there are probably very good reasons, but what exactly is the point of the "appeal" process.
A judge has ruled against you. DEAL WITH IT.
Does anyone know the legal/moral/constitutional requirement for the right to apeal? Why is the appeal Judge / Jury's virdict considered any more or less valid than the original?
There just doesn't seem to be any closure in legal processes involving tech companies, they just go on indefinitely.
...that decided it could change the rules of Formula 1?
None of these TCO studies seem to make any reference to the capabilities of your people.
It is well known amongst software engineering disciplines that 2 programmers of equal education and experience can vary in performance by as much as a factor of 10, and I'm sure a similar differential applies amongst sysadmin staff.
Therefore, I'd argue that people are perhaps the most significant contributing factor towards the TCO of any chosen vendor's platform. A Linux server farm managed by idiots is going to have a TCO far greater than a Windows farm managed by seasoned and competent Windows sysadmins, with licensing costs rendered as a negligable factor.
I think the point is that sysadmin's come under an dis-proportionate amount of flak from the end user community, as opposed to, say, the Payroll Clerk who shouldn't really attract anyone's negative attention unless _they_ screw up.
Sysadmins, on the other hand, seem to attract negative attention because YOU screwed up.
Valid HTML/XHTML..... Check
Valid CSS.... Check
READY!
I just checked the pics, and now it looks like an iPoo.
and very few rise to the level of ubiquity
Sounds like somebody needs to enrol on Economics 101.
...that promotes the illegality, and not the developer?
Is that sufficient for the *AA to sue the original developer?
I don't see how it can be, and therefore every P2P app is safe so long as the original developer isn't the one doing the promoting.
For a long time, Nokia's slogan to accompany their mobile office features of advanced phones was:
"Now you can get to work before you get to work."
Bollocks to that.
It costs very little to be innovative in Software.
The same cannot be said of innovation in pharmaceuticals.
From the article:
"They (those in favour of Software Patents) argue that intellectual property rights provide incentives for companies to innovate and invest in research and development."
What i'm saying is, that in my opinion, this argument is void because it is possible to innovate in Software without any considerable investment in anything other than your own time.
They're going to do a special model combined with the police radio - the iPlod.
Programmers felt vindicated that the Y2K bug didn't turn out to be that big of a deal.
It was a big deal. Lot's of us here worked very hard to make sure that nothing bad happened and this really gets to me when people throw around the opinion that it was all a fuss over nothing.
Get a clue.
Where's the website where you post your homework and somebody on the other side of the World does it for you for a couple of dollars....?
Am I the only one who gets the impression that this whole social netbookblogmarkworking thingamebob is all a bit self referential at the moment.
blogs pointing to social booking marking tools linking to other blogs talking about syndication, itself syndicating another page talking about blogging that links to a social booking site...
I'm a bit worried about getting involved because I might not get out.
You heard about the two websites that accidetally syndicated each other didn't you? Right mess it was. In the data center of one of the servers the Janitor had to be called in - it was beyond anything a sysadmin could clear up.
You must be able to describe your invention using words that have existed for at least 20 years.