But it's already okay for the site operator to pay to have redundant servers close to or on consumer ISP networks so that their content crosses the backbones fewer times, and users have a much shorter network path to get to the content. That's been there since the days modem access was common.
Intentional thug-like throttles are bad, but paying to get to the head of the line is common practice.
This is one of the unsolved flaws in the Net-Neutral network design... whomever has the best connection to a "fair" network will win the race every time. To give everyone an equal connection requires regulation....
You must be new here. Google is spending massive amounts of money on bandwidth as it sits now, and is always looking for a better way to get content out. Connecting to a backbone provider to get to Verizon costs money, connecting to Verizon as a peer costs less.
People form corporations, corporations can't vote but can suggest that government do things in a way that benefit them. All these three-letter regulatory agencies basically tell corporations what to do, but accept input from those that they regulate so they're better informed. If you want to interfere as a person, just send something in during a comment period you're interested in.
I see "mesh networking" as a misspelling of "mess networking" because it's so damn inefficient it's not even funny. Wireless networking is for point-to-point connections like my TV to my headphones. Broadcasting packets with the hope it'll get where you want it going requires too many repeats, and that's just not good networking. Forget it.
Really, with all the Net Neutrality FUD aside, Google's getting fed up with all of the ISPs, so they're threatening to start their own. Google clearly wants to fiber-up some lucky community with dreams of proving it's profitable and allowing them to fiber the whole nation.
Why pay a backbone provider to serve Google/YouTube content when Google has the dark fiber and up/down traffic to be considered a peer by the other ISPs. This isn't a tiered Internet situation, it's simply Google saying they'd rather provide their own line into the major networks rather than paying somebody else to do it for them. Yes, this does mean Google's going to get faster delivery at their own expense, but it's unclogging the backbone exchanges so everything else will go faster too.
People are using the same argument that "Government can't make me buy health insurance!" in order to kill the already-law health care reforms. But the pseudo-code looks like this.
function HealthCareTax($BoughtInsurance) { $HealthTax = $money; If $BoughtInsurance == True {$HealthTax = 0;} return $HealthTax; }
The government most certainly has the power to tax, and also has the power to create tax deductions for those who qualify. So, this challenge is going to go nowhere fast.
Back to Net Neutrality, the way to implement this is a tax on what we consider unfair network activity. If they want to do what they want with their property, sure... but then they've got to pay a tax that makes that behavior less profitable or perhaps even unprofitable.
They errored in assuming that there was an equal number of mailboxes on both sides of the street. On the street in question, there's only mail service on one side and the other side of the street has to cross the road to get to their mailbox. Those people would love for it to be a Speed Limit 30 sign, but they just can't get it legally posted because it's not qualifying for "densely populated" and people drive 35-40 to the point that a limit would cause accidents.
A few years ago I was in a speeding ticket dispute (that I eventually won) where the traffic court was using Google Maps' Satellite View in order to count the number of mailboxes along the road to determine the number of houses on the road, and therefore to determine if the area was "densely populated" and therefore qualified for a lower unposted speed limit.
1. Anybody who wants to distribute Java out of the box has to pay for a runtime license. This is why your OS doesn't include it and makes you download it from Sun/Oracle.
2. Java's original business model was to charge big for the server on which to host your Java app.
3. Oracle/Sun are profit-driven entities, and therefore if they're not making money off of Java they'll discontinue it.
Yep, that was the proper solution... just the hard part was finding out who is allowed to touch that code. The original programmer should have realized Microsoft releases new OSes every 2-4 years so a complete list of today's supported OSes would be outdated quickly.
Java isn't totally free. The runtime is free, but development tools require licensing... Microsoft learned that one the hard way when they violated their agreement with Sun.
You could use similar facts to say.NET is free....
If NT or 2000, look for the DOS prompt program here... If 95 or 98, look for the DOS prompt program here... If XP, look for the DOS prompt program here...
Only problem is that Vista was out at the time, and it's OS string failed on all three ifs, so that led to a fail. Worse yet, this was outside of the domain that I'd be allowed to fix, and the search for who was the maintainer-of-record for this program kept coming up empty. I had to call marketing and tell them to hold off on declaring the whole system Vista-ready because we had a small programming bug and a big organizational malfunction.
This method just says "Don't use Firefox with my webpage. It may work now, but I plan on using IE-only commands in the future so if you're not coming from IE then don't get attached to this service."
Open source lets the community fix these breaking bugs only if there's still a community left for the project, and hiring a developer to fix is one way to say "paying for support"... basically, be nice to the developers and they'll be there for you. Let them move on and you've got no support left.
I remember seeing "how to" articles for various languages there to determine the drive the app is on, and the drive and directory where Windows is. Programmers who didn't learn from these things were ignorant.
If you're using Sun/Oracle-specific commands, you don't want to find your app running in an unofficial or unsupported Java such as Microsoft's that was eventually recalled.
This is a critical flaw in the "pay once, own forever" software model. If the company that supplied your app uses this field, assumes it'll never change, and then goes out of business or move on to different products, you're in big trouble right now. You've got to pay for support, or your vendor might not be there when you need them in a situation like this.
Southwest, JetBlue, and others of the low-price carriers opt out of letting anybody other than themseleves sell their tickets, but they still have to register their flight times and fares with the government, meaning ITAsoftware.com's version of the platform can still display those flights (and tell you where to go should you want to book one), but the travel agency customers of ITA don't display what they can't sell you. Hopefully Google will continue to offer the "unbiased" edition of the software, and mix in a Google Checkout way of buying what they are able to sell through the system.
I remember debating in college a professor who thought that Microsoft's MSN was going to be a single-sign-on takeover of the Internet, and I had to point out that nearly everything offered by MSN at the time were also duplicated by Yahoo! or AOL Time Warner who also offered their own single-sign-on interface, and in some product areas the competitors were using the absolute same backend services.
Google is now the "too big to leave alone" player... but seemlingly everything they do is something that there is a competitor for, it's just that Google is #1 for being the best.
ITA Software's main business is taking the various fare/schedule tables put out by the airlines, and then combine and standardize them so they're comparable, and finally put a user interface on top of all of this so the average user can figure out what their options are for getting from Airport A to Airport B during the time frame the user was interested in.
They're not a travel reservation system... although some of their customers add that themselves to ITA's flight selection tools. Google already has some simple flight tracking tools in their interface, and Bing has been trying to sell their "Decision Engine" as a tool for selecting flights and predicting fare movement, so this seems like a natural acquisition to add to Google.
Slashdot Mirror
But it's already okay for the site operator to pay to have redundant servers close to or on consumer ISP networks so that their content crosses the backbones fewer times, and users have a much shorter network path to get to the content. That's been there since the days modem access was common.
Intentional thug-like throttles are bad, but paying to get to the head of the line is common practice.
"Do no evil!" crossed with "Because we're the phone company!"... interesting blend.
This is one of the unsolved flaws in the Net-Neutral network design... whomever has the best connection to a "fair" network will win the race every time. To give everyone an equal connection requires regulation....
You must be new here. Google is spending massive amounts of money on bandwidth as it sits now, and is always looking for a better way to get content out. Connecting to a backbone provider to get to Verizon costs money, connecting to Verizon as a peer costs less.
People form corporations, corporations can't vote but can suggest that government do things in a way that benefit them. All these three-letter regulatory agencies basically tell corporations what to do, but accept input from those that they regulate so they're better informed. If you want to interfere as a person, just send something in during a comment period you're interested in.
I see "mesh networking" as a misspelling of "mess networking" because it's so damn inefficient it's not even funny. Wireless networking is for point-to-point connections like my TV to my headphones. Broadcasting packets with the hope it'll get where you want it going requires too many repeats, and that's just not good networking. Forget it.
Really, with all the Net Neutrality FUD aside, Google's getting fed up with all of the ISPs, so they're threatening to start their own. Google clearly wants to fiber-up some lucky community with dreams of proving it's profitable and allowing them to fiber the whole nation.
Why pay a backbone provider to serve Google/YouTube content when Google has the dark fiber and up/down traffic to be considered a peer by the other ISPs. This isn't a tiered Internet situation, it's simply Google saying they'd rather provide their own line into the major networks rather than paying somebody else to do it for them. Yes, this does mean Google's going to get faster delivery at their own expense, but it's unclogging the backbone exchanges so everything else will go faster too.
Why is anybody opposed to this?
Can't you just place a robots.txt file on your property to tell the GoogleDrone not to index it?
People are using the same argument that "Government can't make me buy health insurance!" in order to kill the already-law health care reforms. But the pseudo-code looks like this.
function HealthCareTax($BoughtInsurance)
{
$HealthTax = $money;
If $BoughtInsurance == True {$HealthTax = 0;}
return $HealthTax;
}
The government most certainly has the power to tax, and also has the power to create tax deductions for those who qualify. So, this challenge is going to go nowhere fast.
Back to Net Neutrality, the way to implement this is a tax on what we consider unfair network activity. If they want to do what they want with their property, sure... but then they've got to pay a tax that makes that behavior less profitable or perhaps even unprofitable.
They errored in assuming that there was an equal number of mailboxes on both sides of the street. On the street in question, there's only mail service on one side and the other side of the street has to cross the road to get to their mailbox. Those people would love for it to be a Speed Limit 30 sign, but they just can't get it legally posted because it's not qualifying for "densely populated" and people drive 35-40 to the point that a limit would cause accidents.
A few years ago I was in a speeding ticket dispute (that I eventually won) where the traffic court was using Google Maps' Satellite View in order to count the number of mailboxes along the road to determine the number of houses on the road, and therefore to determine if the area was "densely populated" and therefore qualified for a lower unposted speed limit.
1. Anybody who wants to distribute Java out of the box has to pay for a runtime license. This is why your OS doesn't include it and makes you download it from Sun/Oracle. 2. Java's original business model was to charge big for the server on which to host your Java app. 3. Oracle/Sun are profit-driven entities, and therefore if they're not making money off of Java they'll discontinue it.
Yep, that was the proper solution... just the hard part was finding out who is allowed to touch that code. The original programmer should have realized Microsoft releases new OSes every 2-4 years so a complete list of today's supported OSes would be outdated quickly.
Java isn't totally free. The runtime is free, but development tools require licensing... Microsoft learned that one the hard way when they violated their agreement with Sun.
You could use similar facts to say .NET is free....
At work... I once ran into code that said
If NT or 2000, look for the DOS prompt program here...
If 95 or 98, look for the DOS prompt program here...
If XP, look for the DOS prompt program here...
Only problem is that Vista was out at the time, and it's OS string failed on all three ifs, so that led to a fail. Worse yet, this was outside of the domain that I'd be allowed to fix, and the search for who was the maintainer-of-record for this program kept coming up empty. I had to call marketing and tell them to hold off on declaring the whole system Vista-ready because we had a small programming bug and a big organizational malfunction.
This method just says "Don't use Firefox with my webpage. It may work now, but I plan on using IE-only commands in the future so if you're not coming from IE then don't get attached to this service."
Open source lets the community fix these breaking bugs only if there's still a community left for the project, and hiring a developer to fix is one way to say "paying for support"... basically, be nice to the developers and they'll be there for you. Let them move on and you've got no support left.
I remember seeing "how to" articles for various languages there to determine the drive the app is on, and the drive and directory where Windows is. Programmers who didn't learn from these things were ignorant.
If you're using Sun/Oracle-specific commands, you don't want to find your app running in an unofficial or unsupported Java such as Microsoft's that was eventually recalled.
This is a critical flaw in the "pay once, own forever" software model. If the company that supplied your app uses this field, assumes it'll never change, and then goes out of business or move on to different products, you're in big trouble right now. You've got to pay for support, or your vendor might not be there when you need them in a situation like this.
My post is proven wrong. Please mod down.
Southwest, JetBlue, and others of the low-price carriers opt out of letting anybody other than themseleves sell their tickets, but they still have to register their flight times and fares with the government, meaning ITAsoftware.com's version of the platform can still display those flights (and tell you where to go should you want to book one), but the travel agency customers of ITA don't display what they can't sell you. Hopefully Google will continue to offer the "unbiased" edition of the software, and mix in a Google Checkout way of buying what they are able to sell through the system.
I remember debating in college a professor who thought that Microsoft's MSN was going to be a single-sign-on takeover of the Internet, and I had to point out that nearly everything offered by MSN at the time were also duplicated by Yahoo! or AOL Time Warner who also offered their own single-sign-on interface, and in some product areas the competitors were using the absolute same backend services.
Google is now the "too big to leave alone" player... but seemlingly everything they do is something that there is a competitor for, it's just that Google is #1 for being the best.
ITA Software's main business is taking the various fare/schedule tables put out by the airlines, and then combine and standardize them so they're comparable, and finally put a user interface on top of all of this so the average user can figure out what their options are for getting from Airport A to Airport B during the time frame the user was interested in.
They're not a travel reservation system... although some of their customers add that themselves to ITA's flight selection tools. Google already has some simple flight tracking tools in their interface, and Bing has been trying to sell their "Decision Engine" as a tool for selecting flights and predicting fare movement, so this seems like a natural acquisition to add to Google.
Yeah... and people named McDonald have the same problem with GPS points-of-interest.