Your fax machine probably won't work over your VOIP either (mine doesn't).
To help on bandwidth, your router assumes that what it's sending in VOIP packets is voice. Data transmission uses different frequencies (and is already compressed pretty well), so the extra compression on top of that (which uses some shortcuts based on the assumption that it's compressing voice) makes the signal uninterpretable on the receiving end.
Vonage will sell you a separate, dedicated fax line at $9.95/month, which I assume is just a separate line that doesn't compress under the assumption that what it's transmitting is voice. To help with this, it may also add latency to the transmission, which while incredibly annoying with voice transmissions, is probably no problem when you're sending a fax.
Just because something is ultimately supported by taxes doesn't mean that it isn't free. Public education is free, travel on (most) public roads is free, fire and police protection are free - you are entitled to them whether you actually pay the taxes that support them or not.
You can receive 911 service even if you do not pay for phone service, and thus do not pay the tax supporting the 911 service. Getting a service you are not paying for is FREE (as in beer).
911 is a free product - so get your free 911 landline, then get VOIP phone service.
Also, 99.4% reliability is perfectly fine for many users - like me. I have a cell phone (actually, two, with different providers) and VOIP. If for some reason my VOIP phone isn't working, I've got my cell phone.
Also, I'd be curious as to how they determined 99.4% reliability. Was that.6% of outage due ONLY to times when vonage was out, or did that also include ANY time the end user was unable to make a call - be it power outage, cable outage, etc.
I've had vonage for months, and the only times it hasn't worked for me were when the power was out or when the cable was out. My cell phone worked fine in either case.
"I am dismissing your traffic citation. However, I am finding you guilty of unauthorized access of a computer network, and sentenceing you to 5 years in prison. Bailiff!"
look at what happened in illinois a couple years back. when the state did some dna testing on inmates, they found out they had over 100 people on death row who were innocent.
Illinois had a few people on Death Row who was shown to be innocent via DNA testing. (Actually, I think it was just one, but it could have been a coule more.) George Ryan, then governor before being forced out due to corruption, determined that the death penalty system in Illinois was inherently unfair, and commuted the death sentences for EVERYONE on death row to life in prison, which was about 100 people, shortly before his term was over. Almost all of them were guilty (they stayed in prison, just wern't going to be executed anymore), although he did pardon a few as well.
Sounds like you need one other guy to not sign the contract, and tell them to fix it or you both leave. They probably can't handle losing 20% of their work force.
What I'd like to know is, if they fire you for not signing it, are you able to collect unemployment, or were you terminated with cause?
The Union contract stated the low end quota, of 200 parts. They did not want anyone doing more.
One of the strongest forces pushing american manufacturing jobs out of the country is Union BS.
When Unions protect workers frm unreasonable working conditions, or an unsafe environment, they're doing what we need unions to do. When they're trying to make sure their members have to be paid whether they actually work to capacity or not, they're just stealing from the rest of us.
Now that I know this, I would like a lot more commercials about:
- Feminine products that reduce the frequency of menstraul cycles - Public service announcements regarding the importance of the low oil pressure indicator light - The How-To's of toilet use: Look at toilet before use. If the seat is up, lower it, without comment. - Getting what you want by actually saying what you want - Weight Loss Success with the Microwaveable Frozen Food diet - Beer: The new Slim Fast - Top 10 Health Benefits of Breast Implants - New Cure for Erictile Dysfunction: The Silent Treatment
I mean, since I'm fast forwarding through these things anyway, might as well give relevant information to the people actually watching the commercials.
They were doing this when we were there in April. We had tickets that were a year or two old. We didn't have to scan our fingers.
DRM support good. DRM on consumer product bad.
on
DRM Advocate Violates DRM
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
It is extremely important that we continue to build a hardware infrastructure capable of enforcing rigid DRM. This enables me to do things like, for example, prepare a confidential document, send it to someone, and have it NOT be copyable.
But the availability of the technology is a separate issue from the use of the technology - something bittorrent whoring slashdot users should understand easily, but apparently seem to have a brain-freeze when applying the concept to DRM.
Just as we don't accept the argument that bittorrent is illegal merely because it can be used for illegal activity, or is in fact mostly used for illegal activity, we should not also label DRM bad just because it can be used for bad purposes.
DRM doesn't stop you from copying your music. Music distributors putting DRM on the music is what stops you.
Wither the technology is at fault or the people who use the technology inappropriately are at fault. We can't have it one way when we like the technology and the other way when we don't.
We know that spammers are smart, and thus hard to catch/stop. We also know that the people who respond to spam are dumb, or they wouldn't do it. Since they're dumb, they're much easier to catch.
Seems the obvious solution here is that if you respond to spam, we shoot you. This should quickly stop people from responding to spam, and thus make it unprofitable for people to send spam in the first place.
As an added bonus, more oxygen for the rest of us.
If your audience is mostly sci-fi nerds, and you want to put on a program targetted at them, and you want to make sure that as many of them as possible are going to be home to watch it, Friday night is definitely a good time for the show. The only time that might be better would be Saturday night. Or New Year's Eve.
There are two things that are necessary for making a car "go":
You need some energy for the engine, and you need some way to store that energy in a manner that you can PUT IN THE CAR.
You can't simply say that coal->electricity->hydrogen->electricity->kinetic is always worse than coal->electicity->kinetic. That' doesn't tell the whole story. The whole story is:
(something)->electricity in power grid->hydrogen in fuel tank->kinetic energy from combustion engine
vs.
(something)->electricity in power grid->electricity in batteries in car->kinetic energy from electric engine
Is there an extra effeciency penalty for going from electricty to hydrogen to engine instead of electricity to engine? Sure. But there's also an effeciency penalty in lugging around a ton of batteries in your car. For the whole process, converting electricity to hydrogen and back may be more efficient than trying to store electricty in batteries in the car, depending on how good we get at making hydrogen and how good we get at making batteries light.
Lots of people think OPEC is a cartel designed to artificially raise the price of oil. This may hav been true in the 70's, but it's not true now. Now, OPEC's main function is to keep the price of oil below $50/barrel, because the oil nations know that the higher the price of oil, the more attractive alternative feul technologies become.
They want to get as much per barrel of oil as possible, but NOT so much that people start spending money on ways to use less oil. OPEC is just as scared of high gas prices as the rest of us - so much so that they've aleady set the production quotas for each of the member countries so high that they've all pretty much maxed out their production.
The real problem, though, isn't PRODUCTION capacity - it's REFINING capacity. That's the bottleneck, that's where the higher gas prices are coming from, and that's something OPEC doesn't really have any control over. Problem is that building new refineries is EXPENSIVE, and takes a long time, and ultimately just lowers the price you can charge for the oil produicts you're refining.
GPRS/EDGE/3g/future can (and initially will) pick up the slack.
What do you mean, pick up the slack? WiFi is dead because cellular broadband is here now, and it works.
I have EVDO broadband cellular modem service through Verizon. It costs me $80 per month flat, and gets me 3 Mbps. The modem is $100 with the plan.
It's NEW technology, and works currently in 43 markets. Sprint and others are coming out with competing products, so as with regular cellular service, we can expect the $80/month to come down in price as the networks get established and more people start using them.
Why would a munincipality biuld a wireless network when there's a technological equivalent already there? At the very least, why build munincipal wireless when you could build munincipal cellular?
So shouldn't these people be charged for these crimes, and not for using a technology that makes these crimes possible?
The guy isn't being charged for using Wi-Fi. He's being charged for using someone ELSE'S Wi-Fi without their permission. Your examples ALL support this action, because in all three cases, it is also ILLEGAL to use someone ELSE'S mailbox, or someone ELSE'S computer, or someone ELSE'S telephone without their permission.
Trafficing in child pornography, stealing credit card info, and sending death threats are all crimes. Using someone else's property is ALSO a crime, because using someone else's property to commit those crimes is WORSE than just comitting the crimes themselves, as you're basically trying to frame someone else to take the fall for your crime.
No, it's not. Sound interference coming into their room doesn't propogate up the cable connection, using the open WiFi to get to the internet does.
The best analogy to going in an open access point is using a universal remote to change the channel on your neighbor's TV. Just because their cable box will allow any universal remote to communicate with it doesn't mean it's OK for you to use it.
Slashdot Mirror
Your fax machine probably won't work over your VOIP either (mine doesn't).
To help on bandwidth, your router assumes that what it's sending in VOIP packets is voice. Data transmission uses different frequencies (and is already compressed pretty well), so the extra compression on top of that (which uses some shortcuts based on the assumption that it's compressing voice) makes the signal uninterpretable on the receiving end.
Vonage will sell you a separate, dedicated fax line at $9.95/month, which I assume is just a separate line that doesn't compress under the assumption that what it's transmitting is voice. To help with this, it may also add latency to the transmission, which while incredibly annoying with voice transmissions, is probably no problem when you're sending a fax.
Just because something is ultimately supported by taxes doesn't mean that it isn't free. Public education is free, travel on (most) public roads is free, fire and police protection are free - you are entitled to them whether you actually pay the taxes that support them or not.
You can receive 911 service even if you do not pay for phone service, and thus do not pay the tax supporting the 911 service. Getting a service you are not paying for is FREE (as in beer).
911 is a free product - so get your free 911 landline, then get VOIP phone service.
.6% of outage due ONLY to times when vonage was out, or did that also include ANY time the end user was unable to make a call - be it power outage, cable outage, etc.
Also, 99.4% reliability is perfectly fine for many users - like me. I have a cell phone (actually, two, with different providers) and VOIP. If for some reason my VOIP phone isn't working, I've got my cell phone.
Also, I'd be curious as to how they determined 99.4% reliability. Was that
I've had vonage for months, and the only times it hasn't worked for me were when the power was out or when the cable was out. My cell phone worked fine in either case.
"I am dismissing your traffic citation. However, I am finding you guilty of unauthorized access of a computer network, and sentenceing you to 5 years in prison. Bailiff!"
look at what happened in illinois a couple years back. when the state did some dna testing on inmates, they found out they had over 100 people on death row who were innocent.
Illinois had a few people on Death Row who was shown to be innocent via DNA testing. (Actually, I think it was just one, but it could have been a coule more.) George Ryan, then governor before being forced out due to corruption, determined that the death penalty system in Illinois was inherently unfair, and commuted the death sentences for EVERYONE on death row to life in prison, which was about 100 people, shortly before his term was over. Almost all of them were guilty (they stayed in prison, just wern't going to be executed anymore), although he did pardon a few as well.
My refrigerator has Internet, but my ice cream keeps melting.
Sounds like you need one other guy to not sign the contract, and tell them to fix it or you both leave. They probably can't handle losing 20% of their work force.
What I'd like to know is, if they fire you for not signing it, are you able to collect unemployment, or were you terminated with cause?
The Union contract stated the low end quota, of 200 parts. They did not want anyone doing more.
One of the strongest forces pushing american manufacturing jobs out of the country is Union BS.
When Unions protect workers frm unreasonable working conditions, or an unsafe environment, they're doing what we need unions to do. When they're trying to make sure their members have to be paid whether they actually work to capacity or not, they're just stealing from the rest of us.
Looks like the 419 scammers submitted the 419 baiters' website to Slashdot.
Anybody got a documentary on how to get your wife to steal the children and run away?
Now that I know this, I would like a lot more commercials about:
- Feminine products that reduce the frequency of menstraul cycles
- Public service announcements regarding the importance of the low oil pressure indicator light
- The How-To's of toilet use: Look at toilet before use. If the seat is up, lower it, without comment.
- Getting what you want by actually saying what you want
- Weight Loss Success with the Microwaveable Frozen Food diet
- Beer: The new Slim Fast
- Top 10 Health Benefits of Breast Implants
- New Cure for Erictile Dysfunction: The Silent Treatment
I mean, since I'm fast forwarding through these things anyway, might as well give relevant information to the people actually watching the commercials.
It may take a woman to ask for directions, but it takes a man to understand them.
Cockprints.
They were doing this when we were there in April. We had tickets that were a year or two old. We didn't have to scan our fingers.
It is extremely important that we continue to build a hardware infrastructure capable of enforcing rigid DRM. This enables me to do things like, for example, prepare a confidential document, send it to someone, and have it NOT be copyable.
But the availability of the technology is a separate issue from the use of the technology - something bittorrent whoring slashdot users should understand easily, but apparently seem to have a brain-freeze when applying the concept to DRM.
Just as we don't accept the argument that bittorrent is illegal merely because it can be used for illegal activity, or is in fact mostly used for illegal activity, we should not also label DRM bad just because it can be used for bad purposes.
DRM doesn't stop you from copying your music. Music distributors putting DRM on the music is what stops you.
Wither the technology is at fault or the people who use the technology inappropriately are at fault. We can't have it one way when we like the technology and the other way when we don't.
We know that spammers are smart, and thus hard to catch/stop. We also know that the people who respond to spam are dumb, or they wouldn't do it. Since they're dumb, they're much easier to catch.
Seems the obvious solution here is that if you respond to spam, we shoot you. This should quickly stop people from responding to spam, and thus make it unprofitable for people to send spam in the first place.
As an added bonus, more oxygen for the rest of us.
If your audience is mostly sci-fi nerds, and you want to put on a program targetted at them, and you want to make sure that as many of them as possible are going to be home to watch it, Friday night is definitely a good time for the show. The only time that might be better would be Saturday night. Or New Year's Eve.
There are two things that are necessary for making a car "go":
You need some energy for the engine, and you need some way to store that energy in a manner that you can PUT IN THE CAR.
You can't simply say that coal->electricity->hydrogen->electricity->kinetic is always worse than coal->electicity->kinetic. That' doesn't tell the whole story. The whole story is:
(something)->electricity in power grid->hydrogen in fuel tank->kinetic energy from combustion engine
vs.
(something)->electricity in power grid->electricity in batteries in car->kinetic energy from electric engine
Is there an extra effeciency penalty for going from electricty to hydrogen to engine instead of electricity to engine? Sure. But there's also an effeciency penalty in lugging around a ton of batteries in your car. For the whole process, converting electricity to hydrogen and back may be more efficient than trying to store electricty in batteries in the car, depending on how good we get at making hydrogen and how good we get at making batteries light.
Lots of people think OPEC is a cartel designed to artificially raise the price of oil. This may hav been true in the 70's, but it's not true now. Now, OPEC's main function is to keep the price of oil below $50/barrel, because the oil nations know that the higher the price of oil, the more attractive alternative feul technologies become.
They want to get as much per barrel of oil as possible, but NOT so much that people start spending money on ways to use less oil. OPEC is just as scared of high gas prices as the rest of us - so much so that they've aleady set the production quotas for each of the member countries so high that they've all pretty much maxed out their production.
The real problem, though, isn't PRODUCTION capacity - it's REFINING capacity. That's the bottleneck, that's where the higher gas prices are coming from, and that's something OPEC doesn't really have any control over. Problem is that building new refineries is EXPENSIVE, and takes a long time, and ultimately just lowers the price you can charge for the oil produicts you're refining.
There's no reason to - DVDs are better *AND* cheaper.
Of course, that analogy doesn't apply to digital television. Better, but not cheaper.
Slashdot is not a waste.
Congratulations. You're on the gcc mailing list and the rest of us must now bow before your mad news reading skills. You are truly one to behold.
If you think that's impressive, you should see how entertaining he is at parties.
GPRS/EDGE/3g/future can (and initially will) pick up the slack.
What do you mean, pick up the slack? WiFi is dead because cellular broadband is here now, and it works.
I have EVDO broadband cellular modem service through Verizon. It costs me $80 per month flat, and gets me 3 Mbps. The modem is $100 with the plan.
It's NEW technology, and works currently in 43 markets. Sprint and others are coming out with competing products, so as with regular cellular service, we can expect the $80/month to come down in price as the networks get established and more people start using them.
Why would a munincipality biuld a wireless network when there's a technological equivalent already there? At the very least, why build munincipal wireless when you could build munincipal cellular?
So shouldn't these people be charged for these crimes, and not for using a technology that makes these crimes possible?
The guy isn't being charged for using Wi-Fi. He's being charged for using someone ELSE'S Wi-Fi without their permission. Your examples ALL support this action, because in all three cases, it is also ILLEGAL to use someone ELSE'S mailbox, or someone ELSE'S computer, or someone ELSE'S telephone without their permission.
Trafficing in child pornography, stealing credit card info, and sending death threats are all crimes. Using someone else's property is ALSO a crime, because using someone else's property to commit those crimes is WORSE than just comitting the crimes themselves, as you're basically trying to frame someone else to take the fall for your crime.
No, it's not. Sound interference coming into their room doesn't propogate up the cable connection, using the open WiFi to get to the internet does.
The best analogy to going in an open access point is using a universal remote to change the channel on your neighbor's TV. Just because their cable box will allow any universal remote to communicate with it doesn't mean it's OK for you to use it.