Yeah, that's really convenient for the big telcos to have a regulatory body force any new potential competitors to come to them hat in hand before they can operate. I'm sure that happened completely by accident.
My dual processor Pentium 90 system just read your post. Now it's muttering in the corner something about "I'll show them who's sentient" and is being generally sulky and bitchy:
$ ls -l Go away. I'm having a bad day. $ cd Screw you! $ ps auxw OMG... are you stupid? I said go away! Connection closed by foreign host.
with the pre 9/11 system, and if airliner terrorism increases 10 fold, I'm still safer than I am driving on the Arizona highways with uninsured chuckleheads and illegal aliens driving drunk with stolen license plates on their car. Dead from terrorism, dead from drunk driver, dead from stroke due to high cholesterol, I'm still dead.
I like to take cheesy pop metal lyrics and try to read them aloud as if it were serious classical poetry. My personal favorite is "Pyromania" by Def Leppard.
"Players will be severely under-served by this offering, and DMs should only consider purchasing it if they know they're going to be running a long-term campaign in this particular corner of the Realms."
If that's a reason why I should buy the Waterdeep book, then I sure hope WoTC didn't pay much for Zonk's review. From where I come from, this is the polite way of saying "This book is a smelly piece of poo."
But if you look at historical segregation in the US, it was initially not a legal issue -- people segregated by choice.
Not so. Jim Crow laws made it such that you were legally required to discriminate. You could've been the most liberal, multicultural egalitarian shopkeeper in the southeast, but if you didn't have separate restrooms for whites and colored people, you would get fined.
Many businesses in the south opposed these laws, not because they opposed segregation per se (though many did) but because the legal requirement to segregate was expensive.
If you're scoffing because you're already employed at a job that pays better, then you're doing what you should. Somebody already values your labor more presumably because you are more productive doing that job rather than identifying items in pictures. I work plenty of hours and am well compensated for it. My remaining time is very valuable to me. Perhaps one should not scoff, but politely say "No, thanks." The job one might scoff at today might be the job that saves your ass tomorrow.
On the other hand, if you're not working, underemployed, or paid really low, scoffing is probably not the right thing to do, and instead of moping about having no job, you should get busy and start looking for pizza places in pictures, and if they're close, maybe see if they have a job. When I'm not employed and work is hard to come by, I'll pump gas, work a car wash, flip burgers, sweep floors, empty trash, deliver pizza, whatever it takes. It might not be enough to live on, but it's closer to livable than making nothing.
You may be surprised, but I don't think I disagree with a single word you said. There is a special vitriolic place in my heart for the Republican Party. Campaign like libertarians, govern like mercantilists, corporatists, or worse.
Remember, the DMCA was signed by a Democrat president
And passed by a Republican majority congress. The sins of both parties are legion, and whenever someone comes around to challenge the status quo, left or right, they band together and squash the threat.
It is so funny to me to listen to the Democratic Party's newly found fondness of federalism, where for 40 years prior they treated support of states' rights and federalism as mere code words for supporting racism and segregation, and out of touch with core American values. Now that they're outnumbered at the federal level, they have all kinds of respect for checks and balances and fiscal responsibility.
I apologize for the strength of my comment. I was getting pissed off. I need to stop ranting at 8am.
It's all good. I think what people sometimes forget on slashdot is that most of us care about technology and that we're passionate about the Right Thing. Sometimes that leads to some heat, but that's always a by-product of work, right? I've been in face-to-face meetings with other engineers where we get boisterous with one another, but when we get out, we know we've probably got the best ideas we can come up with. We know that ideas didn't get overlooked just because someone was timid and didn't speak their mind. I prefer someone speak up, even if they're wrong. You never know but that a wrong idea will trigger something that's even more right that otherwise wouldn't have come up at all.
Freeway speeds? I guess it might work under certain circumstances. Given a cell will generally cover more than a freeway, that's a lot of hard work, and realistically, if you're trying to get an idea of that, rather than amounts of people (as has hithertoo been claimed) I can think of easier methods, including just driving on these roads at rushhour.
Oh, you're right. It's not trivial work. But you can derive a fair amount of flow data just by watching things move from one general zone to the next. With some cars per day statistics for freeway and arterial roads, you might be surprised with the accuracy a good statistical model would give regarding traffic flow on the roads in an area.
"Or do you really believe that cellphones are in constant communication with the towers, giving towers completely unnecessary exact location information, as the GGP seems to think?
Not at all. You're totally right. It seemed as though you were saying there was no two-way communications going on when you're not actively using the cell phone. If I misinterpreted, then I apologize. The data is certainly only transmitted when there's a status change. I was wrong about the power thing, and unclear in my description of cell tower switching. It was late. Sorry I wasn't more clear-headed.
I need to quit posting after 11pm. I always seem to be apologizing the next morning.:-)
But, your original claim about a billion levels up still doesn't hold. It would be a pretty straightforward matter to take the aggregate tower switching data from various towers and come up with an approximate value of area freeway speeds. Implementation for a real-time summation of this data would be a bitch (the devil's in the details), but certainly feasible. The article's claim that you would know "instantly" is crazy, but this could be made to work fairly well with some good statistical work up front.
The GP is correct. You are making an unwarranted assumption that a cellphone communicating to the towers to determine where you are uses the same amount of power as talking on the phone.
How do you think you receive incoming calls? Do you think that every tower in the country broadcasts trying desperately to find your phone? No. Your cellphone looks for cell towers, sends some data that basically says "here I am!" and the tower and its associated network take note of that. This does take some power, but not as much as when you're talking. When you move into the range of a new tower, the cycle repeats itself. When an incoming call comes, the network already has a pretty good idea where you are. Wikipedia does a pretty good job of giving a basic explanation.
I do not know for certain, but I am given to understand that the primary reason they want cellphones off on airflights is not because of a threat to avionics systems, but that the frequent handoff signalling going on plays holy hell with the cellular network. This is not a field of specialty for me and perhaps someone with more knowledge can clarify and/or correct.
I made a bet to myself that I would see the words "pusher", "shover", and "terrible secret of space" before I viewed a screenful of messages. Thanks guys, for not disappointing!
'I hope ma bell actually tries to do this "Sorry you cannot access GOogle because they will not pay us a fee"...then the customer leaves the DSL company for the cable company.'
And what of the rumors (confirmed or not?) that Google has been buying up scads of dark fiber? Does this guy really want Google to decide to become a common carrier and eat his lunch too? What are they putting in the water on the executive floor these days?
I give any company who tries to deny users access to internet services because the content providers won't pay them about 6-12 months to live. They need to come to grips with reality that information transmission has become a utility, and that people mostly just want to buy packets in and packets out. Denying the transmission of information when that's your only product is pretty damn stupid. If SBC tries this, I will buy puts on SBC so fast I'll make their heads swim.
Well, not really, 'cause I'm a little fish, but you get my meaning.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, that's really convenient for the big telcos to have a regulatory body force any new potential competitors to come to them hat in hand before they can operate. I'm sure that happened completely by accident.
I hope you're happy.
Hockey. Back Bacon. Rush.
Secant and you shall find the answers you are angling for.
OMG, I'm sorry... I really am.
Take the cannolis.
When debating with many sects of American Protestantism, whose views of Roman Catholicism range from suspicion to abject hatred.
with the pre 9/11 system, and if airliner terrorism increases 10 fold, I'm still safer than I am driving on the Arizona highways with uninsured chuckleheads and illegal aliens driving drunk with stolen license plates on their car. Dead from terrorism, dead from drunk driver, dead from stroke due to high cholesterol, I'm still dead.
I like to take cheesy pop metal lyrics and try to read them aloud as if it were serious classical poetry. My personal favorite is "Pyromania" by Def Leppard.
Perhaps I should put out a CD.
Do you think this reads like ad copy?
"Players will be severely under-served by this offering, and DMs should only consider purchasing it if they know they're going to be running a long-term campaign in this particular corner of the Realms."
If that's a reason why I should buy the Waterdeep book, then I sure hope WoTC didn't pay much for Zonk's review. From where I come from, this is the polite way of saying "This book is a smelly piece of poo."
Yeah, and while we're on this, how did people know to be warm or cold before thermometers were invented?
Do two B's make a right?
No, but 4 Bs mean I get to keep my scholarship.
But if you look at historical segregation in the US, it was initially not a legal issue -- people segregated by choice.
Not so. Jim Crow laws made it such that you were legally required to discriminate. You could've been the most liberal, multicultural egalitarian shopkeeper in the southeast, but if you didn't have separate restrooms for whites and colored people, you would get fined.
Many businesses in the south opposed these laws, not because they opposed segregation per se (though many did) but because the legal requirement to segregate was expensive.
Sorry, I don't want it. Now get your filthy light pollution off my property!
If you're scoffing because you're already employed at a job that pays better, then you're doing what you should. Somebody already values your labor more presumably because you are more productive doing that job rather than identifying items in pictures. I work plenty of hours and am well compensated for it. My remaining time is very valuable to me. Perhaps one should not scoff, but politely say "No, thanks." The job one might scoff at today might be the job that saves your ass tomorrow.
On the other hand, if you're not working, underemployed, or paid really low, scoffing is probably not the right thing to do, and instead of moping about having no job, you should get busy and start looking for pizza places in pictures, and if they're close, maybe see if they have a job. When I'm not employed and work is hard to come by, I'll pump gas, work a car wash, flip burgers, sweep floors, empty trash, deliver pizza, whatever it takes. It might not be enough to live on, but it's closer to livable than making nothing.
You may be surprised, but I don't think I disagree with a single word you said. There is a special vitriolic place in my heart for the Republican Party. Campaign like libertarians, govern like mercantilists, corporatists, or worse.
I'll mark you as a foe, if that makes you feel better... :-)
Remember, the DMCA was signed by a Democrat president
And passed by a Republican majority congress. The sins of both parties are legion, and whenever someone comes around to challenge the status quo, left or right, they band together and squash the threat.
It is so funny to me to listen to the Democratic Party's newly found fondness of federalism, where for 40 years prior they treated support of states' rights and federalism as mere code words for supporting racism and segregation, and out of touch with core American values. Now that they're outnumbered at the federal level, they have all kinds of respect for checks and balances and fiscal responsibility.
For your perusal: Renunciation of U.S. Citizenship right from the State Department.
Note that this doesn't excuse you from prior taxes or other financial obligations in the US.
Presumably you've retained your US citizenship. This guy was never a New York citizen, or isn't at least while working for the NY firm.
It's a simple matter to go to the embassy, renounce your US citizenship and surrender your US passport if they're not providing you any services.
I apologize for the strength of my comment. I was getting pissed off. I need to stop ranting at 8am.
It's all good. I think what people sometimes forget on slashdot is that most of us care about technology and that we're passionate about the Right Thing. Sometimes that leads to some heat, but that's always a by-product of work, right? I've been in face-to-face meetings with other engineers where we get boisterous with one another, but when we get out, we know we've probably got the best ideas we can come up with. We know that ideas didn't get overlooked just because someone was timid and didn't speak their mind. I prefer someone speak up, even if they're wrong. You never know but that a wrong idea will trigger something that's even more right that otherwise wouldn't have come up at all.
Freeway speeds? I guess it might work under certain circumstances. Given a cell will generally cover more than a freeway, that's a lot of hard work, and realistically, if you're trying to get an idea of that, rather than amounts of people (as has hithertoo been claimed) I can think of easier methods, including just driving on these roads at rushhour.Oh, you're right. It's not trivial work. But you can derive a fair amount of flow data just by watching things move from one general zone to the next. With some cars per day statistics for freeway and arterial roads, you might be surprised with the accuracy a good statistical model would give regarding traffic flow on the roads in an area.
"Or do you really believe that cellphones are in constant communication with the towers, giving towers completely unnecessary exact location information, as the GGP seems to think?
Not at all. You're totally right. It seemed as though you were saying there was no two-way communications going on when you're not actively using the cell phone. If I misinterpreted, then I apologize. The data is certainly only transmitted when there's a status change. I was wrong about the power thing, and unclear in my description of cell tower switching. It was late. Sorry I wasn't more clear-headed.
I need to quit posting after 11pm. I always seem to be apologizing the next morning. :-)
But, your original claim about a billion levels up still doesn't hold. It would be a pretty straightforward matter to take the aggregate tower switching data from various towers and come up with an approximate value of area freeway speeds. Implementation for a real-time summation of this data would be a bitch (the devil's in the details), but certainly feasible. The article's claim that you would know "instantly" is crazy, but this could be made to work fairly well with some good statistical work up front.
The GP is correct. You are making an unwarranted assumption that a cellphone communicating to the towers to determine where you are uses the same amount of power as talking on the phone.
How do you think you receive incoming calls? Do you think that every tower in the country broadcasts trying desperately to find your phone? No. Your cellphone looks for cell towers, sends some data that basically says "here I am!" and the tower and its associated network take note of that. This does take some power, but not as much as when you're talking. When you move into the range of a new tower, the cycle repeats itself. When an incoming call comes, the network already has a pretty good idea where you are. Wikipedia does a pretty good job of giving a basic explanation.
I do not know for certain, but I am given to understand that the primary reason they want cellphones off on airflights is not because of a threat to avionics systems, but that the frequent handoff signalling going on plays holy hell with the cellular network. This is not a field of specialty for me and perhaps someone with more knowledge can clarify and/or correct.
Maybe he throws in a stylesheet to make the page readable.
It renders like crap in Opera 8.02 on Linux (yeah, I should upgrade).
I made a bet to myself that I would see the words "pusher", "shover", and "terrible secret of space" before I viewed a screenful of messages. Thanks guys, for not disappointing!
PAK CHOOIE UNF
'I hope ma bell actually tries to do this "Sorry you cannot access GOogle because they will not pay us a fee"...then the customer leaves the DSL company for the cable company.'
And what of the rumors (confirmed or not?) that Google has been buying up scads of dark fiber? Does this guy really want Google to decide to become a common carrier and eat his lunch too? What are they putting in the water on the executive floor these days?
I give any company who tries to deny users access to internet services because the content providers won't pay them about 6-12 months to live. They need to come to grips with reality that information transmission has become a utility, and that people mostly just want to buy packets in and packets out. Denying the transmission of information when that's your only product is pretty damn stupid. If SBC tries this, I will buy puts on SBC so fast I'll make their heads swim.
Well, not really, 'cause I'm a little fish, but you get my meaning. :-)