I liked the fact that he was a criminal, but only because he had a plan to rescue the "clones" that had been put on ice since the war. They were decaying and while the "civilized" world wouldn't kill them, they wouldn't allow them to be born.. so they were just leaving them to genetic decay of the ages.
I thought it was only the group that took the modification.. so they couldn't go home and after Enterprise the Klingons were about to decend into war from being civilized. So the ones Kurk met were outcasts.
Later the guy who was trying to build perfect humans decided to try robot humans instead... it would take a few lifetimes. (and his children would look remarkably like him!)
not really, in order for web apps to be functional developers need to have some baseline that a function of given complexity will complete in a certain time.... That is one of the key features that Flash and Silverlight and ActiveX provide... the ability to have thing happen according to TIME.
because companies (big ones in particular) have to carefully craft standard forms and questions for HR purposes that their lawyers "guarantee" will follow all the applicable discrimination laws, in all the states. Sticking to the forms keeps the company out of dutch.
Going "off-script" to Myspace is just begging for trouble because your company already made a policy about what items you were using for job determination. In short why are you snooping other than to verify the facts on the pre-approved forms the applicant filled out?
the thing is that the RIAA has already identified the class, and not just identified via MediaSentry, but actually use ex parte proceedings to get their names. (that's the big difference between what the RIAA is doing and Direct TV case)
this is a case about whether she downloaded some songs. Then it was a case about whether her lawyer fees should be paid. What is there to keep secret except damning evidence the RIAA isn't following the law?
but those pictures are "owned" by your employer, just like computer source code is owned by programming companies. There is policy in place not to release images, the policy was knowingly broken.
The CHP should be sued, and should settle generously. Then they turn around and sue their employees to get the damages back for breaking policy. Yes, it will RUIN the families of the leakers... but that's what happens when you LEAK stuff. Although it's quite the rage to break confidentiality agreements and NDAs on the internet, it does REAL damage to people... That's what happened here because somebody wanted to brag to their friends.
this has nothing to do with free speech. One of the OBLIGATIONS of law enforcement is that privacy of certain records is maintained because it's "abusive" for information they obtain in investigations to be used without going through the proper lawyers. Law enforcement ALREADY knows the images taken can hurt people if misused and has rules their employees chose to ignore.
They all know these rules when they sign up, it's very clear, and in this case chose not to follow them.
because they don't give us good tools for monitoring and while they complain about overages, they don't notify people BEFORE they start being dicks about disconnections. If I have to use THEIR box to connect, then it should have my limit and my usage clearly displayed for me to monitor myself. Running my own meters is inaccurate and inconsistent and the majority of high-bandwidth users wouldn't know how anyway.
When the discussion is TWO-WAY communication with the community, then people will take the overage problem seriously.
it's just like the Direct TV commercial... The cable company wants to keep the busy executive types that work 60 hour weeks and travel but "have" to have every sports channel and premium channel, with the highest tier internet, for when they have the guys over one nite per month for bragging rights. How can somebody even USE more than 25 channels a month anyway, let alone 25 PREMIUM channels?
Ever since the Dutch West Indies Company, companies have been built in North America to make sure THAT doesn't happen. Just like the various states were granted by England and Spain as "monopolies" to companies to populate them in the 1600's, to the Railroad "company towns" of the 1800's, there's a long standing US tradition of granting big property rights (far exceeding the value of the work) to companies for doing build-out work with unheard of monopoly power over the end product.
they're also smaller than California as far as land mass.. and population only live on about 1/3 of their countries. The US is staggeringly big compared to European or Asian countries and still very spread out.
The problem is that a town of say 10,000 people is still too spread out to make cable effective. Even telco is a stretch, when houses are 1/4 mile apart with 1/8 mile drives. That's nearly a mile of wire to string for each customer (getting back to the CO)!!
I think the FCC really dropped the ball in the last spectrum auction. The 700MHz spectrum is really good stuff, rabbit ears in the basement can pick up signals over 30 miles good stuff! They OWED society to have 2-3 back-to-back channels given over to build a wireless internet structure, allowing long distance, portable internet devices. It would have fit the existing infrastructure of TV stations dotting the countryside every 15-20 miles. It won't work with WiMax or even the stuff AT&T is doing because it's not ONE bandwidth, it's carved into many pieces. It needed to be ONE super-wide spread-spectrum allowing for "ISPs" to provide internet connections wherever it was profitable, much like the Wi-Fi networks that have become ubiquitous all over... only bigger!
this is where the rubber-meets-the-road in the discussion of network neutrality folks!
See, Content providers want Cable companies to pay lots extra for the privilege of hosting VoD services because if "everybody did it" it would cut into secondary sales of their media products. Content providers have no problem setting up their OWN websites, using ISP (cable) bandwidth, but keeping the ad revenue for themselves. This is the problem in the system.
In a perfect world we wouldn't have "cable" plans anymore. We'd just have one pipe and access to TV shows everywhere thru our ISP, or if the show wasn't hosted on our ISP, it would be on an "affiliate". The shows would be "inside" the ISP network, so the cost would be effectively zero to transmit. This is where net neutrality gets in the way... what's to keep people to the shows they paid for, and not getting torrents or going behind the ISPs back to Hulu? As soon as you start identifying which content is "shows" then you allow the ISP to break neutrality. If you don't let them limit shows, then they limit all streams or big files... then your Linux distro gets cut off for being too big.
Who gets to write up the new rules? We don't NEED cable and telco anymore, we could do with just one service now. The problem is that one service would have to be pure data and fast enough to stream all your shows on while the other would be pure content providing. It means Comcast/TWC and Att/Verison would have to merge/go away.
YOUR taxes don't pay squat for schools, no matter how high they are. Businesses pay the majority of property tax, they pay tax on the real value of equipment and goods (like computers, cars, and inventory) and they pay at typically double the rate home owners pay (as most states give home owners big discounts businesses don't see).
Businesses get good value for tax money. They get roads to transport their employees, clients, and goods. They get police and fire service to protect their property. They get courts to mediate disputes. They get schools to train the population so there is a good pool of cheap labor.
except that the people that run wall street did such a good job making sure the banks were properly protecting their money... now imagine if YOUR Social Security was suddenly taken away because of what happened in the last 9 months!
$20 per month at 56k will only ever be 5Gb max (when I added it up a long time ago) That's assuming you never hang up the phone to make calls, i.e. you were limited by a trickle of bandwidth and a need to use the line for other purposes.
The present situation is that cable/telco are installing massive pipes to use for Video on Demand and other services. They're trying to play both sides. They want all the houses to have always-on service to the cable boxes at high bandwidth speeds and siphon a part of that off for internet use. They're massively over-selling the lines offering 6-10Mb service 24x7. They can't afford the internet bill for more than a few customers actually using what they were "promised".
They don't WANT to clarify that the "all-you-can-eat" plan is really a "10-plate-per-day" plan because the FTC and customers using "11 Plates" will start to get upset because that's not what they were sold. They also don't seem to be negotiating fairly in the matter... they are charging $60 for plates 1-10 and $25 for plate #11 and customers are getting rightfully pissed off. They do it without notice and without negotiation or offer of a reasonable higher tier for plates 10-20.
I agree with the argument, but cable and telco in the US have never made a good effort to clarify their expectations and to clarify customer usage expectations. They advertise "unlimited" and "always on" everywhere with mention of bandwidth limitations in the fine print of a TOS somewhere.
if companies were SERIOUS about limiting usage, first they'd need to issue new hardware routers capable of letting the user monitor and control their own usage. Whether it be by time or by choosing my own throttling, if I, me, can't control the flow from my end adequately, then they're pissing up a rope. Think about power or water... I can go and watch the meter on my house every day if I think I need to control it... what does the cable/telco give me to monitor their wire at my end?
Second, if they are serious about limiting bandwidth (and I understand being "gated communities" they are "leechers" on the internet so can't get better rates through peering) They should start issuing monthly usages to all accounts. Then they need to start issuing billing showing daily usage with breakouts by hour (or time periods) so that "power" users can see what they're doing. After 6 months of identifying usage to customers, then they can conduct negotiations with their customers to address their financial concerns about usage! As you point out BOTH sides need to see usage capping as a negotiation and cable/telcos don't really think they have to put forth reasonable rates (I believe overages are billed at 100X market bandwidth rate which is unacceptable negotiation with a customer)
That's the REAL problem with the article. The TOS is not being enforced in a uniform manner, it's being followed capriciously, and without proper notification... it may be the letter of the contract, but if they haven't been enforcing it before, then the cable company is in the wrong. This isn't plates at the "all you can eat"... if the cable/telco was a real utility, they'd provide a means to measure at the customer's site, until they start to do that, they can stuff it.
Slashdot Mirror
of course it does have time travel... which should be shot dead and declared illegal by the sci-fi police.
Rule 34 of the Internet lives!
we get those while slashdot and our other web pages are loading too.
I liked the fact that he was a criminal, but only because he had a plan to rescue the "clones" that had been put on ice since the war. They were decaying and while the "civilized" world wouldn't kill them, they wouldn't allow them to be born.. so they were just leaving them to genetic decay of the ages.
Is there a language unicode for Klingon? You'd think slashdot of all places would have support for that so we could post in the actual language!
I thought it was only the group that took the modification.. so they couldn't go home and after Enterprise the Klingons were about to decend into war from being civilized. So the ones Kurk met were outcasts.
Later the guy who was trying to build perfect humans decided to try robot humans instead... it would take a few lifetimes. (and his children would look remarkably like him!)
why so long....
not really, in order for web apps to be functional developers need to have some baseline that a function of given complexity will complete in a certain time.... That is one of the key features that Flash and Silverlight and ActiveX provide... the ability to have thing happen according to TIME.
We all know it's the VIRAL GPL (Genes of Pig Linux)
Horton is listening.
because companies (big ones in particular) have to carefully craft standard forms and questions for HR purposes that their lawyers "guarantee" will follow all the applicable discrimination laws, in all the states. Sticking to the forms keeps the company out of dutch.
Going "off-script" to Myspace is just begging for trouble because your company already made a policy about what items you were using for job determination. In short why are you snooping other than to verify the facts on the pre-approved forms the applicant filled out?
the thing is that the RIAA has already identified the class, and not just identified via MediaSentry, but actually use ex parte proceedings to get their names. (that's the big difference between what the RIAA is doing and Direct TV case)
this is a case about whether she downloaded some songs. Then it was a case about whether her lawyer fees should be paid. What is there to keep secret except damning evidence the RIAA isn't following the law?
that's because CONSUMER grade accounts don't pay for reliability. Upgrade to Business accounts and you get similar uptime guarantees to POTS.
Yes, it costs MORE. But your business is RELYING on it.. right?
but those pictures are "owned" by your employer, just like computer source code is owned by programming companies. There is policy in place not to release images, the policy was knowingly broken.
The CHP should be sued, and should settle generously. Then they turn around and sue their employees to get the damages back for breaking policy. Yes, it will RUIN the families of the leakers... but that's what happens when you LEAK stuff. Although it's quite the rage to break confidentiality agreements and NDAs on the internet, it does REAL damage to people... That's what happened here because somebody wanted to brag to their friends.
this has nothing to do with free speech. One of the OBLIGATIONS of law enforcement is that privacy of certain records is maintained because it's "abusive" for information they obtain in investigations to be used without going through the proper lawyers. Law enforcement ALREADY knows the images taken can hurt people if misused and has rules their employees chose to ignore.
They all know these rules when they sign up, it's very clear, and in this case chose not to follow them.
because they don't give us good tools for monitoring and while they complain about overages, they don't notify people BEFORE they start being dicks about disconnections. If I have to use THEIR box to connect, then it should have my limit and my usage clearly displayed for me to monitor myself. Running my own meters is inaccurate and inconsistent and the majority of high-bandwidth users wouldn't know how anyway.
When the discussion is TWO-WAY communication with the community, then people will take the overage problem seriously.
it's just like the Direct TV commercial... The cable company wants to keep the busy executive types that work 60 hour weeks and travel but "have" to have every sports channel and premium channel, with the highest tier internet, for when they have the guys over one nite per month for bragging rights. How can somebody even USE more than 25 channels a month anyway, let alone 25 PREMIUM channels?
Ever since the Dutch West Indies Company, companies have been built in North America to make sure THAT doesn't happen. Just like the various states were granted by England and Spain as "monopolies" to companies to populate them in the 1600's, to the Railroad "company towns" of the 1800's, there's a long standing US tradition of granting big property rights (far exceeding the value of the work) to companies for doing build-out work with unheard of monopoly power over the end product.
they're also smaller than California as far as land mass.. and population only live on about 1/3 of their countries. The US is staggeringly big compared to European or Asian countries and still very spread out.
The problem is that a town of say 10,000 people is still too spread out to make cable effective. Even telco is a stretch, when houses are 1/4 mile apart with 1/8 mile drives. That's nearly a mile of wire to string for each customer (getting back to the CO)!!
I think the FCC really dropped the ball in the last spectrum auction. The 700MHz spectrum is really good stuff, rabbit ears in the basement can pick up signals over 30 miles good stuff! They OWED society to have 2-3 back-to-back channels given over to build a wireless internet structure, allowing long distance, portable internet devices. It would have fit the existing infrastructure of TV stations dotting the countryside every 15-20 miles. It won't work with WiMax or even the stuff AT&T is doing because it's not ONE bandwidth, it's carved into many pieces. It needed to be ONE super-wide spread-spectrum allowing for "ISPs" to provide internet connections wherever it was profitable, much like the Wi-Fi networks that have become ubiquitous all over... only bigger!
this is where the rubber-meets-the-road in the discussion of network neutrality folks!
See, Content providers want Cable companies to pay lots extra for the privilege of hosting VoD services because if "everybody did it" it would cut into secondary sales of their media products. Content providers have no problem setting up their OWN websites, using ISP (cable) bandwidth, but keeping the ad revenue for themselves. This is the problem in the system.
In a perfect world we wouldn't have "cable" plans anymore. We'd just have one pipe and access to TV shows everywhere thru our ISP, or if the show wasn't hosted on our ISP, it would be on an "affiliate". The shows would be "inside" the ISP network, so the cost would be effectively zero to transmit. This is where net neutrality gets in the way... what's to keep people to the shows they paid for, and not getting torrents or going behind the ISPs back to Hulu? As soon as you start identifying which content is "shows" then you allow the ISP to break neutrality. If you don't let them limit shows, then they limit all streams or big files... then your Linux distro gets cut off for being too big.
Who gets to write up the new rules? We don't NEED cable and telco anymore, we could do with just one service now. The problem is that one service would have to be pure data and fast enough to stream all your shows on while the other would be pure content providing. It means Comcast/TWC and Att/Verison would have to merge/go away.
YOUR taxes don't pay squat for schools, no matter how high they are. Businesses pay the majority of property tax, they pay tax on the real value of equipment and goods (like computers, cars, and inventory) and they pay at typically double the rate home owners pay (as most states give home owners big discounts businesses don't see).
Businesses get good value for tax money. They get roads to transport their employees, clients, and goods. They get police and fire service to protect their property. They get courts to mediate disputes. They get schools to train the population so there is a good pool of cheap labor.
except that the people that run wall street did such a good job making sure the banks were properly protecting their money... now imagine if YOUR Social Security was suddenly taken away because of what happened in the last 9 months!
$20 per month at 56k will only ever be 5Gb max (when I added it up a long time ago) That's assuming you never hang up the phone to make calls, i.e. you were limited by a trickle of bandwidth and a need to use the line for other purposes.
The present situation is that cable/telco are installing massive pipes to use for Video on Demand and other services. They're trying to play both sides. They want all the houses to have always-on service to the cable boxes at high bandwidth speeds and siphon a part of that off for internet use. They're massively over-selling the lines offering 6-10Mb service 24x7. They can't afford the internet bill for more than a few customers actually using what they were "promised".
They don't WANT to clarify that the "all-you-can-eat" plan is really a "10-plate-per-day" plan because the FTC and customers using "11 Plates" will start to get upset because that's not what they were sold. They also don't seem to be negotiating fairly in the matter... they are charging $60 for plates 1-10 and $25 for plate #11 and customers are getting rightfully pissed off. They do it without notice and without negotiation or offer of a reasonable higher tier for plates 10-20.
I agree with the argument, but cable and telco in the US have never made a good effort to clarify their expectations and to clarify customer usage expectations. They advertise "unlimited" and "always on" everywhere with mention of bandwidth limitations in the fine print of a TOS somewhere.
if companies were SERIOUS about limiting usage, first they'd need to issue new hardware routers capable of letting the user monitor and control their own usage. Whether it be by time or by choosing my own throttling, if I, me, can't control the flow from my end adequately, then they're pissing up a rope. Think about power or water... I can go and watch the meter on my house every day if I think I need to control it... what does the cable/telco give me to monitor their wire at my end?
Second, if they are serious about limiting bandwidth (and I understand being "gated communities" they are "leechers" on the internet so can't get better rates through peering) They should start issuing monthly usages to all accounts. Then they need to start issuing billing showing daily usage with breakouts by hour (or time periods) so that "power" users can see what they're doing. After 6 months of identifying usage to customers, then they can conduct negotiations with their customers to address their financial concerns about usage! As you point out BOTH sides need to see usage capping as a negotiation and cable/telcos don't really think they have to put forth reasonable rates (I believe overages are billed at 100X market bandwidth rate which is unacceptable negotiation with a customer)
That's the REAL problem with the article. The TOS is not being enforced in a uniform manner, it's being followed capriciously, and without proper notification... it may be the letter of the contract, but if they haven't been enforcing it before, then the cable company is in the wrong. This isn't plates at the "all you can eat"... if the cable/telco was a real utility, they'd provide a means to measure at the customer's site, until they start to do that, they can stuff it.