NBC proper didn't cover curling at all, but on cable USA covered live in early mornings just about as many early round matches as possible, while CNBC had a daily 5pm ET three-hour block that was dedicated entirely to curling... showing most of the Team USA matches and selected other matches.
Bottom line: Every event in the Olympics got TV coverage, you just needed to know which one of NBC's cable networks to look on.
For the benefit of people who come accross this article in a search, you might want to notice that the/. article posted immediately before this one estimates that Akamai can only handle 150,000 streams at a time.
Put these two articles together: and you come to the conclusion that Internet streaming just isn't ready for prime time. TV will always be more easily moved over broadcast technology, not something that has the overhead of IP.
It should be noted that the gold medal game will also be broadcast by the main NBC network live at 8am ET to affiliates in the Eastern and Central time zones. The game will be seen at 8am local time in the Mountain and Pacific time zones.
99% of the TVs in America has access to an NBC affiliate, and this web stream is designed not to be viewable outside the USA, so it's kinda questionable just who this stream is aimed at. West coasters who can't wait out a three hour tape delay and want to see the game at 5am PT? People who have an office job who are working at 8am ET on a Sunday morning?
Sure, some people will say "What prevents Megacorp YYY from blasting 100,000 watts over every frequency?" That's pretty simple -- energy costs make it prohibitive to transmit anything but profitable data. The FCC has existed long past its useful life, maybe it is time to open up little bits of unregulated spectrum piece-by-piece and let's see what happens. These software radios are a huge step in the right direction.
That's just nonsense. With no regulation at all, no frequency would be safe from a fly-by-night operation disrupting service. TiVos would fly right out of the window because they're all dependant on a show being broadcast on a designated channel at a designated time. If TV channels could be jammed by absolutely anybody, TV as we know it would cease to exist. Radio as we know it would cease to exist. DirecTV, Dish Network, Sirius, and XM would all have their investments in satellites wasted. (Only cable would be safe, because cable network signals spend most of their distance traveled on fiber anyway, and they can sheild the "last mile" of coax against anything given a thick enough wire.)
Of course, your answer to that would be that's the whole point, you want the existing license-holders evicted to free up everything for one big utopian mesh network. That's great on the chalkboard, but fails to stand up to real-world attacks. Just how are you going to avoid man-in-the-middle attacks and eavesdropping? "Encryption!" you say? That's nice, but you can't encrypt routing data. You have to put the address you're headed to outside of the enveleope, otherwise it's not going to get there. Basically, every partisipating router is a chance to be logging, and worse yet tampering with every packet. Meshes don't work as soon as somebody intent on not playing fair joins.
You basically want to obsolite nearly every RF telecom device in existance, and in that system's place subsitute chaos. It's just not gonna fly. Don't bother.
"As far as notifications, we think there are certain instances where businesses might want to notify consumers and certain instances where they might not to inform them," Cook said.
When would there ever be an instant that a business would want to disclose a leak? There are instances were businesses should be required to inform customers.
The reason is simple. It's hard to enforce sales to a "one-to-a-customer-period" rule. Especially at a chain store, where a customer who doesn't have to present ID can simply drive to another store and get the special over again. One rebate to a mailing address limits the discount to one per household, and gets rid of most repeat claimers.
TiVo has always had the Showcases menu which was mostly supplied with paid-for content from broadcasters and sponsors, and could even contain video clips that were sent over a Discovery Channel late-night infomercial. The only thing here is that a search is being added, as if there's going to be more content than makes sense for a menu now.
What is highly disturbing about the not improper and not illegal uses of the DMCA Takedown Notice. It is just a legal notice that a copyrighted work is being distributed, and offers a lawsuit-free chance to take it down, with no damages for the time it was up being collected.
Sure, the 30ish% abuse rate is disturbing... but there's nothing to see here talking about the other 70ish%.
Google may have quickly released the patch once they were notified like a good company should, but TFA reveals that the patching is far from complete:
A small sample of 43 appliances taken this week showed that 23 remained vulnerable, 8 were patched, and the status of 12 could not be determined. If this sample is representative of all deployed Google Search Appliances, more than half may still be vulnerable.
A patch that hasn't made it to half of the vulnerable devices? We've got a problem here. Google should have made it clear to the owners of the Search Appliance that there's a patch to install. (Fault the media while we're at it... this is the first/. mention of any patch for the Google Search Appliance.)
You'd think Google would have built in an auto-updater, but clearly not with this low of a response rate.
Which is why they held this meeting in the first place. Everybody's got to agree on little things like color schemes for there to be cross-browser compatibility.
But how do you know that you didn't get the hacker site on day 1 and the real site on day 2? Without some authentication protocol being followed, you're not secure. Sure, there's no way you're being intercepted when you're talking to the site, but you don't know what's on the other end of the line.
The problem with your self-made whitelist situation is that you have no way to authenticate your bank's website the first time. Just because you're sure you've got the URL right is no proof that you don't have a rouge DNS entry or router somewhere between you and your bank. If you can get fooled into adding a spoof site to your list, your whole theory colapses.
I've seen several site operators let their sites sit with SSL warning boxes because they insist on using a self-issued SSL certificate instead of paying for a major brand name label.
Most of the time, this isn't exposed to customers, but employees of the organization are trained to ignore the "This certificate was not issued by a trusted authority," warnings, and I fear such people will take away that that box with all of its technobabble is one they should ignore at all times. That box is a last line of defense against an encrypted connection that isn't trustworthy... and I think this is a step forward to the point where browsers will refuse to give SSL encryption without SSL authentication succeeding.
Having a plate that's hidden, out of place, or looks funny is primary cause for getting pulled over. Such schemes are likely to backfire by attracting police attention.
Slashdot Mirror
Help Wanted: Game Programmers
Must have 5 years experience coding in Assembly for the IBM Cell processor
NBC proper didn't cover curling at all, but on cable USA covered live in early mornings just about as many early round matches as possible, while CNBC had a daily 5pm ET three-hour block that was dedicated entirely to curling... showing most of the Team USA matches and selected other matches.
Bottom line: Every event in the Olympics got TV coverage, you just needed to know which one of NBC's cable networks to look on.
For the benefit of people who come accross this article in a search, you might want to notice that the /. article posted immediately before this one estimates that Akamai can only handle 150,000 streams at a time.
Put these two articles together: and you come to the conclusion that Internet streaming just isn't ready for prime time. TV will always be more easily moved over broadcast technology, not something that has the overhead of IP.
It should be noted that the gold medal game will also be broadcast by the main NBC network live at 8am ET to affiliates in the Eastern and Central time zones. The game will be seen at 8am local time in the Mountain and Pacific time zones.
99% of the TVs in America has access to an NBC affiliate, and this web stream is designed not to be viewable outside the USA, so it's kinda questionable just who this stream is aimed at. West coasters who can't wait out a three hour tape delay and want to see the game at 5am PT? People who have an office job who are working at 8am ET on a Sunday morning?
Sure, some people will say "What prevents Megacorp YYY from blasting 100,000 watts over every frequency?" That's pretty simple -- energy costs make it prohibitive to transmit anything but profitable data. The FCC has existed long past its useful life, maybe it is time to open up little bits of unregulated spectrum piece-by-piece and let's see what happens. These software radios are a huge step in the right direction.
That's just nonsense. With no regulation at all, no frequency would be safe from a fly-by-night operation disrupting service. TiVos would fly right out of the window because they're all dependant on a show being broadcast on a designated channel at a designated time. If TV channels could be jammed by absolutely anybody, TV as we know it would cease to exist. Radio as we know it would cease to exist. DirecTV, Dish Network, Sirius, and XM would all have their investments in satellites wasted. (Only cable would be safe, because cable network signals spend most of their distance traveled on fiber anyway, and they can sheild the "last mile" of coax against anything given a thick enough wire.)
Of course, your answer to that would be that's the whole point, you want the existing license-holders evicted to free up everything for one big utopian mesh network. That's great on the chalkboard, but fails to stand up to real-world attacks. Just how are you going to avoid man-in-the-middle attacks and eavesdropping? "Encryption!" you say? That's nice, but you can't encrypt routing data. You have to put the address you're headed to outside of the enveleope, otherwise it's not going to get there. Basically, every partisipating router is a chance to be logging, and worse yet tampering with every packet. Meshes don't work as soon as somebody intent on not playing fair joins.
You basically want to obsolite nearly every RF telecom device in existance, and in that system's place subsitute chaos. It's just not gonna fly. Don't bother.
...or, he could let his savings accumulate for 1000 years and then spend it on a single anchovy.
Nice mocking, but unrealted to the article. The 40 second clock starts ticking once you've displayed the message.
"As far as notifications, we think there are certain instances where businesses might want to notify consumers and certain instances where they might not to inform them," Cook said.
When would there ever be an instant that a business would want to disclose a leak? There are instances were businesses should be required to inform customers.
The reason is simple. It's hard to enforce sales to a "one-to-a-customer-period" rule. Especially at a chain store, where a customer who doesn't have to present ID can simply drive to another store and get the special over again. One rebate to a mailing address limits the discount to one per household, and gets rid of most repeat claimers.
TiVo has always had the Showcases menu which was mostly supplied with paid-for content from broadcasters and sponsors, and could even contain video clips that were sent over a Discovery Channel late-night infomercial. The only thing here is that a search is being added, as if there's going to be more content than makes sense for a menu now.
This is a slow News for Nerds day story... that's all. Come back Monday when we're back to business.
Google Base is Google's answer to Craig's List. It's a post whatever / find whatever site that has an almost anything goes policy.
Google's SafeSearch can be turned off, China's Great Firewall cannot.
What is highly disturbing about the not improper and not illegal uses of the DMCA Takedown Notice. It is just a legal notice that a copyrighted work is being distributed, and offers a lawsuit-free chance to take it down, with no damages for the time it was up being collected.
Sure, the 30ish% abuse rate is disturbing... but there's nothing to see here talking about the other 70ish%.
Google may have quickly released the patch once they were notified like a good company should, but TFA reveals that the patching is far from complete:
/. mention of any patch for the Google Search Appliance.)
A small sample of 43 appliances taken this week showed that 23 remained vulnerable, 8 were patched, and the status of 12 could not be determined. If this sample is representative of all deployed Google Search Appliances, more than half may still be vulnerable.
A patch that hasn't made it to half of the vulnerable devices? We've got a problem here. Google should have made it clear to the owners of the Search Appliance that there's a patch to install. (Fault the media while we're at it... this is the first
You'd think Google would have built in an auto-updater, but clearly not with this low of a response rate.
The problem comes when this is a site exposed to the Internet for employees to check their e-mail. Can't force a system image onto home machines.
Firefox does a yellow location bar for SSL already.
Which is troublesome because Microsoft proposes to use yellow as a warning color. Standards, people, you're getting together to make standards.
Maybe training your father to press F1 instead of calling you might be worthwile.
Which is why they held this meeting in the first place. Everybody's got to agree on little things like color schemes for there to be cross-browser compatibility.
But how do you know that you didn't get the hacker site on day 1 and the real site on day 2? Without some authentication protocol being followed, you're not secure. Sure, there's no way you're being intercepted when you're talking to the site, but you don't know what's on the other end of the line.
The problem with your self-made whitelist situation is that you have no way to authenticate your bank's website the first time. Just because you're sure you've got the URL right is no proof that you don't have a rouge DNS entry or router somewhere between you and your bank. If you can get fooled into adding a spoof site to your list, your whole theory colapses.
I've seen several site operators let their sites sit with SSL warning boxes because they insist on using a self-issued SSL certificate instead of paying for a major brand name label.
Most of the time, this isn't exposed to customers, but employees of the organization are trained to ignore the "This certificate was not issued by a trusted authority," warnings, and I fear such people will take away that that box with all of its technobabble is one they should ignore at all times. That box is a last line of defense against an encrypted connection that isn't trustworthy... and I think this is a step forward to the point where browsers will refuse to give SSL encryption without SSL authentication succeeding.
Having a plate that's hidden, out of place, or looks funny is primary cause for getting pulled over. Such schemes are likely to backfire by attracting police attention.
Actually, both of these offerings are commercial-free in exchange for your 99 cents.
Which means, to make ourselves clear, neither of these are IP downloads.