Of all the tests done between these two, about a 5% improve was the most that the PC1066 had. How exactly does about a 5% improve justify the (previously true, now perhaps perceived) significant increase in price?
It ALMOST sounds like someone *COUGHRDRAMMAKERSCOUGH* was "supporting" the writer of that article, their adjectives were too strong for the data.
The only thing a person would lose with a firmer attachment of legal identity to oneself would be the freedom to easily do things anonymously AND in person. If that.
Patenting corruption might be an idea. Since so many patents of vague, general ideas and widely spread actions are being granted, perhaps someone could patent "repeated inhalation of mixed gasses, their seperation and the subsequent exhalation of unused gas."
Wouldn't that be a novel and useful idea for keeping lawyers in business?
My only request for ATT would be to "pick a cap".
If they are going to cap my bandwidth (128Kb/s up-1.5Mb/s down in Salem, Oregon) then they had better let me USE it.
Capping total bandwidth is a decent decision for a healthy network (128Kb/s bah!), but capping individual services in addition to the original cap is just reduction of service and should go with a reduction in cost for that service.
Now I shall return to my hovel and deal with my 3 gigs of USENET traffic every three days. I don't know if I can handle it!!!
-Jigokukoinu:)
I know of 2 specific instances in Salem, Oregon where a company wished to use cable broadband access in their business. Neither wanted to pay for a T1 and so ATT allowed them (us in one case) to use a normal ATT@Home account at the normal ATT@Home cost of ~$45/month.
Call them, if they don't off a special package for business, they'll porbably just say "OK". Odd for them, but true to the teeth.
-Jigokukoinu
Slashdot Mirror
Of all the tests done between these two, about a 5% improve was the most that the PC1066 had. How exactly does about a 5% improve justify the (previously true, now perhaps perceived) significant increase in price?
It ALMOST sounds like someone *COUGHRDRAMMAKERSCOUGH* was "supporting" the writer of that article, their adjectives were too strong for the data.
-Jeremiah
The only thing a person would lose with a firmer attachment of legal identity to oneself would be the freedom to easily do things anonymously AND in person. If that.
Patenting corruption might be an idea. Since so many patents of vague, general ideas and widely spread actions are being granted, perhaps someone could patent "repeated inhalation of mixed gasses, their seperation and the subsequent exhalation of unused gas." Wouldn't that be a novel and useful idea for keeping lawyers in business?
It sounds like someone patented the "corruption of the results of one's own search engine."
What the hell kind of patent is that?
:)
My only request for ATT would be to "pick a cap". If they are going to cap my bandwidth (128Kb/s up-1.5Mb/s down in Salem, Oregon) then they had better let me USE it. Capping total bandwidth is a decent decision for a healthy network (128Kb/s bah!), but capping individual services in addition to the original cap is just reduction of service and should go with a reduction in cost for that service. Now I shall return to my hovel and deal with my 3 gigs of USENET traffic every three days. I don't know if I can handle it!!! -Jigokukoinu :)
I know of 2 specific instances in Salem, Oregon where a company wished to use cable broadband access in their business. Neither wanted to pay for a T1 and so ATT allowed them (us in one case) to use a normal ATT@Home account at the normal ATT@Home cost of ~$45/month. Call them, if they don't off a special package for business, they'll porbably just say "OK". Odd for them, but true to the teeth. -Jigokukoinu