Typical anti-science
on
Melting Europa
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
The news post is such a typical anti-science message that it'd be funny if it weren't so depressing that people can be so stupid. The message obviously shows somebody who is against things they don't understand. They're probably the kind of person who opposes GM food not because it is unsafe, but because it has the word "genetic" in it.
Current non-extreme 802.11g (54mbit) solutions are capable of about 20mbit actual throughput. Therefore I'd assume that future 108mbit standards (I recall reading about one that's rating was planned to be 108mbit, and I'm not talking about an "extreme" mode) would increase that to ~40mbit. While wireless networks are indeed a shared medium, the primary use of any home network is to share an internet connection, which rarely go over 10mbit in speed. For sending files accross a network, 40mbit is currently sufficient for most people.
However, as I noted in my original post, wireless technology is advancing at a much more rapid pace than wired ethernet. By the time 1000baseT is not fast enough (I'm certain it will be MANY years before this is the case), I'm sure there will be a wireless standard that can replace it; perhaps some medium-range ultra-wideband solution.
What I'm trying to say is, there is no need for anything better than Cat5e or Cat6 cabling; they both support gigabit speeds, which is more than sufficient for even the most demanding power useres, and will remain so for a great deal of time to come; most people would not notice if their network were suddenly switched to 10mbit half duplex, as their internet connection would still be shared at full speed.
Also, please note that half-duplex does not mean that a network will max out at 25% of capacity. In fact, it will max out at 100% of capacity; a 10mbit half-duplex network shared among several machines will still allow 10mbit (or something more like 7-8mbit due to other concerns) of aggregate traffic to pass over the network. Keep in mind that full-duplex means that a network can transfer 200% of it's rated speed (100mbit networks can do 200mbit if you combine outgoing and incomming data).
Just go with Cat5e; it supports gigabit speeds (GigE over Copper is dropping in price very fast), which is more than fast enough until you switch to wireless.
Wireless is advancing at a pace that wired solutions never did; in just a few short years we've gone from 11mbit to 108mbit, with faster speeds and longer ranges in the cards for the future. By the time gigabit ethernet isn't enough for you, I'm certain wireless will be the solution you adopt.
Seriously, any game that people want co-op for, they'll do it themselves. Id is usually very good about releasing game sourcecode (not engine, game). I'm sure we'll see a mod that adds co-op mere weeks (or days) after DooM 3's release. Heck, people have even done it for games like Half-Life and Deus-Ex, where the games didn't lend themselves well to co-op.
I'm quite pleasd with ServerMatrix's service. Good uptime, fast network, low prices. Only miff is that their response times on trouble tickets is a bit low, but that's solved by 24/7 phone support via a 1-800 number. They have a 2-ring SLA, so you never wait on hold. Also if you live outside of the US/Canada, call them and leave your number and they'll call back on their dime.
As for their offerings, my biggest complaint is that there's no reasonable way to add more bandwidth to a server. For a 69$/mth server, you get 1000GB. Want another 1000GB? That's 500$. Yeah you can just rent multiple servers, but that means a lot of extra management work.
For example, take 120GB drives. That are made with 80GB platters. Two platters at 80GB is 160GB, with 120GB viewable. You've got at least 40GB "hidden" space there. However nowhere near the hidden space the article is claiming.
I get 10.5 million hits per month on my site, almost three times what this guy is getting... And at the highest point my hosting costs were only 168$ US per month for two dedicated servers from ServerMatrix.
I agree with many of the people here when I say, What's the POINT? I'm also curious as to where most of those pounds come from.
For example, an Alienware Area-51m can be configured with everything this 16lb beast has, minus the 160GB HDD and 17" LCD (The Area-51m only has a 15.4" or a 16.1"), and yet only weighs 8-9lbs, HALF the weight.
First of all, why does anybody need 160GB on a laptop, that's what servers are for, the current 60GB 8MB cache 7200RPM laptop drives from Hitachi are more than sufficient.
And second of all, either that laptop has an 8lbs hard-drive, or one BIG motherfucking battery.
For those who don't want to read the full 5 pages, here are two favourite quotes that I've typed from the images:
"By the way, you later told Kevin Bachus of Infinium that you declined any follow ups because - you believed that you were being invited to Florida only so Mr. Roberts could physically attack you."
"In short your "volunteer" appears to have locked authority."
And yes, that really does read "locked authority".
I should have RTFA. I assumed that the data was "precise" judging by the news post.
Umm.... and how are they getting this info?
on
BudNet Tracks Your Suds
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
If I pick up a 6-pack at the local depaneur (7-11, corner store, etc) and pay cash, and the clerk prints out a cheap receipt on a cheap non-networked cash register, Budweiser will STILL know who I am, and if my bear was chilled or warm?
What, do they have a secret network of x-ray thermal spy sats that record all purchases of their product?
This whole article is overblown and exagerated. Not to mention it doesn't apply to many (most?) stores. At least around here. I don't know of too many corner stores around here that ask for your personal info when you buy beer.
I wouldn't bet on it; Half-Life (1) is still Windows-Only. Sure, you can run it with WINE on PC, and I'm sure there's some way to run it in software (Or maybe even hardware) mode in an emulator on a Mac, but VALVe never even made the effort. They could have probably even gotten away with paying one guy to take advantage of WineX to do a linux "port" that had WineX built in; it seems to have worked for games like The Sims, and HL is pretty old. But they didn't.
"A few hours" on a MiniDisc player can't beat the 694 hours of audio one can store on an iPod or other large media player (40GB models, using 1000 not 1024). Minidisc players are vaguely interesting and all, but their pathetic capacity is kind of boring. Yeah, they've improved since back in the day when they behaved like mini CD players, but MP3 players have leapfrogged WAY past them.
Unfortunately no, my only firewall is external in the form of an iptables firewall at the border of my network:(
A simple "telnet localhost 80" on the command prompt returns a (nearly) instant "Connection refused", so I guess that explanation must be discarded. I can't think of anything else to explain Firebird's behaviour. Perhaps it's a quirk in Firebird? It is a beta after all, such things are to be expected.
Round it off. 3.7GB is a lot closer to 4GB than it is to 3GB. Which seems to indicate you don't understand grade three math.
Oh, and I'm not attracted to the mini iPod, I think it's a huge waste of money as it's priced much too high to be worth it. Less than a third the storage for 250$? Ripoff.
I have an idea as to the possible cause; is your local machine running a web server? If so, you'd get instant 404 errors, causing the instant rejection. In my case I don't, so Firebird would time out trying to load the ad content.
Perhaps I should write a simple web server to simply reject everything with 404 errors for these kinds of situations.
You're attracted to the mini iPod? The mini iPod is 4GB, not 3GB, which seems to indicate you haven't even seen the mini iPod website, so how are you attracted to it?
Slashdot Mirror
The news post is such a typical anti-science message that it'd be funny if it weren't so depressing that people can be so stupid. The message obviously shows somebody who is against things they don't understand. They're probably the kind of person who opposes GM food not because it is unsafe, but because it has the word "genetic" in it.
Current non-extreme 802.11g (54mbit) solutions are capable of about 20mbit actual throughput. Therefore I'd assume that future 108mbit standards (I recall reading about one that's rating was planned to be 108mbit, and I'm not talking about an "extreme" mode) would increase that to ~40mbit. While wireless networks are indeed a shared medium, the primary use of any home network is to share an internet connection, which rarely go over 10mbit in speed. For sending files accross a network, 40mbit is currently sufficient for most people.
However, as I noted in my original post, wireless technology is advancing at a much more rapid pace than wired ethernet. By the time 1000baseT is not fast enough (I'm certain it will be MANY years before this is the case), I'm sure there will be a wireless standard that can replace it; perhaps some medium-range ultra-wideband solution.
What I'm trying to say is, there is no need for anything better than Cat5e or Cat6 cabling; they both support gigabit speeds, which is more than sufficient for even the most demanding power useres, and will remain so for a great deal of time to come; most people would not notice if their network were suddenly switched to 10mbit half duplex, as their internet connection would still be shared at full speed.
Also, please note that half-duplex does not mean that a network will max out at 25% of capacity. In fact, it will max out at 100% of capacity; a 10mbit half-duplex network shared among several machines will still allow 10mbit (or something more like 7-8mbit due to other concerns) of aggregate traffic to pass over the network. Keep in mind that full-duplex means that a network can transfer 200% of it's rated speed (100mbit networks can do 200mbit if you combine outgoing and incomming data).
Or, if Cat6 is cheaper, by all means go with that.
Just go with Cat5e; it supports gigabit speeds (GigE over Copper is dropping in price very fast), which is more than fast enough until you switch to wireless.
Wireless is advancing at a pace that wired solutions never did; in just a few short years we've gone from 11mbit to 108mbit, with faster speeds and longer ranges in the cards for the future. By the time gigabit ethernet isn't enough for you, I'm certain wireless will be the solution you adopt.
Seriously, any game that people want co-op for, they'll do it themselves. Id is usually very good about releasing game sourcecode (not engine, game). I'm sure we'll see a mod that adds co-op mere weeks (or days) after DooM 3's release. Heck, people have even done it for games like Half-Life and Deus-Ex, where the games didn't lend themselves well to co-op.
I'm quite pleasd with ServerMatrix's service. Good uptime, fast network, low prices. Only miff is that their response times on trouble tickets is a bit low, but that's solved by 24/7 phone support via a 1-800 number. They have a 2-ring SLA, so you never wait on hold. Also if you live outside of the US/Canada, call them and leave your number and they'll call back on their dime.
As for their offerings, my biggest complaint is that there's no reasonable way to add more bandwidth to a server. For a 69$/mth server, you get 1000GB. Want another 1000GB? That's 500$. Yeah you can just rent multiple servers, but that means a lot of extra management work.
For example, take 120GB drives. That are made with 80GB platters. Two platters at 80GB is 160GB, with 120GB viewable. You've got at least 40GB "hidden" space there. However nowhere near the hidden space the article is claiming.
Well.... good. I hope there are serious consequences to their funding of SCO's FUD.
I get 10.5 million hits per month on my site, almost three times what this guy is getting... And at the highest point my hosting costs were only 168$ US per month for two dedicated servers from ServerMatrix.
This guy DESERVES to be charged with extortion.
I agree with many of the people here when I say, What's the POINT? I'm also curious as to where most of those pounds come from.
For example, an Alienware Area-51m can be configured with everything this 16lb beast has, minus the 160GB HDD and 17" LCD (The Area-51m only has a 15.4" or a 16.1"), and yet only weighs 8-9lbs, HALF the weight.
First of all, why does anybody need 160GB on a laptop, that's what servers are for, the current 60GB 8MB cache 7200RPM laptop drives from Hitachi are more than sufficient.
And second of all, either that laptop has an 8lbs hard-drive, or one BIG motherfucking battery.
For those who don't want to read the full 5 pages, here are two favourite quotes that I've typed from the images:
"By the way, you later told Kevin Bachus of Infinium that you declined any follow ups because - you believed that you were being invited to Florida only so Mr. Roberts could physically attack you."
"In short your "volunteer" appears to have locked authority."
And yes, that really does read "locked authority".
1. Read up on advanced physics
2. Make bet against famous physicists
3. ???
4. Profit!
In other news, one of EV1's biggest competitors, ServerMatrix, IS NOT supporting SCO's FUD.
Support the fight against SCO's FUD! Host at ServerMatrix!
Yep, the resolver link is pretty obvious just by the file structure used alone;
/etc/hosts
c:\winnt\system32\drivers\etc\hosts
And under *nix:
Gee, a bit of a similarity there, you think?
I should have RTFA. I assumed that the data was "precise" judging by the news post.
If I pick up a 6-pack at the local depaneur (7-11, corner store, etc) and pay cash, and the clerk prints out a cheap receipt on a cheap non-networked cash register, Budweiser will STILL know who I am, and if my bear was chilled or warm?
What, do they have a secret network of x-ray thermal spy sats that record all purchases of their product?
This whole article is overblown and exagerated. Not to mention it doesn't apply to many (most?) stores. At least around here. I don't know of too many corner stores around here that ask for your personal info when you buy beer.
I'm referring to this line:
"It'll come, I'm quite sure of it...I'm sure we can all see the sun rising on the horizon now."
Which I assume is your affirmation that you believe VALVe will port HL2 to Linux, something I don't think is as likely to happen as you do.
Why hasn't anybody done something like this yet in the US, where SCO is arguably the "strongest"? That'd REALLY put a damper on their FUD.
And while they were at it, maybe they could get the court to order that SCO pay back any company they scared into paying for a licence.
I wouldn't bet on it; Half-Life (1) is still Windows-Only. Sure, you can run it with WINE on PC, and I'm sure there's some way to run it in software (Or maybe even hardware) mode in an emulator on a Mac, but VALVe never even made the effort. They could have probably even gotten away with paying one guy to take advantage of WineX to do a linux "port" that had WineX built in; it seems to have worked for games like The Sims, and HL is pretty old. But they didn't.
That's assuming (incorrectly) that only linux users use Vorbis.
I know many Windows users, myself included, who prefer Vorbis over all other formats.
"A few hours" on a MiniDisc player can't beat the 694 hours of audio one can store on an iPod or other large media player (40GB models, using 1000 not 1024). Minidisc players are vaguely interesting and all, but their pathetic capacity is kind of boring. Yeah, they've improved since back in the day when they behaved like mini CD players, but MP3 players have leapfrogged WAY past them.
Unfortunately no, my only firewall is external in the form of an iptables firewall at the border of my network :(
A simple "telnet localhost 80" on the command prompt returns a (nearly) instant "Connection refused", so I guess that explanation must be discarded. I can't think of anything else to explain Firebird's behaviour. Perhaps it's a quirk in Firebird? It is a beta after all, such things are to be expected.
Round it off. 3.7GB is a lot closer to 4GB than it is to 3GB. Which seems to indicate you don't understand grade three math.
Oh, and I'm not attracted to the mini iPod, I think it's a huge waste of money as it's priced much too high to be worth it. Less than a third the storage for 250$? Ripoff.
I have an idea as to the possible cause; is your local machine running a web server? If so, you'd get instant 404 errors, causing the instant rejection. In my case I don't, so Firebird would time out trying to load the ad content.
Perhaps I should write a simple web server to simply reject everything with 404 errors for these kinds of situations.
You're attracted to the mini iPod? The mini iPod is 4GB, not 3GB, which seems to indicate you haven't even seen the mini iPod website, so how are you attracted to it?