You have to put up so many access points to cover even an average sized office building, nevermind a whole city. You'd practically have to deploy one on top of every street light or telephone pole, and even then it wouldn't cover everything.
Unless, of course, they got a license to use high gain antennas and transmitters, which they wouldn't because Verizon and Friends (c) would cry.
To cover anything but the top 8 big cities would take hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of WiFi access points.
New long-distance wireless tech shows some promise, but we'll see how well it works and if anyone deploys it. In my opinion, until any broadband technology starts to reach into the rural areas, it's not successful. NYC and San Fran already have so many broadband options that adding one more doesn't even count.
Plus, this whole article is silly anyways. Just because Google sponsers a hotspot doesn't mean they are planning on deploying WiFi on a wide scale.
All of the BBS's local to me were. And you got in late if 14.4 was a normal speed - and stayed too long if the speeds were 33.6.
The norm was 2400 here, and some were USR 9600's - you needed a USR modem to connect at those speeds. Eventually, the USR 16.8's hit the scene but again, you needed expensive USR modems to make use of the speeds. Most everyone else was stuck at 9600, or 14.4 later on.
It didn't matter. Downloading cool stuff was good - I got into the demoscene (as a pure spectator) after downloading a file called unreal.zip. But it wasn't about the files it was about the online games and chat boards.
I agree with you - someone trying to say electricity if a factor *at all* is just ignorant.
I think mod_gzip is great, and I think the benefits outweigh the costs in all regards. We're not alone; I've found that a LOT of sites are using gzip now.
Not to mention the fact that the client/browser computers are going to get pages faster.
But, man.. the chat log with some dude that works wheverever (and you can't tell who's talking - no names) needs to go. You don't need to continuously prove a point that IS correct. Being correct is enough =)
It's a digest of the worm, not the vulnerability. Why do you need everything explained in every article? It's not like Microsoft vulnerability details are hard to find, so I don't see why he'd need to explain it all over again.
So next time it should read like this to make you happy:
This worm (a computer program that spreads from computer to computer) infects Windows (an operating system from Microsoft (an operating system is the software that allows access to the hardware and provides an environment for other software to run)) systems due to the vulnerability listed in MS05-039 (Vulnerability in Plug and Play Could Allow Remote Code Execution and Elevation of Privilege (899588)) which can be found at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin /MS05-039.mspx.
PC's (Personal Computers) without this patch (a software update that fixes a problem or provides an enhancement) should download (retrieving data from another computer) and install this software ASAP (As Soon As Possible.)
The chips run at 7Ghz with crazy stupid cooling like liquid nitrogen.
I don't see this as proof that they were designed to run this fast. 4Ghz, maybe (and only from new technologies that came to surface AFTER the P4 was originally designed) - any super high speed claims that were made were entirely marketing.
This image that Linux and all OSS is developed by some nerd in the basement of his grandma's house is simply wrong. While this may have been true one day, now, thousands of programmers are PAID to develop OSS. KDE, the Linux kernel, Gnome, Apache, and hundreds of OSS apps are developed by paid programmers.
And there's thousands more programmers employed to develop in-house applications that are built on top of OSS. If anything, it's promoted the idea of in house talent because you can take the software and mold it to your specific needs.
OSS is quickly turning into a multi-billion dollar industry and it's not all on the shoulders of poor Jimmy in his basement with leet C++ skills.
Why don't you find out a little more about the OSS economy before spilling this absurd garbage that you sucked up from Microsoft and the other closed source camps?
It runs on just about everything. Yet I still believe it's high quality software.
I don't see MacOS being all that different - it's got it's own GUI on top, and it just talks API's to the kernel which talks to drivers which talk to the hardware. Changing the hardware around in all sorts of ways won't change the GUI any, nor the kernel. Just the drivers.
I think it would still be MacOSX, it would still be just as quality as you percieve it to be now on Apple's own hardware.
Lowering the quality of the hardware would lower the quality of the hardware, not the software. You should keep in mind that Apple doesn't use any higher quality motherboards and CPU's then anyone else.
The reporter wrote an interesting article - whos focus was Google because of it's massive database of information - about how a database like this could be just waiting to be exploited. He used an example that I thought was pretty good, as it's information that's freely available on the web.
The person he searched on got all pissy, and made a childish call. They're basically saying "If you point out flaws in Google, you're cut off."
They could just as easy have one chip for both. Or a chip that's powerful enough to play OGG and MP3 without acceleration - the whole thing about ogg's CPU usage is really overstated. Sure, it's a little heavier on the CPU but these little devices were designed with just enough to decode MP3.
I'm guessing the battery lifetimes would be negligible between MP3 playing and OGG playing on a capable player.
Which is good, because I like it simple. That superkaramba desktop is too cluttered. Who needs to see CPU and memory utilization on a workstation often enough to stick it on the desktop?
I say just let the computer do it's thing unless you need to troubleshoot it =) The same people that dress up their systems so much like that are the same ones that do nothing else with them.
Maybe in a big city or something. When I lose power, the phones still work fine (well, the corded ones.) The cable-to-phone box they install gets power off the 90V that the coax carries.
That is unless of course a car hits a pole down the road that both cables sit on, which in case the phone companies lines would be cut too.
Obviously the cablemodem, computers, and TV's would turn off when you lose power.
The last place I worked at, I regularly used four or five different administration tools that behaved almost as well as "real" desktop apps. Unfortunately, all of them required IE - and the sad part is that only one of them was actually served from IIS.
Hopefully we see more apps run on all browsers moving forward.
I've seen very resonably "secure" desktops get spyware all the time. Windows firewall, linksys NAT routers, no admin login, passworded accounts, etc.
There's been so many dozens of IE vulnerabilties that allow software to be installed with *zero* user interaction that it doesn't take a security "idiot" to get smacked by these things.
They own the OS. They can do whatever they want to, include not certifying drivers that don't conform to the new "MSOpenGL Standard" or simply making it a real big pain in the ass to use anything but DirectX.
It's software, and within the bounds of what software CAN do, you can DO anything.
Slashdot Mirror
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
You have to put up so many access points to cover even an average sized office building, nevermind a whole city. You'd practically have to deploy one on top of every street light or telephone pole, and even then it wouldn't cover everything.
Unless, of course, they got a license to use high gain antennas and transmitters, which they wouldn't because Verizon and Friends (c) would cry.
To cover anything but the top 8 big cities would take hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of WiFi access points.
New long-distance wireless tech shows some promise, but we'll see how well it works and if anyone deploys it. In my opinion, until any broadband technology starts to reach into the rural areas, it's not successful. NYC and San Fran already have so many broadband options that adding one more doesn't even count.
Plus, this whole article is silly anyways. Just because Google sponsers a hotspot doesn't mean they are planning on deploying WiFi on a wide scale.
Most?
All of the BBS's local to me were. And you got in late if 14.4 was a normal speed - and stayed too long if the speeds were 33.6.
The norm was 2400 here, and some were USR 9600's - you needed a USR modem to connect at those speeds. Eventually, the USR 16.8's hit the scene but again, you needed expensive USR modems to make use of the speeds. Most everyone else was stuck at 9600, or 14.4 later on.
It didn't matter. Downloading cool stuff was good - I got into the demoscene (as a pure spectator) after downloading a file called unreal.zip. But it wasn't about the files it was about the online games and chat boards.
Hack'n'Slash on CNetBBS (Amiga) was the best!
I agree with you - someone trying to say electricity if a factor *at all* is just ignorant.
I think mod_gzip is great, and I think the benefits outweigh the costs in all regards. We're not alone; I've found that a LOT of sites are using gzip now.
Not to mention the fact that the client/browser computers are going to get pages faster.
But, man.. the chat log with some dude that works wheverever (and you can't tell who's talking - no names) needs to go. You don't need to continuously prove a point that IS correct. Being correct is enough =)
It's a digest of the worm, not the vulnerability. Why do you need everything explained in every article? It's not like Microsoft vulnerability details are hard to find, so I don't see why he'd need to explain it all over again.
n /MS05-039.mspx.
So next time it should read like this to make you happy:
This worm (a computer program that spreads from computer to computer) infects Windows (an operating system from Microsoft (an operating system is the software that allows access to the hardware and provides an environment for other software to run)) systems due to the vulnerability listed in MS05-039 (Vulnerability in Plug and Play Could Allow Remote Code Execution and Elevation of Privilege (899588)) which can be found at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulleti
PC's (Personal Computers) without this patch (a software update that fixes a problem or provides an enhancement) should download (retrieving data from another computer) and install this software ASAP (As Soon As Possible.)
You can't do a Google search for "MS05-039"? It's the first hit.
Because it's NEWS FOR NERDS, retard.
If the chip was designed to run at those speeds, how come it doesn't? Shouldn't they have had a plan for reaching 6Ghz?
I'm guessing they just didn't think AMD would have forced them to push the chip to it's real (3.8Ghz) limits so fast.
The chips run at 7Ghz with crazy stupid cooling like liquid nitrogen.
I don't see this as proof that they were designed to run this fast. 4Ghz, maybe (and only from new technologies that came to surface AFTER the P4 was originally designed) - any super high speed claims that were made were entirely marketing.
This image that Linux and all OSS is developed by some nerd in the basement of his grandma's house is simply wrong. While this may have been true one day, now, thousands of programmers are PAID to develop OSS. KDE, the Linux kernel, Gnome, Apache, and hundreds of OSS apps are developed by paid programmers.
And there's thousands more programmers employed to develop in-house applications that are built on top of OSS. If anything, it's promoted the idea of in house talent because you can take the software and mold it to your specific needs.
OSS is quickly turning into a multi-billion dollar industry and it's not all on the shoulders of poor Jimmy in his basement with leet C++ skills.
Why don't you find out a little more about the OSS economy before spilling this absurd garbage that you sucked up from Microsoft and the other closed source camps?
It runs on just about everything. Yet I still believe it's high quality software.
I don't see MacOS being all that different - it's got it's own GUI on top, and it just talks API's to the kernel which talks to drivers which talk to the hardware. Changing the hardware around in all sorts of ways won't change the GUI any, nor the kernel. Just the drivers.
I think it would still be MacOSX, it would still be just as quality as you percieve it to be now on Apple's own hardware.
Lowering the quality of the hardware would lower the quality of the hardware, not the software. You should keep in mind that Apple doesn't use any higher quality motherboards and CPU's then anyone else.
Your definition of "round trip" is different then any other definition when it comes to internet traffic.
It doesn't matter if the signal goes to the satellite and back to earth, it's not going "round trip" because the destination is not the source.
So no, it's not "round trip 250ms" it's "one way 250ms."
Because anything having to do with any sort of multiplayer game is very adversely affected by latency.
Even the normal web surfing is a lot slower - not because of the transfer rate, but because of the response to request rate.
The reporter wrote an interesting article - whos focus was Google because of it's massive database of information - about how a database like this could be just waiting to be exploited. He used an example that I thought was pretty good, as it's information that's freely available on the web.
The person he searched on got all pissy, and made a childish call. They're basically saying "If you point out flaws in Google, you're cut off."
They could just as easy have one chip for both. Or a chip that's powerful enough to play OGG and MP3 without acceleration - the whole thing about ogg's CPU usage is really overstated. Sure, it's a little heavier on the CPU but these little devices were designed with just enough to decode MP3.
I'm guessing the battery lifetimes would be negligible between MP3 playing and OGG playing on a capable player.
Which is good, because I like it simple. That superkaramba desktop is too cluttered. Who needs to see CPU and memory utilization on a workstation often enough to stick it on the desktop?
I say just let the computer do it's thing unless you need to troubleshoot it =) The same people that dress up their systems so much like that are the same ones that do nothing else with them.
..your point?
I don't think this is a huge requirement because you can boot a CD/DVD or floppy image from a remote workstation, or use the PXE boot.
I guess it would be good in some circumstances but I've never thought it would be a great thing to have.
Thank you. Everything you said makes perfect sense. You saved me a long post =)
Maybe in a big city or something. When I lose power, the phones still work fine (well, the corded ones.) The cable-to-phone box they install gets power off the 90V that the coax carries.
That is unless of course a car hits a pole down the road that both cables sit on, which in case the phone companies lines would be cut too.
Obviously the cablemodem, computers, and TV's would turn off when you lose power.
You can do whatever you want. You can choose to download a RvB episode, you can make one yourself, or you can play Halo. Or not.
I think it's kinda funny, you don't, but it really has nothing to do with the game Halo itself.
People purchase computers to do whatever they want with them - not just your rigid idea of what you SHOULD do with them.
The last place I worked at, I regularly used four or five different administration tools that behaved almost as well as "real" desktop apps. Unfortunately, all of them required IE - and the sad part is that only one of them was actually served from IIS.
Hopefully we see more apps run on all browsers moving forward.
Unfortunately, Half Life 2 is a strictly Direct3D game, so no multi-platform there. I heard it runs pretty good under WineX though.
I've seen very resonably "secure" desktops get spyware all the time. Windows firewall, linksys NAT routers, no admin login, passworded accounts, etc.
There's been so many dozens of IE vulnerabilties that allow software to be installed with *zero* user interaction that it doesn't take a security "idiot" to get smacked by these things.
They own the OS. They can do whatever they want to, include not certifying drivers that don't conform to the new "MSOpenGL Standard" or simply making it a real big pain in the ass to use anything but DirectX.
It's software, and within the bounds of what software CAN do, you can DO anything.