Maybe you should learn how to disagree without attacking someone, but since you sound like such a charming individual let me explain what I mean so you'll understand. If the capability to search was added, there would be a guaranteed hoard of people taking advantage of the software. Right now BitTorrent is a rather small enterprise compared to other networks like Kazaa, and its usefulness as a large file transfer mechanism is sustained by the way that people are using it. Instead of letting everyone use this service for whatever they please why not maintain it as a tool people use for transfer instead of a mass search engine? There are a few benefits...
Separation of usage and blame. When the program is not helping a user find what he wants, and only to download it, that hardly puts the developers in a position to be held responsible for what is traded.
Less needless traffic. It seems that this system was developed to help people download large files, and most of what would be downloaded would most likely be mp3s. People would use BitTorrent because it's less congested than other P2P networks, then boom, it isn't. Yeah yeah, the more users, the larger the web, but it wouldn't grow larger than the amount of traffic.
As was mentioned somewhere in these comments, BitTorrent resembles FTP more than anything else. As soon as Bram gets back to us on his real intents for his software we'll know if that's his aim or not, but judging by it's progress so far...
I hardly consider careful discretion a restriction of rights.
Just my thoughts, but I think adding searching would make BitTorrent appear more like a P2P network for illegal files if a user had the ability to search the whole network. When you have to find the torrent file as it is now, I think that it keeps more people honest by taking convenience out of the equation. That way, if you want a redhat ISO, you get it, but if you're searching for Enter Sandman, the MTV Icons won't come back after you.
To tell you the truth I quit using Dreamweaver after I found myself counting literally hundreds of font tags in its output. I will concede that people may get it to produce clean output but in my experience it produced grotesque code, so I quit using it. The only other people I know personally who use it were incompetent (by that I mean they couldn't code by hand if their life depended on it) and so I concluded after a time that a WYSIWYG editor is not the tool of choice for a picky developer. But, as I said way up there somewhere I've barely been paid to do this for a year now.
Even if I don't understand the tool, I understand the fundamentals that the tool brings to the user, and that's what's important.
Since they struck an agreement with these record companies. Probably in there somwhere it says "yo don't take advantage of us and we'll cut you off if you let it happen"
Of course, that's only an issue if you've downloaded music from the iTunes store.
If there were a place to go where I could see exactly how IE works, why it renders this like that, why CSS doesn't work and a quick efficient way around it, etc., then I would be more satisfied than I am now. I can go to the W3 and find out exactly how all this shit works together, and for the few discrepancies that do exist, I can look at Mozilla's site to find them. I'm not saying that I've done it more than once but when Mozilla has a problem I'll bet you my paycheck I can fix it. The only way around IE is to load up Dreamweaver and WYSIWYG my way out of the problem, and I see that as a horrible solution. It's another prime example of deviant application!
Do you notice how many font tags and needless stuff is in the output of a WYSIWYG editor? I can write a set of attributes once in a stylesheet for <p> for example, or even a class, and it will appear the same way every single time. Or, alternatively, I could have the editor use the deprecated <font> tag every single time I encounter a <p>. That makes no sense, and there have been documented, widespead advancements that continue to go un-freaking-noticed by companies because it would most likely require some work.
This brings me back to my original point in my first post which you ignored, people and companies who are lazy are the ones who stifle innovation. It wasn't meant to be a M$ bashing post, although sometimes I think the anti-MS-bashers are worse than the MS bashers themselves. If there is an organization that stifles innovation and the people do not work around the companies shortcomings, then yes, development and advancement of technology will crawl.
I beg to differ. If they truly didn't see it coming then they should have. How do you think movies and software were shared before? FTP, IRC... the only thing new about P2P is the popularity. People working for/developing ISPs and networks did know that things are traded illegally on the internet, and should have forseen more bandwidth equaling more piracy, and there fore more usage, almost only because it's quicker and easier.
What, do you think people will just follow the rules all of the sudden? The percentage of people acting illegally has changed more than the amount of stuff each person transfers.
If you design a website according to spec, you're going to have close to 95% (i.e. IE users) of web browsers incorrectly displaying the website. I HATE this. I am new to web development in general, I've barely got a year of programming behind me and I find it easiest when I can read exactly what I can/can't or should/shouldn't use. I've written pages that render perfectly under Gecko and KHTML but whatever pile of ass that MS is using makes it look horrible, and I must rework.
Ah, but we can choose! If it made a damn bit of difference to the people attached to those web browsers they might complain or outright switch. But the inconvenience or ignorance of switching drives people to stay where they are, comfortably annoying those of us who have a hard enough time learning stuff, let alone learning it correctly then incorrectly.
It seems to me that these ISPs are Internet Service Providers. If people are using bandwidth why are they complaining? I'd also like to know why they think file sharing will triple next year.
It says this in the article but if they want to stop people from using "all" of the bandwidth and pull them off the all-you-can-eat plan. There's a problem with this though. Who will accept having a limit on their internet access? I know it drives me nuts when the dumbasses on my floor download 10-15 movies a night between them all and I can't get a single SSH session to behave without some serious latency, but I'd rather deal with pulling their cables out of the wall than dealing with an ISP limiting my use of their services when they previously were not.
Hmm now that's what caught my eye. I believe they said
...the ministry has agreed to take on service and support issues related to the PCs.
This could get interesting... I know Wal-Mart sells headless Linux boxes for $200 but the only people that buy them are guys who already run Linux. The support could persuade a LOT more people into using Linux.
It's still stupid though. If nVidia really wants to appear the best then there's not much we can do to stop them. The people who buy nVidia cards are not going to drop everything they're doing and boycott because of some pixel shaders or something.
I read a while back when they altered the clipping planes of some test to enhance the score, but it left hideous effects on the screen. The pdf won't load but if this is the same thing then it's old news. Add that to the fact that benchmark alteration is quite common. Who plays fair and makes money anyway?
See, if your office area was in your kitchen or the bathroom you'd have a very good point.
My dad used the woman to do just that. When I came home from school last may we got a nice long piece of cat-5 and draped it over doorways and left it on the floor. The first time she came upstairs she said "get rid of that...now" and poof, we'd bought the AP and cards in advance and it was gone in an hour. Still, even though we have a wireless network now doesn't mean that ethernet cable is obsolete, far from it. We have two PCs and two macs, and even the fabled 54Mbps pales in comparison to the 10 to 300 MBps we regularly get out of our gig/100 ethernet connections.
Back to my point. I live with the same restrictions that you have, I just think that physical cable is not too much to ask for large transfers...get up in your attic, you can string your house up pretty nice with a day or two of work. I'll do it for you if you wave the billz in my face!
Re:Great Refutation
on
Gator Examined
·
· Score: 3, Funny
"He's only touching a part of the elephant."
I was gonna say, that is the weirdest thing I've heard all week. What the hell does that mean? Is that a real saying? Which part is he touching?
You know what, my bad. First I forgot where I was posting: anyone who knows what a megabit is probably isn't a casual user as I mentioned above. My mess of crap is still small enough where I can plug my laptop in when I need to dump gigz of stuff. Hey I'm all for a huge LAN on the way to my job or wherever, but you work out the details and I'll pay the monthly fee!!
If you NEED that bandwidth...
on
802.11g Slows Down
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Just plug in a cable. While I admit (by the time this posts, like seven other people before me) that knocking it down below one half of the original throughput is weird, 54Mbps is not neccessary. If I need 54Mbps I'll just grab an ethernet cable.
Normal/casual connections need no more than a megabit per second anyway. Browsing, SSH, IM etc does not require a enormous connection. Maybe if there were a "safe mode" there would be both safety for 11b and speed when only 11g is present in the area.
I'd be eager to agree with this theory but I am still not satisfied:
How does the water traverse this continuum? What is the effect on the matter transitioning into earlier from later? Is if there is a change in time there must be a change in position. Perhaps someone should drop food coloring into the stream of later and observe the color's motion around the waterfall/waterrise/elefall.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe you should learn how to disagree without attacking someone, but since you sound like such a charming individual let me explain what I mean so you'll understand. If the capability to search was added, there would be a guaranteed hoard of people taking advantage of the software. Right now BitTorrent is a rather small enterprise compared to other networks like Kazaa, and its usefulness as a large file transfer mechanism is sustained by the way that people are using it. Instead of letting everyone use this service for whatever they please why not maintain it as a tool people use for transfer instead of a mass search engine? There are a few benefits...
I hardly consider careful discretion a restriction of rights.
Once I read thorugh the articles I lost interest...it must have been lost in the translation=D
Just my thoughts, but I think adding searching would make BitTorrent appear more like a P2P network for illegal files if a user had the ability to search the whole network. When you have to find the torrent file as it is now, I think that it keeps more people honest by taking convenience out of the equation. That way, if you want a redhat ISO, you get it, but if you're searching for Enter Sandman, the MTV Icons won't come back after you.
English versions of the japanese sites
To tell you the truth I quit using Dreamweaver after I found myself counting literally hundreds of font tags in its output. I will concede that people may get it to produce clean output but in my experience it produced grotesque code, so I quit using it. The only other people I know personally who use it were incompetent (by that I mean they couldn't code by hand if their life depended on it) and so I concluded after a time that a WYSIWYG editor is not the tool of choice for a picky developer. But, as I said way up there somewhere I've barely been paid to do this for a year now.
Even if I don't understand the tool, I understand the fundamentals that the tool brings to the user, and that's what's important.
Except Rob is the questioneer and Cliff posted the story...
Since they struck an agreement with these record companies. Probably in there somwhere it says "yo don't take advantage of us and we'll cut you off if you let it happen"
Of course, that's only an issue if you've downloaded music from the iTunes store.
I do not like it, and here's why:
If there were a place to go where I could see exactly how IE works, why it renders this like that, why CSS doesn't work and a quick efficient way around it, etc., then I would be more satisfied than I am now. I can go to the W3 and find out exactly how all this shit works together, and for the few discrepancies that do exist, I can look at Mozilla's site to find them. I'm not saying that I've done it more than once but when Mozilla has a problem I'll bet you my paycheck I can fix it. The only way around IE is to load up Dreamweaver and WYSIWYG my way out of the problem, and I see that as a horrible solution. It's another prime example of deviant application!
Do you notice how many font tags and needless stuff is in the output of a WYSIWYG editor? I can write a set of attributes once in a stylesheet for <p> for example, or even a class, and it will appear the same way every single time. Or, alternatively, I could have the editor use the deprecated <font> tag every single time I encounter a <p>. That makes no sense, and there have been documented, widespead advancements that continue to go un-freaking-noticed by companies because it would most likely require some work.
This brings me back to my original point in my first post which you ignored, people and companies who are lazy are the ones who stifle innovation. It wasn't meant to be a M$ bashing post, although sometimes I think the anti-MS-bashers are worse than the MS bashers themselves. If there is an organization that stifles innovation and the people do not work around the companies shortcomings, then yes, development and advancement of technology will crawl.
I beg to differ. If they truly didn't see it coming then they should have. How do you think movies and software were shared before? FTP, IRC... the only thing new about P2P is the popularity. People working for/developing ISPs and networks did know that things are traded illegally on the internet, and should have forseen more bandwidth equaling more piracy, and there fore more usage, almost only because it's quicker and easier.
What, do you think people will just follow the rules all of the sudden? The percentage of people acting illegally has changed more than the amount of stuff each person transfers.
People and companies do
If you design a website according to spec, you're going to have close to 95% (i.e. IE users) of web browsers incorrectly displaying the website. I HATE this. I am new to web development in general, I've barely got a year of programming behind me and I find it easiest when I can read exactly what I can/can't or should/shouldn't use. I've written pages that render perfectly under Gecko and KHTML but whatever pile of ass that MS is using makes it look horrible, and I must rework.
Ah, but we can choose! If it made a damn bit of difference to the people attached to those web browsers they might complain or outright switch. But the inconvenience or ignorance of switching drives people to stay where they are, comfortably annoying those of us who have a hard enough time learning stuff, let alone learning it correctly then incorrectly.
3. Insane court battles so you don't have to say "oops I guess we should have anticipated this"
It seems to me that these ISPs are Internet Service Providers. If people are using bandwidth why are they complaining? I'd also like to know why they think file sharing will triple next year.
It says this in the article but if they want to stop people from using "all" of the bandwidth and pull them off the all-you-can-eat plan. There's a problem with this though. Who will accept having a limit on their internet access? I know it drives me nuts when the dumbasses on my floor download 10-15 movies a night between them all and I can't get a single SSH session to behave without some serious latency, but I'd rather deal with pulling their cables out of the wall than dealing with an ISP limiting my use of their services when they previously were not.
You bastard =D
I don't think he means cheat as in alter gameplay so much as altering the X-Box as a product itself.
Hmm now that's what caught my eye. I believe they said
This could get interesting... I know Wal-Mart sells headless Linux boxes for $200 but the only people that buy them are guys who already run Linux. The support could persuade a LOT more people into using Linux.
It's still stupid though. If nVidia really wants to appear the best then there's not much we can do to stop them. The people who buy nVidia cards are not going to drop everything they're doing and boycott because of some pixel shaders or something.
I read a while back when they altered the clipping planes of some test to enhance the score, but it left hideous effects on the screen. The pdf won't load but if this is the same thing then it's old news. Add that to the fact that benchmark alteration is quite common. Who plays fair and makes money anyway?
See, if your office area was in your kitchen or the bathroom you'd have a very good point.
My dad used the woman to do just that. When I came home from school last may we got a nice long piece of cat-5 and draped it over doorways and left it on the floor. The first time she came upstairs she said "get rid of that...now" and poof, we'd bought the AP and cards in advance and it was gone in an hour. Still, even though we have a wireless network now doesn't mean that ethernet cable is obsolete, far from it. We have two PCs and two macs, and even the fabled 54Mbps pales in comparison to the 10 to 300 MBps we regularly get out of our gig/100 ethernet connections.
Back to my point. I live with the same restrictions that you have, I just think that physical cable is not too much to ask for large transfers...get up in your attic, you can string your house up pretty nice with a day or two of work. I'll do it for you if you wave the billz in my face!
I was gonna say, that is the weirdest thing I've heard all week. What the hell does that mean? Is that a real saying? Which part is he touching?
It's a hash here too, but also a "pound" sign (don't know why) on touch-tone phones and an abbreviation for "number" like #3.
As if Windows doesn't have enough bugs in it, fill the hardware with a few hundred and you're set!
You know what, my bad. First I forgot where I was posting: anyone who knows what a megabit is probably isn't a casual user as I mentioned above. My mess of crap is still small enough where I can plug my laptop in when I need to dump gigz of stuff. Hey I'm all for a huge LAN on the way to my job or wherever, but you work out the details and I'll pay the monthly fee!!
Just plug in a cable. While I admit (by the time this posts, like seven other people before me) that knocking it down below one half of the original throughput is weird, 54Mbps is not neccessary. If I need 54Mbps I'll just grab an ethernet cable.
Normal/casual connections need no more than a megabit per second anyway. Browsing, SSH, IM etc does not require a enormous connection. Maybe if there were a "safe mode" there would be both safety for 11b and speed when only 11g is present in the area.
I don't know whether you mean the porn or the traffic...
I'd be eager to agree with this theory but I am still not satisfied:
How does the water traverse this continuum? What is the effect on the matter transitioning into earlier from later? Is if there is a change in time there must be a change in position. Perhaps someone should drop food coloring into the stream of later and observe the color's motion around the waterfall/waterrise/elefall.
Or let's blow this thing up, like I said before.
omg i was joking. Sorry...