I bet browsers did run really well on your 1992 workstations, since the first graphical browserwasn't released until late 1993.
Have you tried running lynx, or for that matter Mosaic 1.0 on your Zaurus? It might run a little snappier..
That's West Virginia. Virginia is "Oh, Stephanie, I'm *so* glad you got into Thomas Jefferson High School For The Rich And White - now we don't have to send you to private school! Between my consulting and Daddy's lobbying job, we'll save enough to go to the Maglev Train Opening Ball!"
That 'Evil Genius Gates Drops Windows 98 Into NYC Water Supply' story was funny, but after September 11, it has a much deeper tone of sadness and fright.
Talk about an evil genius watching televised terror gleefully, with a beautiful nighttime photo of the Twin Towers in the center of the article... it just made me sad.
A usage distribution like that may not be unique, but it is worth taking into account in the pricing structure.
Your examples actually disprove the point your sympathetic too. Take the highways: what's the appropriate and common solution to a small number of drivers using a high proportion of road resources? Tolls in the more congested areas. That way the people that use it more, pay more. Traffic snarls in Western cities can in part be blamed on the failure to charge "per byte", as it were; only now are they coming around to the idea, given solid theory and evidence that it helps.
Same on those campgrounds. You pay each time you stay in a campground, under the theory that the people who use a resource, should pay for that resource. Again, the National Park system has been implementing this idea in recent years.
Personally, I'd like to see a dissociation of bandwidth from monthly usage. Some people might want relatively slow speeds, but constant usage, adding up to a bulky total. I'd want this option, because I listen to Net radio all the time. Others might want blistering high speeds, but not all that much total usage for the month; say, someone who wants to download a few large game demos. And that 1% wants high-speed, high-usage. Fine. Let them pay for it. I'm sure the prices could be changed to reflect these different usage patterns.
You forgot to close the ALT quotes on your second image. So the second image doesn't show up, at least in IE (had to copy-and-paste from the source to load it).
Slashdot Mirror
I bet browsers did run really well on your 1992 workstations, since the first graphical browser wasn't released until late 1993.
Have you tried running lynx, or for that matter Mosaic 1.0 on your Zaurus? It might run a little snappier..
That's West Virginia. Virginia is "Oh, Stephanie, I'm *so* glad you got into Thomas Jefferson High School For The Rich And White - now we don't have to send you to private school! Between my consulting and Daddy's lobbying job, we'll save enough to go to the Maglev Train Opening Ball!"
you must be spelling everything in your submissions correctly. Run an automatic typo generator on your stories, and try again.
That 'Evil Genius Gates Drops Windows 98 Into NYC Water Supply' story was funny, but after September 11, it has a much deeper tone of sadness and fright. Talk about an evil genius watching televised terror gleefully, with a beautiful nighttime photo of the Twin Towers in the center of the article... it just made me sad.
(n/t)
it is a small, small mind that takes a dictionary definition literally, and cannot analogize even slightly beyond it.
A usage distribution like that may not be unique, but it is worth taking into account in the pricing structure.
Your examples actually disprove the point your sympathetic too. Take the highways: what's the appropriate and common solution to a small number of drivers using a high proportion of road resources? Tolls in the more congested areas. That way the people that use it more, pay more. Traffic snarls in Western cities can in part be blamed on the failure to charge "per byte", as it were; only now are they coming around to the idea, given solid theory and evidence that it helps.
Same on those campgrounds. You pay each time you stay in a campground, under the theory that the people who use a resource, should pay for that resource. Again, the National Park system has been implementing this idea in recent years.
Personally, I'd like to see a dissociation of bandwidth from monthly usage. Some people might want relatively slow speeds, but constant usage, adding up to a bulky total. I'd want this option, because I listen to Net radio all the time. Others might want blistering high speeds, but not all that much total usage for the month; say, someone who wants to download a few large game demos. And that 1% wants high-speed, high-usage. Fine. Let them pay for it. I'm sure the prices could be changed to reflect these different usage patterns.
You forgot to close the ALT quotes on your second image. So the second image doesn't show up, at least in IE (had to copy-and-paste from the source to load it).
Might want to fix that.
I think the problem is PHP and its ilk. In the old days, everyone hand-crafted each page, and they were all static.
Nowadays, everybody's got to be running a fancy-pants database-driven site, and consequently their server chokes under even a moderate load.
Back to the days of copy-and-paste templating, I say!
These kids today. What about raising your hand?
I believe he refers to the 29th of February.
Yeah, but it's not such an accomplishment to learn to spell 'ftp', is it?
"Uh, wait, pronounce it again? efteepee? Howz that spelled?"Hold down the shift key next time you do a genie.
Nifty, eh? It's a feature, not a bug.
You could read one of his books. That's a wonderful way to meet him, so to speak.