3) Each channel costs the same in bandwidth to broadcast as any other channel, so the cost scales linearly with number of channels broadcast.
Almost, but not quite.
In a digital signal feed, you can add a channel without requiring more bandwidth overall by simply reducing the bitrate of one or more of the other channels. The SUM is limited by physics; the amount allocated to each channel is a decision made by Dish.
I expect that they have two means of adjusting things: an automated system that detects motion artifacts and ups the bitrate on a channel, and a manual override. And I have noticed more artifacts in more channels as they add more channels to each satellite.
I'm hoping that someone from Dish's net ops can add more detail.
... meaning that some people will become Dish-on-demand customers...
It also means that some people will hook their receivers up to the phone line, thus providing all the demographic and viewing data back to Dish, which they can sell to marketers.
Not to mention all the ilicit photos their receivers have been taking with the camera located behind the little plastic window they want you to think is the infrared remote control port.
Regarding "knowing" that VIACOM is at fault, you say "If they watch TV, they do."
We have no way of knowing who is "at fault" based on the public pronouncements of either Dish or Viacom. Viacom says the channels are being "pulled" or "dropped", Dish says the contract to carry them expired. If the latter is true, then VIACOM would be all over Dish if they did NOT stop carrying the signals.
What we are watching is two large children pissing in the sandbox, making life for the rest of us less enjoyable. Viacom puts crawls on its channels telling Dish customers they are losing the channels, Dish covers them up with black bars. Viacom wants money for its IP, Dish tells us that it is "too much" and that some of the channels "aren't of value to Dish customers".
I'd rather Charlie spend his time negotiating for the rights to carry the signals and leave the "value for the customer" evaluations up to the customers.
I'm looking at T-Mobile with their unlimited data plan.
And then you will count the days until your T-Mobile contract expires.
T-Mobile has some odd idea that I called the same non-working phone number in Australia more than a hundred times, and has refused to fix the bill ($230 when it should be about $40). The "service" rep argued with me when I asked to talk to a supervisor, and neither one would tell me the times and dates for these alleged calls.
VoiceStream used to have awful customer support and worse billing, but they were doing better -- until now. They've regressed. And they're giving me "loyalty minutes" because I've been a loyal customer.
Sorry for being OT, but bad word-of-mouth is the only leverage I have on these people, and I told them I'd use it. I'll keep using it until they wake up.
I spent a week in Australia with my phone, and made about a dozen calls. I called T-Mobile to get the charges so I could do my expense report: $230. (The correct charges should be around $40.)
For some reason only they know, they think I made more than 100 one-minute calls (at $1.49/minute) to the same non-working number. The "customer service" (HA!) person would not admit that this seemed odd, and she argued with me when I asked to talk to a supervisor. The supervisor was just as unhelpful.
I don't yet know how many calls or when they were allegedly made, since they wouldn't tell me this information over the phone. I have to wait for my bull, ahem, bill to show up.
They are either fixing the bogus bill, or I'm using this number portability I'm being forced to pay for and taking my business elsewhere.
Just make it illegal to use ANY electronic database to surreptitiously track people.
Umm. Ok. So you use SpeedPass to get through the tollgates on the local freeway, and one month your bill looks higher than normal. You ask them "why is this higher?"
What should they say? "Ummm, you went through 45 dollars worth of tollgates this month, but we cannot tell you which ones". Or would you prefer they say "you went through X ten times, Y eight times, and Z two dozen times?" At least with the latter, you can argue that you've never been to Z so the charge is wrong. With the former, you are left debating how many times you went through something you didn't know you went through.
Besides, it will never happen. There are too many existing card-key and such systems being used as security for those records to ever be illegal.
And if you are hinging your argument on the word "surreptitious", I have no doubt at all that a large number, most, maybe even a majority, of SpeedPass users haven't a clue as to how they work or what kind of data is available. They choose to use the system and they don't know what it does; why would simply not knowing it exists make any significant difference? (Like the arguments made by cellular phone providers that their users don't know they are using the radio and thus have an expectation of privacy when broadcasting their personal details throughout the neighborhood.)
But why is everyone here trying to answer him with things that aren't in the parameter of the original question?
Because the "parameter of the original question", while technically interesting perhaps, and geekily cool, would be the wrong solution for the problem.
A PC-based solution will cost more and be less flexible, and be more complex, than any simple FRS/GMRS/MURS solution. Not only will there be a very high technical support requirement (e.g., what happens when the PC croaks and you need to install the same software on a new one -- is the guy who designed it still available to help, and can the hardware do what it needs to?) but it will require custom hardware configurations and software. FRS/GMRS is a COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) solution. If you break one radio, you go to the local RS or online to Outpost.com, or any of a hundred other sites, and buy a replacement. Cheap.
Part of designing a system is to look at the problem, not just assume that the answer needs to be kewl and rad. Sometimes the right answer is the old, obsolete-looking one.
They are regualted and are only allowed to be used for individual purposes.
FRS is not restricted in purpose. 47CFR95.193 defines the use of FRS, and the only mention of "individual" is:
(a) You may use an FRS unit to conduct two-way voice communications with another person.
There is no limitation as to the purpose of this communications with another person, other than a blanket prohibition on use in connection with a violation of federal, state, or local law. Assuming the stage crew is not supporting a production which violates the law, FRS would be a low-cost solution to this specific problem.
If you want more power to cover a larger area, then MURS is available -- which are the kinds of radios that Wal-mart et.al. use. It, too, is license free.
UserLinux is about a stable, usable business desktop (AFAIK). it is *not* about choice.
Yes, it is about choice, and UserLinux ought not be making the choice of what desktop a person uses. If we want "no choice", we can use Windows.
Including both or more would dilute development efforts,
Nonsense. UserLinux is not about development, it is about users. Users having a choice is a good thing. Putting both in a distribution that is not intended for developers doesn't dilute development.
The biggest complaint I have about RedHat is BlueCurve. I want to be able to use KDE on all of
the systems I have, I don't want to have to deal with a handful of different desktops depending on
which system I am using at the moment. I'm already
dealing with Sun's CDE, SGI's 4Wmd (or whatever
it's called) and KDE. I don't need more, and RedHat sucks for deciding for me that I don't want
KDE.
I think basically what I'm trying to say is that it would take more power to fill a 12 MHZ channel than a 6 MHZ channel.
What do you mean by "fill"? If you mean to produce the same amount of signal covering twice as large an area, then yes, you'd be using twice the power.
But that's only because you chose to use twice the power. If you use the same amount of power over twice the frequency range, then you have the same power but twice the available bandwidth.
Now, someone else commented that signal to noise ratio is proportional to power, and that is relevant to a point. For a pure analog signal, that's relevant.
However, the data signal is, while analog at its heart, still digital. That means you are no longer really concerned with s/n ratios, but with bit error rates. You see, an analog representation of ones and zeros can have quite a bit of noise on it without degrading the encoded digital data.
Here's a thought experiment. You have a system that defines any voltage > 5V as one, less than -5V as 0,
and in between is an error. Your transmitter sends
+-10V signals, and has.1V of noise. No problem. The S/N ratio is 100.
Now cut the sending voltage by 10, but keep the.1 V noise. Your S/N is now 10. You also need an amplifier at the receiver, which amplifies the incoming signal, and noise, by 10. Your S/N is still just 10, but you've not degraded the digital component. Your receiver is seeing 10 +/- 1V for a digital one, -10 +/- 1V for a zero.
And that shows that S/N is not really proportional to power. The S/N changed by a factor of 10, but the power decreased by a factor of 100. The power of a signal is proportional to the square of the current, and the current is proportional to the voltage. Change the voltage by 10, that's a change of 10*10 in the power. (E=IR and P=IIR)
So, yes, if you are operating your system at so low a power that you have a bit error rate that cannot be corrected by error correction codes, then you will need to increase power if you increase bandwidth. But most systems are not operated at that extreme.
When you upload, your cable modem is using its builtin low-power transmitter to push the data onto the wire.
No, I'm sorry, this is just silly. Bandwidth is not related to power. A one milliwatt signal can carry just as much data as a one megawatt signal. This is not why uploads are slower. And the only FCC licensing required for cable-based RF systems are the type certifications that measure radiated signals. You can run an unlicensed megawatt signal into a cable -- as long as you keep it in the cable.
The real reason is the TDMA -- time division multiple access -- used on the upstream. It's not
an issue of the collision of weak signals, the signals would collide no matter how powerfull they were.
...and the nagware-advertising will piss off Joe Sixpack.
Unfortunately, this is unlikely to happen. Joe will see this as helpful and nice, since he doesn't understand how the net works anyway. Oh, no thanks, and he'll click on the "no" button.
It won't be until someone reverse engineers the "redirect flag configuration" that he'll get pissed. I was going to add "that bypasses administrative controls such as admin passwords", but Joe probably won't have set the admin password anyway. When his box starts redirecting all connections to some pron site is when he'll notice there is a problem.
Now, wouldn't it be just grand to find out there is a buffer overflow problem in the external configuration system?
While these politicians are at it, why not mandate fuel governors for all cars to prevent them from speeding?
I'll assume you are asking a serious question.
1. Sometimes there is a REASON to speed. For example, if you get caught in the passing lane when someone enters the road from the left, you may have only one option: speed up to get ahead of who you are passing. The jerk behind you may already be blocking any slowdown, and if you pull off the left side of the road, guess what the guy who now sees you coming is going to do? Right, pull off the (his) right side.
2. Define "speeding". Is that the 25MPH of the residential zone, the 35MPH of the city artery, the 45MPH of the urban edge, or 55MPH of the open road? Or is it 65MPH for the open road? Or is it 75MPH? Or unlimited (as in Montana, I believe it is.)
Do you set it at the maximum open-road limit in the state where the car is sold? What happens when you travel and are now limited to 20MPH slower than everyone else on the highway? That's unsafe. What happens when you travel and are going 20MPH faster than everyone else because you have gotten used to your governor keeping you legal?
And if you can adjust them by state, don't you think the "bad guys" will know how to adjust them, too?
Governers on cars is as bad an idea as remote controlled shut-down systems on gasoline tankers.
I can't figure out if this is a sexist way of voting or not.Will there be a bias for or against women candidates?
I mean, will most folks not vote against a woman so they won't have to hit a woman, or will the first one who does vote against her take her out with one punch?
So, the original poster is saying the problems with diving should be addressed.
Little of deep-sea oceanography is done with divers. They are too expensive and too fragile.
Most of the measurements of the deep-sea are done with cable controlled submersible vehicles, instruments towed behind boats on long cables, or submerged buoys.
Submerged buoys are dropped from boats which leave them in place for six months to a year. They come back and send an acoustic signal that is supposed to trigger a release and the data is supposed to float back to the surface. IF the release hasn't failed, if the boat is in the right place, if they can find it when it pops up, etc. NEPTUNE removes this problem because the data doesn't have to pop back to the surface, it is already on shore.
And yes, real-time is important. If you want to study something you've seen in the current-style buoy data, you have to design a new instrument, have money left in your ship-ops budget to hire time on a boat, drop that instrument, and then hope it comes back alive -- in six to twelve months. NEPTUNE is a major improvement in this process.
However, it may also be that the cost of setting up this network might be better deployed focusing on the actual experiments themselves.
They have been focusing on the experiments for years. The new part of this project is NOT the measurements, it is the connectivity and being able to get large volumes of data back.
It costs a great deal of money to send out ships to tow side-scan sonars and temperature/salinity sensors. It costs a great deal of money to put out current sensors. This means that sampling is done very sparsely, if ever. And the instruments have to be designed to fit their data in limited space.
A wide-bandwidth real-time data stream allows not only more data to be collected, but for data sampling methods to be changed to observe transient phenomena. While we have some understanding of the long-term activities under the water, most of the fun (and change) comes from the transient stuff.
And I'll point out that while the web page comes from U-dub, there are an awful lot of academic and corporate institutions involved in Neptune, so saying that "University of Washington" is doing this is a little insulting.
... you will unwittingly have real email addresses on your website...
No, what's even worse, is there will be bad addresses at someone else's domain. Thus you are pushing spam on innocent sites that may otherwise have no spam at all.
Some idgit has been doing this with two domains I own, and I now get spam addressed to fireplace@... and several other random words. The spam load has gone so high that I can no longer afford to even bounce this crap, since doing that more than doubles the load (receive spam, generate bounce, send bounce, get bounce back from bounce...).
I'd like to thank the person who decided to poison my domains like this, but of course, he's hiding somewhere on the net.
It is the bot-trap of the past. It's called 'wpoison'.
Your version creates allegedly fake addresses in real domains. That's impolite, to say the least. You're poisoning domains that don't belong to you and causing them spam problems. Just like the really swell fellow who has created fake email addresses using randomword@domain.name for two
domains I own.
I have NO idea where you got the factorial thing from.
He's confused this binary problem with a "select n from a set of m" problem, which is factorial. I.e., if you have four unique playing cards and select one at a time, there are 4! different sequences. (Your first choice can be any of 4, your second choice is any of the remaining 3, then 2, then 1 -- 4*3*2*1)
I'd almost say that if a TLD can be handled with a single wildcard, then the domain is not large enough to exist and should be a second level under something else. Even if it is just starting out, it should be run as if it were a significant participant in the net, which means delegation of specific second level entries under that tld.
I won't say anything but quote Mr. Peter Jacobs as
reported here, in a 2001 interview, and again here, in a 2003 interview:
"From
our standpoint, we are designing the software for the 99 percent of the people who don't want to steal the music but instead (want to) use it for
whatever means--for whatever personal use that's allowed by the artist and the record label. The software was designed for those people,
not for the 1 percent who are going to take the lock cutters and cut the lock off and steal music in an unauthorized way."
Oh, okay, I'll say something. In other words, his copy protection is designed to keep people who have no intention of trying to copy the music from copying the music they never intended on copying. It isn't intended on keeping those people who want to copy the music from copying the music, which they can and already are doing.
IANAL, but Mr. Peter Jacobs published remarks about the motives of the grad student involved sound very much like slander (or is it libel?)
I support reasonable increases in gas taxes and vehicle registration fees to pay for the massive road network I enjoy so much.
Unfortunately, in Oregon, such taxes have become decoupled from the source and all wind up in the general fund, or worse, a fund irrelevant to the source.
If you want to have some fun, for a few seconds at least, go to a public meeting where the county or city is proposing a tax increase to pay for roads. Ask them where the gas tax money that was supposed to pay for the roads in the first place went. (In Corvallis, the city meetings in are in
the beautiful downtown firestation, with real brick facade and comfy chairs for all the councillors, to go with the nice wood trim all over the place.)
Well, the solution is to simply take off your tinfoil hat.. while you are driving, at least. Hey, it's not YOUR fault if you set it on the GPS antenna by accident!
It's nobody's business what my packets decode into.
Actually, it is. Or rather, it will be, and you will be glad it will be.
At some point, true QoS will be implemented on the net, because too many people will be too unhappy that their VoIP calls break up and sound crappy, and too many people will be whining that their on-demand movie-over-IP is jerking and drops lots of frames.
At some point, you'll be paying a premium for video and audio bandwidth, as opposed to email or web browsing bandwidth. So, you'll be happy that your ISP knows that your packets are email or web and not streaming Britney Spears music videos which the RIAA will come to arrest you for watching.
Slashdot Mirror
Almost, but not quite.
In a digital signal feed, you can add a channel without requiring more bandwidth overall by simply reducing the bitrate of one or more of the other channels. The SUM is limited by physics; the amount allocated to each channel is a decision made by Dish.
I expect that they have two means of adjusting things: an automated system that detects motion artifacts and ups the bitrate on a channel, and a manual override. And I have noticed more artifacts in more channels as they add more channels to each satellite.
I'm hoping that someone from Dish's net ops can add more detail.
It also means that some people will hook their receivers up to the phone line, thus providing all the demographic and viewing data back to Dish, which they can sell to marketers.
Not to mention all the ilicit photos their receivers have been taking with the camera located behind the little plastic window they want you to think is the infrared remote control port.
We have no way of knowing who is "at fault" based on the public pronouncements of either Dish or Viacom. Viacom says the channels are being "pulled" or "dropped", Dish says the contract to carry them expired. If the latter is true, then VIACOM would be all over Dish if they did NOT stop carrying the signals.
What we are watching is two large children pissing in the sandbox, making life for the rest of us less enjoyable. Viacom puts crawls on its channels telling Dish customers they are losing the channels, Dish covers them up with black bars. Viacom wants money for its IP, Dish tells us that it is "too much" and that some of the channels "aren't of value to Dish customers".
I'd rather Charlie spend his time negotiating for the rights to carry the signals and leave the "value for the customer" evaluations up to the customers.
And then you will count the days until your T-Mobile contract expires.
T-Mobile has some odd idea that I called the same non-working phone number in Australia more than a hundred times, and has refused to fix the bill ($230 when it should be about $40). The "service" rep argued with me when I asked to talk to a supervisor, and neither one would tell me the times and dates for these alleged calls.
VoiceStream used to have awful customer support and worse billing, but they were doing better -- until now. They've regressed. And they're giving me "loyalty minutes" because I've been a loyal customer.
Sorry for being OT, but bad word-of-mouth is the only leverage I have on these people, and I told them I'd use it. I'll keep using it until they wake up.
Well, that's going to leave me out.
I spent a week in Australia with my phone, and made about a dozen calls. I called T-Mobile to get the charges so I could do my expense report: $230. (The correct charges should be around $40.)
For some reason only they know, they think I made more than 100 one-minute calls (at $1.49/minute) to the same non-working number. The "customer service" (HA!) person would not admit that this seemed odd, and she argued with me when I asked to talk to a supervisor. The supervisor was just as unhelpful.
I don't yet know how many calls or when they were allegedly made, since they wouldn't tell me this information over the phone. I have to wait for my bull, ahem, bill to show up.
They are either fixing the bogus bill, or I'm using this number portability I'm being forced to pay for and taking my business elsewhere.
Umm. Ok. So you use SpeedPass to get through the tollgates on the local freeway, and one month your bill looks higher than normal. You ask them "why is this higher?"
What should they say? "Ummm, you went through 45 dollars worth of tollgates this month, but we cannot tell you which ones". Or would you prefer they say "you went through X ten times, Y eight times, and Z two dozen times?" At least with the latter, you can argue that you've never been to Z so the charge is wrong. With the former, you are left debating how many times you went through something you didn't know you went through.
Besides, it will never happen. There are too many existing card-key and such systems being used as security for those records to ever be illegal.
And if you are hinging your argument on the word "surreptitious", I have no doubt at all that a large number, most, maybe even a majority, of SpeedPass users haven't a clue as to how they work or what kind of data is available. They choose to use the system and they don't know what it does; why would simply not knowing it exists make any significant difference? (Like the arguments made by cellular phone providers that their users don't know they are using the radio and thus have an expectation of privacy when broadcasting their personal details throughout the neighborhood.)
It's actually pronounced "throat-wobbler mangrove".
Because the "parameter of the original question", while technically interesting perhaps, and geekily cool, would be the wrong solution for the problem.
A PC-based solution will cost more and be less flexible, and be more complex, than any simple FRS/GMRS/MURS solution. Not only will there be a very high technical support requirement (e.g., what happens when the PC croaks and you need to install the same software on a new one -- is the guy who designed it still available to help, and can the hardware do what it needs to?) but it will require custom hardware configurations and software. FRS/GMRS is a COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) solution. If you break one radio, you go to the local RS or online to Outpost.com, or any of a hundred other sites, and buy a replacement. Cheap.
Part of designing a system is to look at the problem, not just assume that the answer needs to be kewl and rad. Sometimes the right answer is the old, obsolete-looking one.
FRS is not restricted in purpose. 47CFR95.193 defines the use of FRS, and the only mention of "individual" is:
There is no limitation as to the purpose of this communications with another person, other than a blanket prohibition on use in connection with a violation of federal, state, or local law. Assuming the stage crew is not supporting a production which violates the law, FRS would be a low-cost solution to this specific problem.If you want more power to cover a larger area, then MURS is available -- which are the kinds of radios that Wal-mart et.al. use. It, too, is license free.
Yes, it is about choice, and UserLinux ought not be making the choice of what desktop a person uses. If we want "no choice", we can use Windows.
Including both or more would dilute development efforts,
Nonsense. UserLinux is not about development, it is about users. Users having a choice is a good thing. Putting both in a distribution that is not intended for developers doesn't dilute development.
The biggest complaint I have about RedHat is BlueCurve. I want to be able to use KDE on all of the systems I have, I don't want to have to deal with a handful of different desktops depending on which system I am using at the moment. I'm already dealing with Sun's CDE, SGI's 4Wmd (or whatever it's called) and KDE. I don't need more, and RedHat sucks for deciding for me that I don't want KDE.
What do you mean by "fill"? If you mean to produce the same amount of signal covering twice as large an area, then yes, you'd be using twice the power.
But that's only because you chose to use twice the power. If you use the same amount of power over twice the frequency range, then you have the same power but twice the available bandwidth.
Now, someone else commented that signal to noise ratio is proportional to power, and that is relevant to a point. For a pure analog signal, that's relevant. However, the data signal is, while analog at its heart, still digital. That means you are no longer really concerned with s/n ratios, but with bit error rates. You see, an analog representation of ones and zeros can have quite a bit of noise on it without degrading the encoded digital data.
Here's a thought experiment. You have a system that defines any voltage > 5V as one, less than -5V as 0, and in between is an error. Your transmitter sends +-10V signals, and has .1V of noise. No problem. The S/N ratio is 100.
Now cut the sending voltage by 10, but keep the .1 V noise. Your S/N is now 10. You also need an amplifier at the receiver, which amplifies the incoming signal, and noise, by 10. Your S/N is still just 10, but you've not degraded the digital component. Your receiver is seeing 10 +/- 1V for a digital one, -10 +/- 1V for a zero.
And that shows that S/N is not really proportional to power. The S/N changed by a factor of 10, but the power decreased by a factor of 100. The power of a signal is proportional to the square of the current, and the current is proportional to the voltage. Change the voltage by 10, that's a change of 10*10 in the power. (E=IR and P=IIR)
So, yes, if you are operating your system at so low a power that you have a bit error rate that cannot be corrected by error correction codes, then you will need to increase power if you increase bandwidth. But most systems are not operated at that extreme.
No, I'm sorry, this is just silly. Bandwidth is not related to power. A one milliwatt signal can carry just as much data as a one megawatt signal. This is not why uploads are slower. And the only FCC licensing required for cable-based RF systems are the type certifications that measure radiated signals. You can run an unlicensed megawatt signal into a cable -- as long as you keep it in the cable.
The real reason is the TDMA -- time division multiple access -- used on the upstream. It's not an issue of the collision of weak signals, the signals would collide no matter how powerfull they were.
Unfortunately, this is unlikely to happen. Joe will see this as helpful and nice, since he doesn't understand how the net works anyway. Oh, no thanks, and he'll click on the "no" button.
It won't be until someone reverse engineers the "redirect flag configuration" that he'll get pissed. I was going to add "that bypasses administrative controls such as admin passwords", but Joe probably won't have set the admin password anyway. When his box starts redirecting all connections to some pron site is when he'll notice there is a problem.
Now, wouldn't it be just grand to find out there is a buffer overflow problem in the external configuration system?
I'll assume you are asking a serious question.
1. Sometimes there is a REASON to speed. For example, if you get caught in the passing lane when someone enters the road from the left, you may have only one option: speed up to get ahead of who you are passing. The jerk behind you may already be blocking any slowdown, and if you pull off the left side of the road, guess what the guy who now sees you coming is going to do? Right, pull off the (his) right side.
2. Define "speeding". Is that the 25MPH of the residential zone, the 35MPH of the city artery, the 45MPH of the urban edge, or 55MPH of the open road? Or is it 65MPH for the open road? Or is it 75MPH? Or unlimited (as in Montana, I believe it is.)
Do you set it at the maximum open-road limit in the state where the car is sold? What happens when you travel and are now limited to 20MPH slower than everyone else on the highway? That's unsafe. What happens when you travel and are going 20MPH faster than everyone else because you have gotten used to your governor keeping you legal?
And if you can adjust them by state, don't you think the "bad guys" will know how to adjust them, too?
Governers on cars is as bad an idea as remote controlled shut-down systems on gasoline tankers.
I can't figure out if this is a sexist way of voting or not.Will there be a bias for or against women candidates?
I mean, will most folks not vote against a woman so they won't have to hit a woman, or will the first one who does vote against her take her out with one punch?
Little of deep-sea oceanography is done with divers. They are too expensive and too fragile.
Most of the measurements of the deep-sea are done with cable controlled submersible vehicles, instruments towed behind boats on long cables, or submerged buoys.
Submerged buoys are dropped from boats which leave them in place for six months to a year. They come back and send an acoustic signal that is supposed to trigger a release and the data is supposed to float back to the surface. IF the release hasn't failed, if the boat is in the right place, if they can find it when it pops up, etc. NEPTUNE removes this problem because the data doesn't have to pop back to the surface, it is already on shore.
And yes, real-time is important. If you want to study something you've seen in the current-style buoy data, you have to design a new instrument, have money left in your ship-ops budget to hire time on a boat, drop that instrument, and then hope it comes back alive -- in six to twelve months. NEPTUNE is a major improvement in this process.
They have been focusing on the experiments for years. The new part of this project is NOT the measurements, it is the connectivity and being able to get large volumes of data back.
It costs a great deal of money to send out ships to tow side-scan sonars and temperature/salinity sensors. It costs a great deal of money to put out current sensors. This means that sampling is done very sparsely, if ever. And the instruments have to be designed to fit their data in limited space.
A wide-bandwidth real-time data stream allows not only more data to be collected, but for data sampling methods to be changed to observe transient phenomena. While we have some understanding of the long-term activities under the water, most of the fun (and change) comes from the transient stuff.
And I'll point out that while the web page comes from U-dub, there are an awful lot of academic and corporate institutions involved in Neptune, so saying that "University of Washington" is doing this is a little insulting.
No, what's even worse, is there will be bad addresses at someone else's domain. Thus you are pushing spam on innocent sites that may otherwise have no spam at all.
Some idgit has been doing this with two domains I own, and I now get spam addressed to fireplace@... and several other random words. The spam load has gone so high that I can no longer afford to even bounce this crap, since doing that more than doubles the load (receive spam, generate bounce, send bounce, get bounce back from bounce...).
I'd like to thank the person who decided to poison my domains like this, but of course, he's hiding somewhere on the net.
It is the bot-trap of the past. It's called 'wpoison'.
Your version creates allegedly fake addresses in real domains. That's impolite, to say the least. You're poisoning domains that don't belong to you and causing them spam problems. Just like the really swell fellow who has created fake email addresses using randomword@domain.name for two domains I own.
He's confused this binary problem with a "select n from a set of m" problem, which is factorial. I.e., if you have four unique playing cards and
select one at a time, there are 4! different sequences. (Your first choice can be any of 4, your second choice is any of the remaining 3, then 2, then 1 -- 4*3*2*1)
I'd almost say that if a TLD can be handled with a single wildcard, then the domain is not large enough to exist and should be a second level under something else. Even if it is just starting out, it should be run as if it were a significant participant in the net, which means delegation of specific second level entries under that tld.
"From our standpoint, we are designing the software for the 99 percent of the people who don't want to steal the music but instead (want to) use it for whatever means--for whatever personal use that's allowed by the artist and the record label. The software was designed for those people, not for the 1 percent who are going to take the lock cutters and cut the lock off and steal music in an unauthorized way."
Oh, okay, I'll say something. In other words, his copy protection is designed to keep people who have no intention of trying to copy the music from copying the music they never intended on copying. It isn't intended on keeping those people who want to copy the music from copying the music, which they can and already are doing.IANAL, but Mr. Peter Jacobs published remarks about the motives of the grad student involved sound very much like slander (or is it libel?)
Unfortunately, in Oregon, such taxes have become decoupled from the source and all wind up in the general fund, or worse, a fund irrelevant to the source.
If you want to have some fun, for a few seconds at least, go to a public meeting where the county or city is proposing a tax increase to pay for roads. Ask them where the gas tax money that was supposed to pay for the roads in the first place went. (In Corvallis, the city meetings in are in the beautiful downtown firestation, with real brick facade and comfy chairs for all the councillors, to go with the nice wood trim all over the place.)
Well, the solution is to simply take off your tinfoil hat .. while you are driving, at least. Hey, it's not YOUR fault if you set it on the GPS antenna by accident!
Actually, it is. Or rather, it will be, and you will be glad it will be.
At some point, true QoS will be implemented on the net, because too many people will be too unhappy that their VoIP calls break up and sound crappy, and too many people will be whining that their on-demand movie-over-IP is jerking and drops lots of frames.
At some point, you'll be paying a premium for video and audio bandwidth, as opposed to email or web browsing bandwidth. So, you'll be happy that your ISP knows that your packets are email or web and not streaming Britney Spears music videos which the RIAA will come to arrest you for watching.