How fast is it? I envy the cost of your plan, but I also wonder how it compares to Verizon's LTE network. It is not unusual to see 20Mbit downstream on their LTE network. The 3G EV-DO on Verizon could do something like 2Mbit.
This is a battle that I have no idea who will win. The lines are drawn.
On one side, we have companies like Comcast and Verizon that are developing faster and faster technologies, but cap the amount of data that their users can consume. They are also companies that that have dreams of vertical integration of products, where they control the content creation, distribution, and consumption, and the profits that come with each.
On the other side, we have companies that are located in the "info space", who are innovating new ways to deliver stuff (entertainment, business services, communication, whatever) to the people. They are the ones advertising "the cloud". Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Facebook, Netflix, etc. They want access to consumers over an open communications network. However, they can't have users afraid to use their bandwidth allotment in order to use the cloud.
So, here we have competing goals, and only one can dominate. Who will it be? I, personally, hope that the Netflix/Google crowd somehow wins. "Give the people what they want." That is a quote that Comcast and Verizon have never understood. They are anti-competitive by nature. This battle will spill out into mass-media debates and government regulation. It will be ugly.
This story? The most important event in recent tech history? Wow. I thought it was just a report of a loose agreement between two groups of griefers. Who knew? Everything you predict is pure speculation. If anon and lulz actually pull off a large hack, that might be news, but... that isn't the case here.
It isn't quite so simple. This is a common argument (especially from republicans) but it relies on an actual free market. Cellular phone carriers do not qualify in the US, because they have government-enforced monopolies* on the spectrum that the cell phones use. They use that power to force unfair pricing strategies on the consumer. Usually they do this while saying that they are striving to lower prices for the consumer. They are lying.
* Actually a duo-opoly, with ATT and Verizon sharing the exclusive access. The reason they don't have to compete is because they don't share phone technology. EDGE, HSPA, EV-DO, LTE, etc. Users of one network can't take their business elsewhere.
The purpose of the summary is not to get you to read the article. It should, you know, summarize. Summaries on Slashdot should also be informative on their own; a "digest" version of the article.
RTFA complaints are valid, but only if the original poster is making false assumptions that are contradictory to the facts in the article.
1. FOIA request?? Oh crap! 2. Make false claim: "We can't export our emails electronically because we lack the technical savvy." 3. Print out all emails. Take damning emails out by hand and burn them. 4. Do absolute minimum to give the rest of the paper to news organizations, knowing that they could never reconstruct the original data set. 5. ??? 6. Profit!
I don't like this summary. Who cares? Tell me why the vote was important. Why "finally"? Was it delayed? Why did Google vote against? What are the new features? Why is this on the front page?!?
As much as I like to bash Comcast, they actually have been on the ball when it comes to IPv6. They have been testing tunneling for their customers (I'm using their 6to4 to participate in IP6 Day), they have a IPv6 test suite for customers, and they are planning to go Dual-stack.
Just like Intel's GHz, most people only buy based on easily understood numbers. Bigger = better. By my understanding, glossy screens are cheaper to produce. Therefore, the user can pay less for their 17" screen. Same with 1080i vs 720p. Another grossly under-reported feature of LCD is the viewing angle. Poor quality screens on bargin laptops are unbelievably terrible. I find that these screens are impossible to configure such that the colors look correct on both the top and bottom of the screen at the same time. Refresh rate, dot pitch, they all get thrown out for that diagonal viewing area number. Don't get me started on trying to use office applications on a 16:9 screen. The vertical resolution is just... pathetic. -d
That much is obvious, yes. But if you read the article, you will see that the author's primary problem with Thunderbolt is that it offers practically no improvement over USB3, while cutting out the backwards compatibility that was originally intended in the LightPeak demo. Combine that with the high cost of entry, and why would anyone want to switch to the new technology? Without high volume, the price will never come down. THAT is what the author meant.
I understand the generation issue, for sure. However look at it from the perspective of the consumer. We currently have flat rate power. You want us to agree to (and in some cases PAY FOR) the new meters which will eventually make me pay a great deal more for the same service I'm getting right now.
The commercials even show a person waiting for the light to turn green before turning on the AC unit. Who does that? It's hot when it's hot. It would be better to focus on more efficient appliances. Then, the customer and the power company both get what they want.
And as I suggested in the original post, that peak period just happens to be the only time I really need to use electricity. The rest of the time, I'm asleep or at work. So, in effect, they are just charging me more.
...that sees through the BS that surrounds these smart meters. The power company will say something like this: "this great new technology helps you use energy more efficiently, so you can be more green!" This is what I hear: "We are going to install new meters that allow us to charge you more for electricity when you use it when you most need it."
It's an amazing accomplishment and truly a beauty to behold. A survey of his completed image would match perfectly with a monologue from Carl Sagan. Not only does it show the elegance of a galaxy from the inside, but the views at large angles away from the galactic plane show a liberal sprinkling of alien galaxies, the inhabitants of which could scarcely care about us puny humans and our problems.
I have definitely noticed addition latency in the UI with VS2010, and it has always bugged me. I can't be certain if it is VS itself or if the underlying WPF is to blame. My current belief, and I have no facts to back this up, is that the VS UI is simply much more complicated than the "typical" use case that was targeted for WPF, and as a result, low-to-mid range computers fail to meet a human's expectations of UI latency.
On a separate beef, why is it that so many people put up with the AWFUL latency on smartphones? Especially when browsing the web, it can sometimes become unusable. The phones get more and more powerful, but instead of making the last UI work, the designers just add more and more flashy crap instead. UI is just as slow but it looks cool in the ads. When I don't have a real computer nearby, I can use the android browser when I need to, because I recognize the flaws and can patiently work around them. It kills me to watch my girlfriend attempt to navigate the interface of her nook color. Usually goes something like this... 1. press UI element 2. no response, press harder (because that's what humans do when a button doesn't work) 3. harder has no effect, start tapping repeatedly 4. UI finally changes, menu pops up and immediately goes away, having tapped on an unknown selection. 5. human gets mad, claims unit is broken, goes to check email on 5 year old PC.
As an added bonus, the PC doesn't require you to put your fingers in the way of what you're trying to look at.
... he wasn't actively commanding his organization since going into hiding. However I would hope that his data contains names of most of the AQ leadership, so perhaps some new names will come to light. It would be nice if the location of his #2 was discovered and exploited.
I've thought about smashing mine in a fit of blinding rage many times, but fortunately I know that the hardware in my laptop is actually pretty good. The reason the machine doesn't work so well is that it is bogged down with a host of security and asset management products that leave the laptop constantly IO-bound. I'm sure I will end up buying my own hard drive online and swapping it out so I can have my own operating system.
Why would I want another laptop setup by the outsourced techno-goons that only care about providing the bare minimum service to satisfy the contract and conspire to lock us in?
This disaster will very likely change the way that nuclear power generation plants are approved and evaluated in the future. Unfortunately, a promising technology will almost certainly be set back, perhaps irreparably. The silver lining, however, is that alternative nuclear technologies may finally get a fair shake. Alternate fuels and reactor types offer so many possibilities to possibly exceed the efficiency and safety levels that we put up with today but have thus far been unable to obtain funding compared to the currently developed reactors. That confidence in our current strategy is being eroded rapidly. This isn't some second-rate system like Chernobyl, it is close-to-state-of-the-art.
It is NOT the job of a software vendor to control foreign governments. Nor is it their job to decide if its product is being used in an "approved" manner.
If the government wants to try to control this, I think that a law would have to be passed. I guess that such a law would introduce all manner of additional powers and controls that the gov't could then use to curtail the rights of its citizens.
It IS the responsibility of a company to avoid dealing with countries that are on the US's embargo list (NK, Cuba, Ivory Coast, Iran, etc) It is also their responsibility to control how their products are used to avoid those countries.
Outside of export laws, American companies can still be attacked for human rights abuses regardless of where the abuses took place.
Still, I agree that there is nothing that prevents companies from blocking websites. I don't think the OP wanted to prosecute these companies, only call them out for being "evil" by our values.
Slashdot Mirror
How fast is it? I envy the cost of your plan, but I also wonder how it compares to Verizon's LTE network. It is not unusual to see 20Mbit downstream on their LTE network. The 3G EV-DO on Verizon could do something like 2Mbit.
This is a battle that I have no idea who will win. The lines are drawn.
On one side, we have companies like Comcast and Verizon that are developing faster and faster technologies, but cap the amount of data that their users can consume. They are also companies that that have dreams of vertical integration of products, where they control the content creation, distribution, and consumption, and the profits that come with each.
On the other side, we have companies that are located in the "info space", who are innovating new ways to deliver stuff (entertainment, business services, communication, whatever) to the people. They are the ones advertising "the cloud". Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Facebook, Netflix, etc. They want access to consumers over an open communications network. However, they can't have users afraid to use their bandwidth allotment in order to use the cloud.
So, here we have competing goals, and only one can dominate. Who will it be? I, personally, hope that the Netflix/Google crowd somehow wins. "Give the people what they want." That is a quote that Comcast and Verizon have never understood. They are anti-competitive by nature. This battle will spill out into mass-media debates and government regulation. It will be ugly.
-d
This story? The most important event in recent tech history? Wow. I thought it was just a report of a loose agreement between two groups of griefers. Who knew? Everything you predict is pure speculation. If anon and lulz actually pull off a large hack, that might be news, but... that isn't the case here.
Dear Slashdot,
Don't feed the trolls.
Thanks,
Metalliqaz
It isn't quite so simple. This is a common argument (especially from republicans) but it relies on an actual free market. Cellular phone carriers do not qualify in the US, because they have government-enforced monopolies* on the spectrum that the cell phones use. They use that power to force unfair pricing strategies on the consumer. Usually they do this while saying that they are striving to lower prices for the consumer. They are lying.
* Actually a duo-opoly, with ATT and Verizon sharing the exclusive access. The reason they don't have to compete is because they don't share phone technology. EDGE, HSPA, EV-DO, LTE, etc. Users of one network can't take their business elsewhere.
The purpose of the summary is not to get you to read the article. It should, you know, summarize. Summaries on Slashdot should also be informative on their own; a "digest" version of the article.
RTFA complaints are valid, but only if the original poster is making false assumptions that are contradictory to the facts in the article.
My gut-assumption is that they did this:
1. FOIA request?? Oh crap!
2. Make false claim: "We can't export our emails electronically because we lack the technical savvy."
3. Print out all emails. Take damning emails out by hand and burn them.
4. Do absolute minimum to give the rest of the paper to news organizations, knowing that they could never reconstruct the original data set.
5. ???
6. Profit!
-d
I don't like this summary. Who cares? Tell me why the vote was important. Why "finally"? Was it delayed? Why did Google vote against? What are the new features? Why is this on the front page?!?
As much as I like to bash Comcast, they actually have been on the ball when it comes to IPv6. They have been testing tunneling for their customers (I'm using their 6to4 to participate in IP6 Day), they have a IPv6 test suite for customers, and they are planning to go Dual-stack.
Just like Intel's GHz, most people only buy based on easily understood numbers. Bigger = better. By my understanding, glossy screens are cheaper to produce. Therefore, the user can pay less for their 17" screen. Same with 1080i vs 720p. Another grossly under-reported feature of LCD is the viewing angle. Poor quality screens on bargin laptops are unbelievably terrible. I find that these screens are impossible to configure such that the colors look correct on both the top and bottom of the screen at the same time. Refresh rate, dot pitch, they all get thrown out for that diagonal viewing area number. Don't get me started on trying to use office applications on a 16:9 screen. The vertical resolution is just... pathetic.
-d
That much is obvious, yes. But if you read the article, you will see that the author's primary problem with Thunderbolt is that it offers practically no improvement over USB3, while cutting out the backwards compatibility that was originally intended in the LightPeak demo. Combine that with the high cost of entry, and why would anyone want to switch to the new technology? Without high volume, the price will never come down. THAT is what the author meant.
I can confirm. It was dead yesterday.
I understand the generation issue, for sure. However look at it from the perspective of the consumer. We currently have flat rate power. You want us to agree to (and in some cases PAY FOR) the new meters which will eventually make me pay a great deal more for the same service I'm getting right now.
The commercials even show a person waiting for the light to turn green before turning on the AC unit. Who does that? It's hot when it's hot. It would be better to focus on more efficient appliances. Then, the customer and the power company both get what they want.
And as I suggested in the original post, that peak period just happens to be the only time I really need to use electricity. The rest of the time, I'm asleep or at work. So, in effect, they are just charging me more.
...that sees through the BS that surrounds these smart meters. The power company will say something like this: "this great new technology helps you use energy more efficiently, so you can be more green!" This is what I hear: "We are going to install new meters that allow us to charge you more for electricity when you use it when you most need it."
I need /. to let me know... am I the only one?
-d
It is mostly visible from the southern hemisphere. 'We' see only a vague streak up north.
It's an amazing accomplishment and truly a beauty to behold. A survey of his completed image would match perfectly with a monologue from Carl Sagan. Not only does it show the elegance of a galaxy from the inside, but the views at large angles away from the galactic plane show a liberal sprinkling of alien galaxies, the inhabitants of which could scarcely care about us puny humans and our problems.
-d
...there had better not be any stuck pixels on my new iPad. It cost a FORTUNE.
I have definitely noticed addition latency in the UI with VS2010, and it has always bugged me. I can't be certain if it is VS itself or if the underlying WPF is to blame. My current belief, and I have no facts to back this up, is that the VS UI is simply much more complicated than the "typical" use case that was targeted for WPF, and as a result, low-to-mid range computers fail to meet a human's expectations of UI latency.
On a separate beef, why is it that so many people put up with the AWFUL latency on smartphones? Especially when browsing the web, it can sometimes become unusable. The phones get more and more powerful, but instead of making the last UI work, the designers just add more and more flashy crap instead. UI is just as slow but it looks cool in the ads.
When I don't have a real computer nearby, I can use the android browser when I need to, because I recognize the flaws and can patiently work around them. It kills me to watch my girlfriend attempt to navigate the interface of her nook color. Usually goes something like this...
1. press UI element
2. no response, press harder (because that's what humans do when a button doesn't work)
3. harder has no effect, start tapping repeatedly
4. UI finally changes, menu pops up and immediately goes away, having tapped on an unknown selection.
5. human gets mad, claims unit is broken, goes to check email on 5 year old PC.
As an added bonus, the PC doesn't require you to put your fingers in the way of what you're trying to look at.
-d
... he wasn't actively commanding his organization since going into hiding. However I would hope that his data contains names of most of the AQ leadership, so perhaps some new names will come to light. It would be nice if the location of his #2 was discovered and exploited.
I've thought about smashing mine in a fit of blinding rage many times, but fortunately I know that the hardware in my laptop is actually pretty good. The reason the machine doesn't work so well is that it is bogged down with a host of security and asset management products that leave the laptop constantly IO-bound. I'm sure I will end up buying my own hard drive online and swapping it out so I can have my own operating system.
Why would I want another laptop setup by the outsourced techno-goons that only care about providing the bare minimum service to satisfy the contract and conspire to lock us in?
-d
The Troll is strong with this one...
yes.
This disaster will very likely change the way that nuclear power generation plants are approved and evaluated in the future. Unfortunately, a promising technology will almost certainly be set back, perhaps irreparably. The silver lining, however, is that alternative nuclear technologies may finally get a fair shake. Alternate fuels and reactor types offer so many possibilities to possibly exceed the efficiency and safety levels that we put up with today but have thus far been unable to obtain funding compared to the currently developed reactors. That confidence in our current strategy is being eroded rapidly. This isn't some second-rate system like Chernobyl, it is close-to-state-of-the-art.
It is NOT the job of a software vendor to control foreign governments. Nor is it their job to decide if its product is being used in an "approved" manner.
If the government wants to try to control this, I think that a law would have to be passed. I guess that such a law would introduce all manner of additional powers and controls that the gov't could then use to curtail the rights of its citizens.
It IS the responsibility of a company to avoid dealing with countries that are on the US's embargo list (NK, Cuba, Ivory Coast, Iran, etc) It is also their responsibility to control how their products are used to avoid those countries.
Outside of export laws, American companies can still be attacked for human rights abuses regardless of where the abuses took place.
Still, I agree that there is nothing that prevents companies from blocking websites. I don't think the OP wanted to prosecute these companies, only call them out for being "evil" by our values.
-d