It's definitely DPI. The DNS aspects are simple DNS redirection. The 404 aspect takes any default 404 error page from IIS or Apache, and redirects it to mediacom. It even does this on my own domains and my own hosting services outside of Mediac
Assuming you're on Mediacom try going to http://freenode.net/asdfasdfasdfasdf
You will not get freenode's default 404 error. You will get redirected to Mediacom even if you're opted-out. This is exactly how it works for me. I've been complaining to them for months.
This doesn't work. I'm on Mediacom and use Google DNS. None the less if I type in http://validsite.com/invalidurlgoeshere/ rather than being served a proper 404 I get forwarded to Mediacom's private search engine. They're using deep packet inspection to hijack any default apache or iis 404 response from a website and redirect it to themselves.
Level3 DNS, Google DNS, and Open DNS all work to fix the issue of my failed DNS queries being hijacked, but it doesn't fix 404s.
I, for one, welcome this. As long as the ads being displayed are even remotely as interesting as the artwork the screensavers show currently I'm all for it. Only having the dozen or so screensavers we have right now on the kindle is boring. I'd be willing to voluntarily turn this on if it means I get some more variety.
Old news, and it was even posted on Slashdot when the program started last summer. I've been running an FCC White Box for several months now and love it. The router is a high quality Netgear with QoS filtering and all the bells and whistles you expect out of a $100+ router. It beats the ever living crap out of my old Belkin Wireless N.
The tracking software doesn't monitor actual sites or any actual private information. Just packet loss, ping times, download and upload speeds, streaming stability, voip stability, etc. The graphs and charts it spits out are extremely useful and I've been using them for the past 2 months when complaining to Mediacom about my slow speeds, packet loss, and horrible ping times. It keeps 2 weeks of hourly data, and after that just tracks it as an average/min/max for the day.
http://i53.tinypic.com/35bt5ro.jpg
I'm not going to argue it, but whatever the reasoning the fact of the matter is that Amazon is far quicker to push against the industry in the MP3 market and is far more consumer friendly to their Digital Music customers than they are with the book industry and their ebook customers. Every time Amazon has done something new and amazing with the Kindle and the Publishers took offense, Amazon almost immediately backtracked and did everything they could to appease the publishers. Remember the text-to-speech firmware upgrade? Publishers threw a shit fit until Amazon caved and let them turn it off on a book by book basis, even though the chances of text-to-speech actually having any affect on the audiobook industry were pretty much zero. A robot voice does not compare to a professional voice actor doing the reading. Amazon could have easily fought that, but they didn't.
Small as far as market share goes. iTunes, as of Dec 2010, had 66% of the total digital music market share. Amazon has 13%. If Amazon wants to cut into Apple's digital music sales they have to do something drastic.
Source: http://www.bgr.com/2010/12/17/itunes-now-holds-66-of-digital-music-market/
Kindle is something like 75-80% of the market share. Amazon OWNS that market. It's their's and they have no reason to rock the boat. Even the iPad and iBooks isn't enough to scare them into taking action yet.
http://www.teleread.com/ebooks/amazon-has-76-of-e-book-market-survey-reports/
It's frustrating to watch Amazon push hard against the RIAA, and blindly accept anything the book industry shoves at them.
You're completely wrong. When Amazon MP3 started iTunes was JUST beginning to offer DRM-free music for $1.29 when their normal, shitty quality DRMcrap was $0.99. Amazon bargained for a far better deal to offer high quality VBR mp3s for $0.99 without any DRM. Apple wasn't forced to give in, Apple was forced to keep up with Amazon's higher quality for lower prices. Amazon is the company that made DRM-free the standard, and it wasn't until MONTHS later that Apple dropped the double pricing system and went purely DRM-free... and yet they're STILL mostly $1.29 per song.
That's exactly what they're doing, or arguing that Amazon didn't pay for a license that lets you download your MP3s that you purchased from them multiple times. Their argument would basically be that each separate download or stream of the MP3 should be it's own license. Previously that is how Amazon MP3 worked, and how iTunes works now. Each single download is it's own license.
Amazon has shown several times now that they're willing to go toe to toe with the RIAA. They had DRM free music before that was the standard, and now they're pushing for cloud storage and streaming. Everything they're doing in regards to the music industry is pro-user and pro-consumer.
So what about the Kindle? Why do they bend over backwards at every turn to please the book publishing industry and continue to DRM protect their eBooks? Why is it that they didn't fight the publishing industry on the Text-to-Speech feature? Why aren't they fighting for the consumer's right to lend books to their friends?
Amazon is only fighting for the consumer on the MP3 issue because they have nothing to lose. They're a small time player in digital music services and they want to make a mark. If they get shut down, they're no worse off than they are now, but if it takes off they have a chance to be the first out of the door with a HUGE service.
I'm becoming less and less confident we'll ever see Amazon fight for the consumer when it relates to the Kindle.
I use Mobibook formats on my kindle all the time, which I got for free from Tor publishing during their ebook give aways last year (or the year before, whatever it was). I even was able to port my Secure eReader format to a format the Kindle can read. I have yet to find an ebook I've purchased that I haven't been able to get onto my kindle in one way or another.
Even the Galaxy S and Backflip (the two most locked down AT&T phones) can be sideloaded with little effort.
A) Droid Explorer. Even the most computer illiterate users can side load using this app.
B) Android SDK -> adb install
These work regardless of the manufacturer's ability to "lock down" the ability to install non-market apps. It's completely impossible to remove the feature entirely.
Actually you're wrong. You don't have to root. I've been sideloading on my Backflip and Galaxy S without rooting for a long time now.
Easiest way is to just use Droid Explorer. This is how I show non-tech savvy users to sideload. It's a free app that makes installing APKs completely painless. You can also install the android SDK (a free download) and type in "adb install "
Please explain why you used one space between all sentences in your post.
Because HTML rendering automatically removes extra white space beyond the first spce. If you type in two spaces, as I have here, it will automatically truncate when rendering down to one space. If you want HTML rendering the spaces properly you have to tell it to.
Yes, it's not as easy as a TV Show like CSI can make it seem but that doesn't make it impossible either. Improbable, but not impossible. It's just as improbable that giving your SSN to a stranger over the phone to handle some account could get your SSN stolen, but that doens't mean it can't happen.
My problem lies in that being "perfect for low brow situations" that the definition of a low brow situtation will broaden and next thing we know grocercy shopping will be using fingerprints (oh wait that already happens too). I don't like the idea of using a piece of personally identifiable information that can't be changed for ANYTHING, simply because if a comprimise happens you're done.
Regardless of how improbable and impractical stealing a fingerprint might be, the real fact of the matter is IF SOMEONE DOES you have next to no recourse to fix that. You can't just fill out some forms and magically get a new fingerprint, but with every other currently used personal identification scheme you can.
The problem has nothing to do with storing that information, or the ability to deconstruct a fingerprint from their database information.
You don't have to deconstruct the fingerprint to copy it, you are given dozens of fingerprints every single day, and you give out dozens of fingerprints every single day. Think about every single thing you touch that gets passed onto someone else over the course of a day. Your finger prints are on each and every one of them. I don't know about you, but I'd be hard pressed to give out my SSN once a month, let alone dozens of times a day.
Sure, it isn't practical to steal a fingerprint in the wild without going out of your way to do it right and get a nice clean print, but it's not a risk I would like to take. If someone steals my password, or my credit card information, or even my name and social security number, all of this can be changed with varying degrees of hassle. Sure it might take a few days of filling out forms and making phone calls, but it's doable. You can't change your fingerprint. At best you have 10 chances and then you're screwed.
They're mostly used on sites such as Facebook and Twitter, where you have a very small limit to the number of characters you can put in a post. If your URL is 50 characters long, that's over a third of your entire post length and leaves little room to post the context of your link.
It's also useful for writing a short URL down on paper for a friend to be able to take home and easily type into their web browser for when e-mail is inconvenient.
Just because you can't come up with a use for it, doesn't make it any less of a popular service that millions of people use.
Use the bandwidth capping abilities in all modern P2P clients. If you're trying to torrent, max it's upload and download capabilities below your total network bandwidth. I have a 1Mbit up and 10Mbit connection. Capping my total upload in KTorrent to 100KByte/s and my down to 900KByte/s allows me to do anything else on the internet without issue. Very few online games or other uses of the internet require more than a 100KB down and 30KB or so up. Learn to properly manage your P2P programs and you won't have a problem.
Exactly. I figured it was worth a slashdot post simply because not everyone even REALIZES that those files are there and take up space. For those who pinch hard drive space like myself it helps. Sure after posting I spent a bit of time on Google and found the answer, but not everyone's going to think that Windows keeps backups of it's own install files for updates which are supposed to fix things and not break them. Heck... I just found them by accident and realized they were using up so much space.
If the/. admins think it's worthy to go live, then who cares anyway. It's not like your post will get the topic deleted. If you dont think it's important, don't read it.
The JPN cube has a jumper connecting those two contacts, you take the jumper off and you have a US cube. None-the-less it has an easy way of switching between regions that doesnt allow for making a mod-chip with the "side effect" of allowing it to read burned discs.
The Q is a totally different thing from the GameCube, it's manufactured by Panasonic's japanese parent company, not by Nintendo. I'm talking about the NORAML EVERY DAY GAMECUBE. It does not have the physical capabilities to read anything but GameCube discs.
Sure the Q has the ability to read GC discs, DVDs, and CDs, but it is hardly something I consider as an option because it costs three times as much as a normal GameCube and is only available in Japan unless you want to spend even more to import it. However, the Q still can't read burned discs. It's just like the DVD players from about two to three years ago that can't read burned audio CDs.
Slashdot Mirror
It's definitely DPI. The DNS aspects are simple DNS redirection. The 404 aspect takes any default 404 error page from IIS or Apache, and redirects it to mediacom. It even does this on my own domains and my own hosting services outside of Mediac
Assuming you're on Mediacom try going to http://freenode.net/asdfasdfasdfasdf You will not get freenode's default 404 error. You will get redirected to Mediacom even if you're opted-out. This is exactly how it works for me. I've been complaining to them for months.
This doesn't work. I'm on Mediacom and use Google DNS. None the less if I type in http://validsite.com/invalidurlgoeshere/ rather than being served a proper 404 I get forwarded to Mediacom's private search engine. They're using deep packet inspection to hijack any default apache or iis 404 response from a website and redirect it to themselves. Level3 DNS, Google DNS, and Open DNS all work to fix the issue of my failed DNS queries being hijacked, but it doesn't fix 404s.
I, for one, welcome this. As long as the ads being displayed are even remotely as interesting as the artwork the screensavers show currently I'm all for it. Only having the dozen or so screensavers we have right now on the kindle is boring. I'd be willing to voluntarily turn this on if it means I get some more variety.
Old news, and it was even posted on Slashdot when the program started last summer. I've been running an FCC White Box for several months now and love it. The router is a high quality Netgear with QoS filtering and all the bells and whistles you expect out of a $100+ router. It beats the ever living crap out of my old Belkin Wireless N. The tracking software doesn't monitor actual sites or any actual private information. Just packet loss, ping times, download and upload speeds, streaming stability, voip stability, etc. The graphs and charts it spits out are extremely useful and I've been using them for the past 2 months when complaining to Mediacom about my slow speeds, packet loss, and horrible ping times. It keeps 2 weeks of hourly data, and after that just tracks it as an average/min/max for the day. http://i53.tinypic.com/35bt5ro.jpg
I'm not going to argue it, but whatever the reasoning the fact of the matter is that Amazon is far quicker to push against the industry in the MP3 market and is far more consumer friendly to their Digital Music customers than they are with the book industry and their ebook customers. Every time Amazon has done something new and amazing with the Kindle and the Publishers took offense, Amazon almost immediately backtracked and did everything they could to appease the publishers. Remember the text-to-speech firmware upgrade? Publishers threw a shit fit until Amazon caved and let them turn it off on a book by book basis, even though the chances of text-to-speech actually having any affect on the audiobook industry were pretty much zero. A robot voice does not compare to a professional voice actor doing the reading. Amazon could have easily fought that, but they didn't.
Small as far as market share goes. iTunes, as of Dec 2010, had 66% of the total digital music market share. Amazon has 13%. If Amazon wants to cut into Apple's digital music sales they have to do something drastic. Source: http://www.bgr.com/2010/12/17/itunes-now-holds-66-of-digital-music-market/ Kindle is something like 75-80% of the market share. Amazon OWNS that market. It's their's and they have no reason to rock the boat. Even the iPad and iBooks isn't enough to scare them into taking action yet. http://www.teleread.com/ebooks/amazon-has-76-of-e-book-market-survey-reports/ It's frustrating to watch Amazon push hard against the RIAA, and blindly accept anything the book industry shoves at them.
You're completely wrong. When Amazon MP3 started iTunes was JUST beginning to offer DRM-free music for $1.29 when their normal, shitty quality DRMcrap was $0.99. Amazon bargained for a far better deal to offer high quality VBR mp3s for $0.99 without any DRM. Apple wasn't forced to give in, Apple was forced to keep up with Amazon's higher quality for lower prices. Amazon is the company that made DRM-free the standard, and it wasn't until MONTHS later that Apple dropped the double pricing system and went purely DRM-free... and yet they're STILL mostly $1.29 per song.
That's exactly what they're doing, or arguing that Amazon didn't pay for a license that lets you download your MP3s that you purchased from them multiple times. Their argument would basically be that each separate download or stream of the MP3 should be it's own license. Previously that is how Amazon MP3 worked, and how iTunes works now. Each single download is it's own license.
Amazon has shown several times now that they're willing to go toe to toe with the RIAA. They had DRM free music before that was the standard, and now they're pushing for cloud storage and streaming. Everything they're doing in regards to the music industry is pro-user and pro-consumer. So what about the Kindle? Why do they bend over backwards at every turn to please the book publishing industry and continue to DRM protect their eBooks? Why is it that they didn't fight the publishing industry on the Text-to-Speech feature? Why aren't they fighting for the consumer's right to lend books to their friends? Amazon is only fighting for the consumer on the MP3 issue because they have nothing to lose. They're a small time player in digital music services and they want to make a mark. If they get shut down, they're no worse off than they are now, but if it takes off they have a chance to be the first out of the door with a HUGE service. I'm becoming less and less confident we'll ever see Amazon fight for the consumer when it relates to the Kindle.
I use Mobibook formats on my kindle all the time, which I got for free from Tor publishing during their ebook give aways last year (or the year before, whatever it was). I even was able to port my Secure eReader format to a format the Kindle can read. I have yet to find an ebook I've purchased that I haven't been able to get onto my kindle in one way or another.
Even the Galaxy S and Backflip (the two most locked down AT&T phones) can be sideloaded with little effort. A) Droid Explorer. Even the most computer illiterate users can side load using this app. B) Android SDK -> adb install These work regardless of the manufacturer's ability to "lock down" the ability to install non-market apps. It's completely impossible to remove the feature entirely.
Actually you're wrong. You don't have to root. I've been sideloading on my Backflip and Galaxy S without rooting for a long time now. Easiest way is to just use Droid Explorer. This is how I show non-tech savvy users to sideload. It's a free app that makes installing APKs completely painless. You can also install the android SDK (a free download) and type in "adb install "
Even on the most locked down Android phones, you can still side-load applications without jailbreaking or rooting the phone.
Please explain why you used one space between all sentences in your post.
Because HTML rendering automatically removes extra white space beyond the first spce. If you type in two spaces, as I have here, it will automatically truncate when rendering down to one space. If you want HTML rendering the spaces properly you have to tell it to.
Yes, it's not as easy as a TV Show like CSI can make it seem but that doesn't make it impossible either. Improbable, but not impossible. It's just as improbable that giving your SSN to a stranger over the phone to handle some account could get your SSN stolen, but that doens't mean it can't happen. My problem lies in that being "perfect for low brow situations" that the definition of a low brow situtation will broaden and next thing we know grocercy shopping will be using fingerprints (oh wait that already happens too). I don't like the idea of using a piece of personally identifiable information that can't be changed for ANYTHING, simply because if a comprimise happens you're done. Regardless of how improbable and impractical stealing a fingerprint might be, the real fact of the matter is IF SOMEONE DOES you have next to no recourse to fix that. You can't just fill out some forms and magically get a new fingerprint, but with every other currently used personal identification scheme you can.
The problem has nothing to do with storing that information, or the ability to deconstruct a fingerprint from their database information. You don't have to deconstruct the fingerprint to copy it, you are given dozens of fingerprints every single day, and you give out dozens of fingerprints every single day. Think about every single thing you touch that gets passed onto someone else over the course of a day. Your finger prints are on each and every one of them. I don't know about you, but I'd be hard pressed to give out my SSN once a month, let alone dozens of times a day. Sure, it isn't practical to steal a fingerprint in the wild without going out of your way to do it right and get a nice clean print, but it's not a risk I would like to take. If someone steals my password, or my credit card information, or even my name and social security number, all of this can be changed with varying degrees of hassle. Sure it might take a few days of filling out forms and making phone calls, but it's doable. You can't change your fingerprint. At best you have 10 chances and then you're screwed.
They're mostly used on sites such as Facebook and Twitter, where you have a very small limit to the number of characters you can put in a post. If your URL is 50 characters long, that's over a third of your entire post length and leaves little room to post the context of your link. It's also useful for writing a short URL down on paper for a friend to be able to take home and easily type into their web browser for when e-mail is inconvenient. Just because you can't come up with a use for it, doesn't make it any less of a popular service that millions of people use.
Been there done that. What's worse is he had a massive poster of Kenny G on his wall above his computer.
Use the bandwidth capping abilities in all modern P2P clients. If you're trying to torrent, max it's upload and download capabilities below your total network bandwidth. I have a 1Mbit up and 10Mbit connection. Capping my total upload in KTorrent to 100KByte/s and my down to 900KByte/s allows me to do anything else on the internet without issue. Very few online games or other uses of the internet require more than a 100KB down and 30KB or so up. Learn to properly manage your P2P programs and you won't have a problem.
Exactly. I figured it was worth a slashdot post simply because not everyone even REALIZES that those files are there and take up space. For those who pinch hard drive space like myself it helps. Sure after posting I spent a bit of time on Google and found the answer, but not everyone's going to think that Windows keeps backups of it's own install files for updates which are supposed to fix things and not break them. Heck... I just found them by accident and realized they were using up so much space. If the /. admins think it's worthy to go live, then who cares anyway. It's not like your post will get the topic deleted. If you dont think it's important, don't read it.
Can't photoshop on lappy with linux, only reason I stick with windows on the laptop. Sure I can use gimp, but it's just not the same :P
The JPN cube has a jumper connecting those two contacts, you take the jumper off and you have a US cube. None-the-less it has an easy way of switching between regions that doesnt allow for making a mod-chip with the "side effect" of allowing it to read burned discs.
I totally forgot about Sony's Linux kit, now i have one more reason for wanting a PS2 :D
However I'd still love to see Linux on my cube ;)
The Q is a totally different thing from the GameCube, it's manufactured by Panasonic's japanese parent company, not by Nintendo. I'm talking about the NORAML EVERY DAY GAMECUBE. It does not have the physical capabilities to read anything but GameCube discs.
Sure the Q has the ability to read GC discs, DVDs, and CDs, but it is hardly something I consider as an option because it costs three times as much as a normal GameCube and is only available in Japan unless you want to spend even more to import it. However, the Q still can't read burned discs. It's just like the DVD players from about two to three years ago that can't read burned audio CDs.