Particularly in the UK, where there is far less [transparent] corruption, there is a misconception that the only possible reason for a group giving money to a political party is for some pat on the back.
In America, where the political system is massively more (and massively transparently) corrupt, it is different. Personally, I believe that funding should be capped, as should individual donations, that taxes should fund a threshold level, as well as more minor restrictions.
So basically, not for one minute am I saying all donations are innocent, and it's just coincidence that groups are rewarded, I'm just trying to say in some cases that is the explanation, particularly outside of America.
Anyway, it's not just the American political funding that needs an overhaul, amidst the mass of problems in the system, the absolute essence of the democratic election system, counting votes, is sadly flawed.
... polititians are elected based on advertising that is payed for by corporate contributions and then act based on who payed them a lot of money?
This is a fairly common misconception that political parties "reward" those that supported them financially.
You'll probably find that the reason that a group gives donations to a party is because they feel that the party thinks in a similar way to they do. So when they get elected and make favourable decisions, it's more than likely because the party does think along the lines of the group, rather than simply rewarding the group.
For example, if an abortion agency gave a donation to a very liberal political party, the liberal party got elected and then made abortion more accessible, it would hardly be a case of the agency buying changes; they simply try to back the group that will server them best, or thinks along the same lines as they do. It happens that they benefit, because they picked the right horse to back.
£100 per month, plus £20 for every 30Gb of data transfer. That includes 1U space, power, remote console, etc and a 10Mbps connection.
Choosehosting host all of our games server off QiX - fabulosuly low pings, great support, great speeds. They also offer central European hosting for European-centric customers.
Clearly SUVs are consumer vehicles, and they were around during Clinton's era, and he specifically left them out of the CAFE.
HGVs, lorries, trucks and specialised vehicles which are intended for industrial use should have separate limitations imposed upon them but should also be made to conform to some regulations.
Catalytic converters have actually been compulsory in newly manufactured cars in Europe since 1992.
Also, manufacturing road surfaces on recycled tires not only reduces pollution, increases fuel efficiency and make car tyres better wearing but is also cheaper. However, the companies that make the road surfacing tend to be key contributors to campaigns and tyre companies don't like the thought of people buying new tyres less often.
Re:Wrong country
on
239 MPG Car
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
As another reply pointed out, this comment is completely wrong.
The most popular selling type of car in the US is the SUV, which is excluded from the CAFE. These can be as unefficient as 10mpg in certain conditions, and the manufacturers have no incentive to improve this.
Saying that the US is very interested in the fuel economy is absurd: not only will they not make any substantial effort to make sure manufacturer's increase efficiency, they also refuse to look at other factors (such as road surfacing) because large corporations might make a few bucks less.
Being from Bristol (UK), an early wireless adopter and a computing student, this article was very interesting.
However, I'm going to be very cynical and say that I don't see the point. What you have effectively done is split a product that costs >=£100 per month (2Mb ADSL) between 4 people. Individually it would cost those 4 people £20 each (512k ADSL for £19.99 per month).
While I think the project is a great excuse for the use of interesting technology, on such a small scale it's ultimately pointless.
The current aim of the project is feeble: "the aim was to prove that a portion of this connection could be successfully shared between a number of local residents or community groups by using wireless technology". Well, I could have saved you a lot of time and effort and told you it was possible:-)
To make the project of any use (imho), it either needs to be far more widespread than it is (as you suggest, explore into other parts of Bristol), and approach Bristol City Council directly for funding/support, or there needs to be some benefit for those using it on a small scale, that there otherwise could not be. Simply giving 4 users ~512Kb/sec each isn't much benefit.
I'm pretty sure this might get moderated as a troll (if moderated at all) but that isn't the intention. Coming from where the article is based, it's hard not to get personal about the details - and although this project has a lot of potential, it seems to be in a very unevolved state.
Isn't this similar to the whole capital punishment debate?
Which is better - one hundred murderers being set free (or not executed), or one innocent person being executed?
Obviously in the case of games it's a question of "not being allowed to play" rather than "being executed" (some might argue the difference is neglibile;)) but it's still the same trade-off.
It largely depends on the nature of the reviewed product.
For CPUs, most people will be looking for the faster CPU [for the application they run], or the less expensive one, or the better value for money one, or compatibility, more stable one, etc. In very few cases does it come down to personal interpretation.
Hardware reviews (in general) should be objective and people should draw their own opinions on the reviewed item(s) based on its performance (in the reviewers benchmarks/findings) in the areas that matter to a user. There are some hardware items where a bit of subjective input is useful - monitors for example. The aesthetics of an LCD are worth nothing.
Film can only be rated from a personal point of view (as you say - a reviewer saying the length, genre, etc is useless). I suppose you could get a group of 100 people and get them to give ratings out of 10 for "humour" for a series of films, and try get a scientific (but still subjective) rating of a film's humour but I doubt many would take it seriously.
So, in the case of the Athlon, if you're just going to play Quake3, you can see a Pentium 4 will give better performance. However, if you're going to do more MP3 encoding, the Athlon might be better. There would be no point the reviewer saying "I prefer the Athlon" when his uses could be wildly different to yours.
I live in a old (pre-Victorian) house with very thick walls. Unfortunately I have no idea how thick the walls are that we (or you) have but I haven't found walls to be a great problem with our wireless setup. The biggest problem I've found is our large metal radiators, TVs/microwaves and trying to keep access points discrete.
Although it limits the range, in general there should be a sufficient signal strength (even a full 11MBps) to transmit directly through a wall, with a receiver/transmitter on either side (or thereabouts).
I suggest you try borrow a Wireless PCMCIA card (and laptop, if need be) and a Wireless access point from someone, and try them on either side of a wall. If the buildings are all within line of sighs, repeaters on each building's roof should enable decent signal strength between buildings (once again a quick test with a wireless card a a base station should prove sufficient).
It obviously depends on the size of the building, the distance from the nearest point on the building to adjacent buildings and the position of where you need the PCs to have access, as well as the distances between buildings but you might be fine with simply a repeater on each building (a ring network of sorts, positionally anyway), and access points inside. If they're strong enough through the walls, and have line of sight to each other on adjacent buildings, I don't see that you'd have any problems.
Well, as long as nobody nearby has chalk, anyway...
/. readers are from a range of countries and most will either not be able to offer advice or the advice given will be of no good.
Has the poster ever thought of IRC? This certainly should not be posted on a major news site. You can just imagine a major news article on BBC asking for hardware retailers.
I fail to see how this can really harm Microsoft's sales, and therefore be bad for MS.
More people (even if it's only those with computers who download DivX movies) will buy the consoles, and therefore more games will be sold. I for one, will.
Of course people will undoubtedly play pirate games on modded XBoxes but unless Microsoft actually do lose money on each XBox sold, they will still generate revenue from sales of hardware.
Pirating games on the XBox (although damaging financially) is not the same as pirating games on a PC, because the software manufacturer has not necessarily received any income from the sale of hardware.
Also, since most mainstream users will not mod their XBox, I cannot see there being a massive dip in sales of games, due to piracy.
Perhaps if Microsoft were sensible, they'd sell a pre-modified version of the XBox (which could support third party software/etc like mod chips) with a substantial price hike. At least, that way, they would make more money back from hardware sales.
Slashdot Mirror
1. Allow wireless devices to access the spectrum
...
2. Charge people to use it
5. PROFIT!
I don't disagree with you in the slightest.
Particularly in the UK, where there is far less [transparent] corruption, there is a misconception that the only possible reason for a group giving money to a political party is for some pat on the back.
In America, where the political system is massively more (and massively transparently) corrupt, it is different. Personally, I believe that funding should be capped, as should individual donations, that taxes should fund a threshold level, as well as more minor restrictions.
So basically, not for one minute am I saying all donations are innocent, and it's just coincidence that groups are rewarded, I'm just trying to say in some cases that is the explanation, particularly outside of America.
Anyway, it's not just the American political funding that needs an overhaul, amidst the mass of problems in the system, the absolute essence of the democratic election system, counting votes, is sadly flawed.
This is a fairly common misconception that political parties "reward" those that supported them financially.
You'll probably find that the reason that a group gives donations to a party is because they feel that the party thinks in a similar way to they do. So when they get elected and make favourable decisions, it's more than likely because the party does think along the lines of the group, rather than simply rewarding the group.
For example, if an abortion agency gave a donation to a very liberal political party, the liberal party got elected and then made abortion more accessible, it would hardly be a case of the agency buying changes; they simply try to back the group that will server them best, or thinks along the same lines as they do. It happens that they benefit, because they picked the right horse to back.
£100 per month, plus £20 for every 30Gb of data transfer. That includes 1U space, power, remote console, etc and a 10Mbps connection.
Choosehosting host all of our games server off QiX - fabulosuly low pings, great support, great speeds. They also offer central European hosting for European-centric customers.
Clearly SUVs are consumer vehicles, and they were around during Clinton's era, and he specifically left them out of the CAFE.
HGVs, lorries, trucks and specialised vehicles which are intended for industrial use should have separate limitations imposed upon them but should also be made to conform to some regulations.
Catalytic converters have actually been compulsory in newly manufactured cars in Europe since 1992.
Also, manufacturing road surfaces on recycled tires not only reduces pollution, increases fuel efficiency and make car tyres better wearing but is also cheaper. However, the companies that make the road surfacing tend to be key contributors to campaigns and tyre companies don't like the thought of people buying new tyres less often.
As another reply pointed out, this comment is completely wrong.
The most popular selling type of car in the US is the SUV, which is excluded from the CAFE. These can be as unefficient as 10mpg in certain conditions, and the manufacturers have no incentive to improve this.
Saying that the US is very interested in the fuel economy is absurd: not only will they not make any substantial effort to make sure manufacturer's increase efficiency, they also refuse to look at other factors (such as road surfacing) because large corporations might make a few bucks less.
"I would love to see GNU/Linux installed on every computer in the world, at gunpoint if necessary. "
At GNU/Point, surely?
*groan*
Jon
So what's all this about: Mozilla riddled with security holes.
:)
Even with the "bugs", I still love Mozilla, mind
I'm very pleased to hear/read that you're planning to expand the idea [a lot].
I've emailed you already with an offer of help, and will join the mailing list post-haste!
As the other reply to mine stated, applying for lottery funding might be a good idea too.
Being from Bristol (UK), an early wireless adopter and a computing student, this article was very interesting.
:-)
However, I'm going to be very cynical and say that I don't see the point. What you have effectively done is split a product that costs >=£100 per month (2Mb ADSL) between 4 people. Individually it would cost those 4 people £20 each (512k ADSL for £19.99 per month).
While I think the project is a great excuse for the use of interesting technology, on such a small scale it's ultimately pointless.
The current aim of the project is feeble: "the aim was to prove that a portion of this connection could be successfully shared between a number of local residents or community groups by using wireless technology". Well, I could have saved you a lot of time and effort and told you it was possible
To make the project of any use (imho), it either needs to be far more widespread than it is (as you suggest, explore into other parts of Bristol), and approach Bristol City Council directly for funding/support, or there needs to be some benefit for those using it on a small scale, that there otherwise could not be. Simply giving 4 users ~512Kb/sec each isn't much benefit.
I'm pretty sure this might get moderated as a troll (if moderated at all) but that isn't the intention. Coming from where the article is based, it's hard not to get personal about the details - and although this project has a lot of potential, it seems to be in a very unevolved state.
Jonathan Love
Isn't this similar to the whole capital punishment debate?
;)) but it's still the same trade-off.
Which is better - one hundred murderers being set free (or not executed), or one innocent person being executed?
Obviously in the case of games it's a question of "not being allowed to play" rather than "being executed" (some might argue the difference is neglibile
Has anyone got a link to this, with information in English? Is it available within Europe?
Did everyone hear about the farmer who won a Nobel Prize? Apparently he was out standing in his field.
Why is it banned?
Air traffic regulations?
It largely depends on the nature of the reviewed product.
For CPUs, most people will be looking for the faster CPU [for the application they run], or the less expensive one, or the better value for money one, or compatibility, more stable one, etc. In very few cases does it come down to personal interpretation.
Hardware reviews (in general) should be objective and people should draw their own opinions on the reviewed item(s) based on its performance (in the reviewers benchmarks/findings) in the areas that matter to a user. There are some hardware items where a bit of subjective input is useful - monitors for example. The aesthetics of an LCD are worth nothing.
Film can only be rated from a personal point of view (as you say - a reviewer saying the length, genre, etc is useless). I suppose you could get a group of 100 people and get them to give ratings out of 10 for "humour" for a series of films, and try get a scientific (but still subjective) rating of a film's humour but I doubt many would take it seriously.
So, in the case of the Athlon, if you're just going to play Quake3, you can see a Pentium 4 will give better performance. However, if you're going to do more MP3 encoding, the Athlon might be better. There would be no point the reviewer saying "I prefer the Athlon" when his uses could be wildly different to yours.
All of those URLs are mentioned on the linked Anandtech article - what's 1 extra click between friends? :)
Anandtech has some alternative review links over here including the more in-depth (and perhaps more objective?) review, at Tom's.
I live in a old (pre-Victorian) house with very thick walls. Unfortunately I have no idea how thick the walls are that we (or you) have but I haven't found walls to be a great problem with our wireless setup. The biggest problem I've found is our large metal radiators, TVs/microwaves and trying to keep access points discrete.
Although it limits the range, in general there should be a sufficient signal strength (even a full 11MBps) to transmit directly through a wall, with a receiver/transmitter on either side (or thereabouts).
I suggest you try borrow a Wireless PCMCIA card (and laptop, if need be) and a Wireless access point from someone, and try them on either side of a wall. If the buildings are all within line of sighs, repeaters on each building's roof should enable decent signal strength between buildings (once again a quick test with a wireless card a a base station should prove sufficient).
It obviously depends on the size of the building, the distance from the nearest point on the building to adjacent buildings and the position of where you need the PCs to have access, as well as the distances between buildings but you might be fine with simply a repeater on each building (a ring network of sorts, positionally anyway), and access points inside. If they're strong enough through the walls, and have line of sight to each other on adjacent buildings, I don't see that you'd have any problems.
Well, as long as nobody nearby has chalk, anyway...
Jon/Manta
My funny what?
...have /. moderators gone bananas?
What is the point of this post?
/. readers are from a range of countries and most will either not be able to offer advice or the advice given will be of no good.
Has the poster ever thought of IRC? This certainly should not be posted on a major news site. You can just imagine a major news article on BBC asking for hardware retailers.
More people (even if it's only those with computers who download DivX movies) will buy the consoles, and therefore more games will be sold. I for one, will.
Of course people will undoubtedly play pirate games on modded XBoxes but unless Microsoft actually do lose money on each XBox sold, they will still generate revenue from sales of hardware.
Pirating games on the XBox (although damaging financially) is not the same as pirating games on a PC, because the software manufacturer has not necessarily received any income from the sale of hardware.
Also, since most mainstream users will not mod their XBox, I cannot see there being a massive dip in sales of games, due to piracy.
Perhaps if Microsoft were sensible, they'd sell a pre-modified version of the XBox (which could support third party software/etc like mod chips) with a substantial price hike. At least, that way, they would make more money back from hardware sales.