Look, I use Bittorrent and it's great. But I also run an ISP.
The thing is, bandwidth isn't cheap. People bitch that ISPs "oversubscribe", and that we can't really deliver our advertised bandwidth to everyone all of the time. This is true, but how do you think we manage to sell people 5Mb connections for $40/month? Do you know how much 5Mb of bandwidth costs and ISP? It's a lot more than $40. In the market I'm in, we pay THOUSANDS of dollars for that much bandwidth.
The real problem is that bandwidth is too expensive in this country, thanks to the likes of AT&T and MCI and all the other big players. They've got tons of unused fiber lying around, and it costs them next-to-nothing to use it, but it still costs the end-user (in this case, the ISP) a hell of a lot of cash.
They can't send you a list of "blocked" messages, because they probably don't HAVE the messages in the first place.
Most of the really effective anti-spam systems rely on "blackhole" lists (like Spamhaus), and greylisting. Both of which simply drop the message before it is even delivered to your inbox.
I work for an ISP, and the spam problem is so bad that if you have to block a non-trivial amount of legitimate mail in order to block a HUGE amount of spam, then that's a more than fair trade-off. There is simply NO WAY to effectively block the junk without block quite a bit of real mail. At least, not on an ISPs e-mail server. "Private" mail servers are a different story.
With the Playstation/Saturn/N64 generation, we were introduced to "3D games". But they didn't look that great. Well, the N64 looked pretty good, but it was hampered by using cartridges instead of CDs.
With the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube generation, we didn't get any new *types* of games, but we got *good-looking* versions of the games we had on the previous generation. And they really did/do look good.
Now with this generation, we get *better looking* versions of the games we have been playing. But they're the same types of games, and they don't look all that much better. It feels like we're getting a relatively minor cosmetic upgrade, though the online features are nice. And the price! The 360 and PS3 are ridiculously expensive.
The Wii, of course, *will* have new types of games, and still will look great, and is likely to be the cheapest. Which is why I think it will sell pretty well.
Yeah, you could try to go it alone with your band, but the publishers basically control the entire marketing/distribution infrastructure. If you go it alone, without signing a deal, how would you:
a)pay to have a zillion copies of your CD manufactured
b)get those CDs distributed to a large number of music stores
c)get your song played on the radio so people even know you EXIST
Those things are important if you plan to make a GOOD living off of your music. Yeah, you could live a decent lifestyle as a good "touring band" that never has a Top 40 hit or big-selling CD, but the ONLY way to become a millionaire is to sell your soul to a major label. Of course, even after you sell your soul, you won't necessarily become rich.
Make no mistake, I think the vast majority of music publishers are out to screw the artists as much as they can. But they can do it because most artists are willing to cut a deal with the devil because of the potential rewards.
It could definitely happen by the time the "PS4" is released. That's, what, at least 5 years down the road?
Between high-speed internet connections and the ever-decreasing cost of high-capacity flash RAM, it's absolutely conceivable that "disks" won't be the primary *portable and removeable* storage medium in the not-too-distant future.
Man, that would be nice. Discs are a pain in the ass, and they aren't very durable. Of course, many of those problems could be solved if they simply put the disks into some kind of protective case, like they did with floppy discs. For that matter, considering how much data a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD holds couldn't they just make "mini-HD" discs, much like Mini-Discs? They'd still hold plenty of data, and they would be more durable and easier to handle.
Seriously, the last few version of Norton Anti-Virus (and Internet Security) have bee SO bad, that I can't believe Norton hasn't been taken to court.
I've seen BRAND-NEW machines, out-of-the-box, refuse to boot to Windows until Norton Internet Security/Anti-Virus was un-installed from Safe Mode. That is insane.
Removing Norton products is the FIRST thing I do whenever I'm fixing a PC. Two-thirds of the time, that's all it takes to restore the machine to a working state. Some customers get pissed, and say "I just paid $80 for that at Best Buy!", and want me to put it back on. I tell them "Look, you can have a working computer, or you can have Norton Internet Security. You can't have both."
It's just ridiculous. Sometimes I wonder if Best Buy and Symantec have some kind of deal where Symantec guarantees that their product will fuck up PCs, and Best Buy sells it so they can keep the "Geek Squad" in business.
This whole "lets make tricky, obnoxious cases for PCs" thing pops up every few years. It never amounts to anything.
Most people don't care how their PC looks. It gets stuck under the desk. A lot of the time, there's even a *door* covering it up.
If they really want to change the look of PCs for the better, then they should move to ultra-compact "mini" cases. I would love to be able to buy a fully-functional PC in a small case that still had a slot or 2 for expandability, and not have to pay $300 for the privilege.
Anyone who has worked in the IT department of a school/school district has had to deal with the HORRIBLE software that ripoff-artists like Blackboard manage to sell to clueless managers.
I would venture to say that the vast majority of software marketed to schools/universities is pure crap. And the best part is, it's MASSIVELY overpriced, too, since most schools get government grants to buy this stuff (and, again, the people who approve these purchases generally have no idea what the stuff is worth).
Screw all of the educational software companies. They're leeches feeding of the ignorance of stupid administrators and pork-barrel funding.
Well, "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang" is pretty good. But yeah, the overall selection is horrible. It's almost like they're TRYING to keep people from buying these new players.
Everybody who is dumb enough to use AOL keeps using it, but doesn't pay.
The true cheapskates of the world sign-up, but since they are cheapskates, the advertising really isn't going to work on them very well. Advertisers abandon AOL.
Dual-core/processor system are nice. It's the equivalent of "load balancing" for your PC. You don't even need software that takes advantage of dual-processors to take advantage of it, really. Just put half of your processes on one CPU, and half on the other. Makes things nice and speedy.
But once you try to write an individual program to split it's *own* load between 2 CPUs, things get complicated fast. And the more CPUs you try to use, the harder it gets.
The fact is, it's hard to make multi-threaded software, and some functions just can't run in parallel. Yeah, now that multi-CPU PCs are going to be the standard, we'll see software that is designed for them, and programming techniques/compilers will get better. But still, there is only so much you can do.
I wonder how much "load balancing" is done by the Core/X2 CPUs at the microcode level? Do the CPUs themselves try to split code between the cores at execution time?
BUT...let's be realistic. The odds that MS is going to be able to create a 109% (or close to it) operating system are very low. A lot of that is their fault, but some of it isn't. Windows is a huge target, and ANY holes will almost ALWAYS be found. That's just how it is. Nothing humans make is perfect, and every lock can be picked.
That being the case, why shouldn't they be allowed to include anti-virus and anti-malware functions with Windows? They're an extra layer of protection. And, honestly, they are the kinds of things that should be *included* with an operating system, anyway.
Of course, I'm in the minority of people (on Slashdot anyway) that thinks Microsoft should be allowed to bundle pretty much whatever they want with Windows. Especially software that qualifies as an "OS utility". Which AV and anti-malware definitely is.
Yeah, he could countersue, but that doesn't help anybody. Most people don't have the financial means to enter into a civil suit with an organization the size of the MPAA. They have no fear of that.
I suppose he *could* try and get them into court for some kind of criminal offense, but what would it be? The courts so far have no problem with the MPAA and RIAA's tactics, and as far as I know, their extortion-like lawsuits break now existing laws.
Basically, while I appreciate what he's doing, it's not going to change anything.
The W3C, as far as I can tell, never accomplished much at all. And you know why? They didn't have an actual PRODUCT.
If the W3C wanted to set standards for browsers, then they should've been MAKING A BROWSER. And open-sourcing it. At the very least, they should've been creating "rendering engines" that could be plugged into the various browsers on the market.
Thankfully, the Mozilla team seems to have picked up the slack in many ways.
If you run a corporate network and DO NOT have a firewall that does "full content inspection", then you aren't doing your job very well. Or your boss is cheap AND stupid.
Buy a Fortigate (or Packeteer, or whatever, but Fortigates are good and cheap) and configure the BUILT-IN filter for Skype traffic. Problem solved.
This is something they should be using their lobbying power to stop.
"Gun safety" is fine, but how long would it be until the U.S. government started requiring this in all firearms? And, of course, they would have all the encryption keys. And, of course, they would know how to JAM the signals.
A lot of the reason we have a "right to bear arms" is so that we can fight the tyranny of our OWN government, if we need to. This technology would allow us to maintain that right, but make it completely ineffectual.
I think that the various companies pushing "HD" movie formats are *radically* overestimating how many HDTV sets are actually out there. Most people I know don't own an HDTV. Most people in the U.S. don't own an HDTV. Most people in the U.S. don't *have* the disposable income to buy an expensive set. And as the article said, if you don't have HD channels, then the picture is worse.
HDTVs won't be everywhere until *most* of the content on regualar broadcast TV/cable is in HD, and the sets are under $400 or so, and HD DVD players drop to under $100. And that's a long ways away.
Plus, many people just bought new TVs in the last few years, since the price of 32" CRTs dropped through the floor. They're not about to upgrade.
The fact is, what they are trying to do hasn't really been done before. AND, they're trying to tack it onto the enormous pile of legacy code that is Windows.
I wonder if the problem of integrating it into Windows itself stems from the fact that next to ZERO file formats that are currently in widespread use by the computing world know anything about "metadata", which is kind of key to the whole "SQL as a filesystem" concept.
Plus, I've always wondered how they thought all that metadata was going to get there in the first place. Most users don't even bother to name their files properly (e.g., every folder is named New Folder), and now they're expected to *decribe* them, too? Doesn't seem likely.
Slashdot Mirror
Look, I use Bittorrent and it's great. But I also run an ISP.
The thing is, bandwidth isn't cheap. People bitch that ISPs "oversubscribe", and that we can't really deliver our advertised bandwidth to everyone all of the time. This is true, but how do you think we manage to sell people 5Mb connections for $40/month? Do you know how much 5Mb of bandwidth costs and ISP? It's a lot more than $40. In the market I'm in, we pay THOUSANDS of dollars for that much bandwidth.
The real problem is that bandwidth is too expensive in this country, thanks to the likes of AT&T and MCI and all the other big players. They've got tons of unused fiber lying around, and it costs them next-to-nothing to use it, but it still costs the end-user (in this case, the ISP) a hell of a lot of cash.
They can't send you a list of "blocked" messages, because they probably don't HAVE the messages in the first place.
Most of the really effective anti-spam systems rely on "blackhole" lists (like Spamhaus), and greylisting. Both of which simply drop the message before it is even delivered to your inbox.
I work for an ISP, and the spam problem is so bad that if you have to block a non-trivial amount of legitimate mail in order to block a HUGE amount of spam, then that's a more than fair trade-off. There is simply NO WAY to effectively block the junk without block quite a bit of real mail. At least, not on an ISPs e-mail server. "Private" mail servers are a different story.
Seriously.
For fixing Windows machines, NOTHING is better than a BartPE CD with the right plug-ins.
Anyone who fixes Windows machines and knows what they're doing has been using BartPE for a couple of years, now.
I pretty much agree.
I think of it this way:
With the Playstation/Saturn/N64 generation, we were introduced to "3D games". But they didn't look that great. Well, the N64 looked pretty good, but it was hampered by using cartridges instead of CDs.
With the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube generation, we didn't get any new *types* of games, but we got *good-looking* versions of the games we had on the previous generation. And they really did/do look good.
Now with this generation, we get *better looking* versions of the games we have been playing. But they're the same types of games, and they don't look all that much better. It feels like we're getting a relatively minor cosmetic upgrade, though the online features are nice. And the price! The 360 and PS3 are ridiculously expensive.
The Wii, of course, *will* have new types of games, and still will look great, and is likely to be the cheapest. Which is why I think it will sell pretty well.
Why do musicians need publishers?
One word: marketing
Yeah, you could try to go it alone with your band, but the publishers basically control the entire marketing/distribution infrastructure. If you go it alone, without signing a deal, how would you:
a)pay to have a zillion copies of your CD manufactured b)get those CDs distributed to a large number of music stores c)get your song played on the radio so people even know you EXIST
Those things are important if you plan to make a GOOD living off of your music. Yeah, you could live a decent lifestyle as a good "touring band" that never has a Top 40 hit or big-selling CD, but the ONLY way to become a millionaire is to sell your soul to a major label. Of course, even after you sell your soul, you won't necessarily become rich.
Make no mistake, I think the vast majority of music publishers are out to screw the artists as much as they can. But they can do it because most artists are willing to cut a deal with the devil because of the potential rewards.
It could definitely happen by the time the "PS4" is released. That's, what, at least 5 years down the road?
Between high-speed internet connections and the ever-decreasing cost of high-capacity flash RAM, it's absolutely conceivable that "disks" won't be the primary *portable and removeable* storage medium in the not-too-distant future.
Man, that would be nice. Discs are a pain in the ass, and they aren't very durable. Of course, many of those problems could be solved if they simply put the disks into some kind of protective case, like they did with floppy discs. For that matter, considering how much data a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD holds couldn't they just make "mini-HD" discs, much like Mini-Discs? They'd still hold plenty of data, and they would be more durable and easier to handle.
Seriously, the last few version of Norton Anti-Virus (and Internet Security) have bee SO bad, that I can't believe Norton hasn't been taken to court.
I've seen BRAND-NEW machines, out-of-the-box, refuse to boot to Windows until Norton Internet Security/Anti-Virus was un-installed from Safe Mode. That is insane.
Removing Norton products is the FIRST thing I do whenever I'm fixing a PC. Two-thirds of the time, that's all it takes to restore the machine to a working state. Some customers get pissed, and say "I just paid $80 for that at Best Buy!", and want me to put it back on. I tell them "Look, you can have a working computer, or you can have Norton Internet Security. You can't have both."
It's just ridiculous. Sometimes I wonder if Best Buy and Symantec have some kind of deal where Symantec guarantees that their product will fuck up PCs, and Best Buy sells it so they can keep the "Geek Squad" in business.
This whole "lets make tricky, obnoxious cases for PCs" thing pops up every few years. It never amounts to anything.
Most people don't care how their PC looks. It gets stuck under the desk. A lot of the time, there's even a *door* covering it up.
If they really want to change the look of PCs for the better, then they should move to ultra-compact "mini" cases. I would love to be able to buy a fully-functional PC in a small case that still had a slot or 2 for expandability, and not have to pay $300 for the privilege.
Anyone who has worked in the IT department of a school/school district has had to deal with the HORRIBLE software that ripoff-artists like Blackboard manage to sell to clueless managers.
I would venture to say that the vast majority of software marketed to schools/universities is pure crap. And the best part is, it's MASSIVELY overpriced, too, since most schools get government grants to buy this stuff (and, again, the people who approve these purchases generally have no idea what the stuff is worth).
Screw all of the educational software companies. They're leeches feeding of the ignorance of stupid administrators and pork-barrel funding.
Well, "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang" is pretty good. But yeah, the overall selection is horrible. It's almost like they're TRYING to keep people from buying these new players.
Here's my prediction of what is going to happen:
Everybody who is dumb enough to use AOL keeps using it, but doesn't pay.
The true cheapskates of the world sign-up, but since they are cheapskates, the advertising really isn't going to work on them very well. Advertisers abandon AOL.
AOL ends up dying. Thank God.
How on Earth is it MS's fault that speech recognition isn't better? They don't even compete in that market.
You are an idiot.
Dual-core/processor system are nice. It's the equivalent of "load balancing" for your PC. You don't even need software that takes advantage of dual-processors to take advantage of it, really. Just put half of your processes on one CPU, and half on the other. Makes things nice and speedy.
But once you try to write an individual program to split it's *own* load between 2 CPUs, things get complicated fast. And the more CPUs you try to use, the harder it gets.
The fact is, it's hard to make multi-threaded software, and some functions just can't run in parallel. Yeah, now that multi-CPU PCs are going to be the standard, we'll see software that is designed for them, and programming techniques/compilers will get better. But still, there is only so much you can do.
I wonder how much "load balancing" is done by the Core/X2 CPUs at the microcode level? Do the CPUs themselves try to split code between the cores at execution time?
Hey man,
I think that someone is redirecting your requests through a proxy server that randomly inserts the letter "o" into the word genius.
Moran.
I agree.
BUT...let's be realistic. The odds that MS is going to be able to create a 109% (or close to it) operating system are very low. A lot of that is their fault, but some of it isn't. Windows is a huge target, and ANY holes will almost ALWAYS be found. That's just how it is. Nothing humans make is perfect, and every lock can be picked.
That being the case, why shouldn't they be allowed to include anti-virus and anti-malware functions with Windows? They're an extra layer of protection. And, honestly, they are the kinds of things that should be *included* with an operating system, anyway.
Of course, I'm in the minority of people (on Slashdot anyway) that thinks Microsoft should be allowed to bundle pretty much whatever they want with Windows. Especially software that qualifies as an "OS utility". Which AV and anti-malware definitely is.
Yeah, he could countersue, but that doesn't help anybody. Most people don't have the financial means to enter into a civil suit with an organization the size of the MPAA. They have no fear of that.
I suppose he *could* try and get them into court for some kind of criminal offense, but what would it be? The courts so far have no problem with the MPAA and RIAA's tactics, and as far as I know, their extortion-like lawsuits break now existing laws.
Basically, while I appreciate what he's doing, it's not going to change anything.
The W3C, as far as I can tell, never accomplished much at all. And you know why? They didn't have an actual PRODUCT.
If the W3C wanted to set standards for browsers, then they should've been MAKING A BROWSER. And open-sourcing it. At the very least, they should've been creating "rendering engines" that could be plugged into the various browsers on the market.
Thankfully, the Mozilla team seems to have picked up the slack in many ways.
You think hundreds of machines is ridiculous...
I read that *many* of those machines have more than 640K of RAM!
If you run a corporate network and DO NOT have a firewall that does "full content inspection", then you aren't doing your job very well. Or your boss is cheap AND stupid.
Buy a Fortigate (or Packeteer, or whatever, but Fortigates are good and cheap) and configure the BUILT-IN filter for Skype traffic. Problem solved.
This is something they should be using their lobbying power to stop.
"Gun safety" is fine, but how long would it be until the U.S. government started requiring this in all firearms? And, of course, they would have all the encryption keys. And, of course, they would know how to JAM the signals.
A lot of the reason we have a "right to bear arms" is so that we can fight the tyranny of our OWN government, if we need to. This technology would allow us to maintain that right, but make it completely ineffectual.
Yes, I agree.
I think that the various companies pushing "HD" movie formats are *radically* overestimating how many HDTV sets are actually out there. Most people I know don't own an HDTV. Most people in the U.S. don't own an HDTV. Most people in the U.S. don't *have* the disposable income to buy an expensive set. And as the article said, if you don't have HD channels, then the picture is worse.
HDTVs won't be everywhere until *most* of the content on regualar broadcast TV/cable is in HD, and the sets are under $400 or so, and HD DVD players drop to under $100. And that's a long ways away.
Plus, many people just bought new TVs in the last few years, since the price of 32" CRTs dropped through the floor. They're not about to upgrade.
The fact is, what they are trying to do hasn't really been done before. AND, they're trying to tack it onto the enormous pile of legacy code that is Windows.
I wonder if the problem of integrating it into Windows itself stems from the fact that next to ZERO file formats that are currently in widespread use by the computing world know anything about "metadata", which is kind of key to the whole "SQL as a filesystem" concept.
Plus, I've always wondered how they thought all that metadata was going to get there in the first place. Most users don't even bother to name their files properly (e.g., every folder is named New Folder), and now they're expected to *decribe* them, too? Doesn't seem likely.
As a person who has to answer customer phone calls-
There is NOTHING more annoying than having an unprepared customer call you, and then 30 seconds into the call ask if they can call back later.
I mean, yes, of course you can call back later, but WHY THE FUCK did you call in the first place if you weren't actually ready to complete the call?
So, your friend is a tool. And the Comcast rep was weird.
Just to clarify- A "review" of a book means you give an opinion about it.
Almost *all* of the book "reviews" on Slashdot are nothing but summaries. Akin to "book reports". And they're completely useless.
Expect to see this system installed at EVERY amusement park, and every landmark, and every tourist attraction.
The Powers That Be are determined to make sure that ANY information the masses have access to is paid for.