56K connects at 48,000 on a good day. That's about 5.2k/sec on throughput.
A T1 is 1.54megabits. Divided by 20 yields 77,000. Thats about 8k/sec on throughput.
How is 1/20 of a T1 slower than 56k mr math?
Also, do you have any familiarity with how wireless works, in that cells can overlap, and not everone has to use the same one? Just because it has a 15 mile range doesn't mean that everone within 15 miles is forced to use the same antenna. And you're assuming a 100% adoption rate.. not even TVs are that prevalent.
In short, your math is... different from what I would use.
There is no such thing as an OC38, is the point of the original post. You could have an OC-36, or an OC-48, but saying you have OC-38 is like saying you have a 3.2 cylinder engine. It's possible, but highly unlikely.
If your knowledge of networking comes from doing bandwidth tests on DSLreports, you might want to do a bit more research on how it all works.
Are not the sole solution, if they are a solution at all.
It's one thing to say "Users should be able to pick strong passwords, made of varying characters, and remember them without writing them down." As most of us who have actually been involved in implementing this, it doesn't quite work. This is just like saying "Humanity should be comprised of responsible, mature, and free-thinking people" - nice in concept, but a little difficult to enforce.
With certificates, secure tokens, biometrics, and image based passwords (as opposed to text) this problem will finally be solved. I think it's sad that the security community has been willing to rail against the stupidity of users for 30 years instead of coming to accept the fact that people like simplicity, not security, and finding ways to make passwords secure AND simple.
We can bitch and moan about passwords all we want, but for a 30 year old system that has had no major revisions except for how they are stored, passwords are woefully outdated and inadequate as an authentication method.
Slashdot Mirror
Because XP is a lot harder to install than *nix? How can you even say that with a straight face?
56K connects at 48,000 on a good day. That's about 5.2k/sec on throughput.
A T1 is 1.54megabits. Divided by 20 yields 77,000. Thats about 8k/sec on throughput.
How is 1/20 of a T1 slower than 56k mr math?
Also, do you have any familiarity with how wireless works, in that cells can overlap, and not everone has to use the same one? Just because it has a 15 mile range doesn't mean that everone within 15 miles is forced to use the same antenna. And you're assuming a 100% adoption rate.. not even TVs are that prevalent.
In short, your math is ... different from what I would use.
Download the Nimo codec pack here, and you won't have this problem.
There is no such thing as an OC38, is the point of the original post. You could have an OC-36, or an OC-48, but saying you have OC-38 is like saying you have a 3.2 cylinder engine. It's possible, but highly unlikely.
If your knowledge of networking comes from doing bandwidth tests on DSLreports, you might want to do a bit more research on how it all works.
Are not the sole solution, if they are a solution at all. It's one thing to say "Users should be able to pick strong passwords, made of varying characters, and remember them without writing them down." As most of us who have actually been involved in implementing this, it doesn't quite work. This is just like saying "Humanity should be comprised of responsible, mature, and free-thinking people" - nice in concept, but a little difficult to enforce. With certificates, secure tokens, biometrics, and image based passwords (as opposed to text) this problem will finally be solved. I think it's sad that the security community has been willing to rail against the stupidity of users for 30 years instead of coming to accept the fact that people like simplicity, not security, and finding ways to make passwords secure AND simple. We can bitch and moan about passwords all we want, but for a 30 year old system that has had no major revisions except for how they are stored, passwords are woefully outdated and inadequate as an authentication method.