Firstly, there are routers out there, or perhaps more specifically, firmware (i.e. DDWRT), which support detailed QoS schemes such as allocating 100Kbits for VoIP at high priority, 512K for http web surfing at medium priority and whatever is left over can be used for torrenting.
What such routers are doing is only "outbound packet DSCP marking". In English this means that once you configure such routers, only the packets that you send out to the Internet will be marked to exibit the behaviour you desire; however... and this is a BIG however, the fact of the matter is that:
1) Whilst you have marked some packets high, medium and low pririty, your ISP and every other Telco/ISP on the Internet may completely ignore those markings (preferences) of yours.
2) In fact, some of them may "remark" all your packets back to the same level, effectively disabling QoS.
3) Most routers mark packets outbound, and little emphasis is placed on inbound marking. This is because by the time the packet gets to you, unless YOUR router is saturated the packet will get through with low latency.
In order for QoS to work effectively the following things must be in place:
1) Every single network device along your network path must support QoS. This is NOT the case with 99% of the Internet. Not because the routers aren't capable of such, but rather because the ISPs disable this function for customer marked traffic.
2) Even if every network device from your home PC, router, to your ISP, the 6 telcos in the middle of the Internet cloud and your destination website in China supported QoS, chances are they would not all agree on what each marking would mean, and therfore they would interpret them incorrectly (from your perspective).
3) QoS only comes into effect when a network point is saturated, during all other times of bandwidth being available, QoS has next to no effect.
Further,
VoIP is UDP based, and is highly sensitive to latency. The Internet is a place where latency is highly unpredictable and the more network hops (the further geographically) your packets have to travel, the higher the end to end latency will be; as such, VoIP is likely to remain a low quality voice transport for a while. Contrastly, your analogue telephone line, when you make a call from US to China, actually reserves an entire set of *dedicated* DS1 (64Kbits/sec) analogue pipes from one end to the other. In other words, there is zero sharing; hence the guarantee and high quality.
Perhaps one day, when all the major Telcos and ISPs have more pipe than they know what to do with, long distance VoIP will come close in quality to analogue phones... until then it's a complete crap shoot. You might get amazing quality to some locations on some days, at certain times 99/100 times, and to other locations 80/100 times the VoIP call is utterly useless.
In resume, you can tweak your home router all you want. It might help slightly since your router would become a saturated network point due to you using bitorrent simultaneously; however, the other 8+ hops to get to "China" are completely out of your control.
My recommendation is that if you have a say 1Mbit Up/Down pipe for broadband internet; that before you make your VoIP call, that you throttle your bittorent software (in the software itself) to use only 850Kbits up/down. VoIP protocols can suck up anywhere between 8Kbit/sec (highly compressed) to 110 Kbits/sec (uncompressed). So by leaving 150Kbits for VoIP, there's a good chance the VoIP and torrents can co-exist peacefully.
I think it was around 2003 too, that I realized that the Microsoft website's search engine was just absolutely horrible. To this day, if I want to find anything on there fast, I just use google with the "site:microsoft.com" as part of my search.
Funny also how most of all those problems Bill detailed in 2003 are still a problem today in XP. Perhaps they are no longer specific to movie maker, but for the most part that entire experience seems awefuly familiar.:-(
(I borrowed the below from another poster)...
1) Physics laws are broken all the time as science moves forward. Science is accurate and obsolute, until it is proven wrong, this is how sciences work.
2) Separating hydrogen from water is NOT breaking any form of phsyics. The question would be the chemical/energy cost to do it.
For something to think getting hydrogen out of water is UBER crazy talk, doesn't realize that the laser printer on their desk is creating ozone by the electrical charges bouncing oxygen atoms around.
Using water as energy is not hard, converting it to a 'useful' form of energy that is more than the energy required to convert it or break it apart it is the trick, but wouldn't break any Physics Laws.
Look I'm a scientist at heart. Absolutely nothing can exist if it breaks natural laws. PERIOD, no exceptions - EVER!
My main point is that we don't yet know all the natural laws, so why cling so hard to the few that we do know, dismissing anything that appears to bring them into question, when we simultaenously admit they are incomplete?
You make many excellent points. And you're right. There's countless crack-pots out there, scammers, etc. Far too many in fact.
But I'm not sure I buy the idea of the inventor needing to explain it in scientific terms to the scientific community, before the world embraces it because:
1) Perhaps the inventor is not a scientist or not well versed enough to explain it suffciently well. Not a great excuse granted, as he could probably find a scientist to do this for him if he tried hard enough.
2) Chances are that for an invention such as this there is no way to explain it with today's science.
Alternetively, there is a very high possibility that these Japanese guys are not telling the whole story, and that some chemical reaction is going on WITH water, implying something else must be added/replaced from time to time.
But I think your last point about the four-colour-theorem proof is a good analogy for the point I'm trying to make...
If it works, it works, let's start using it. Just how much does it matter that we have formulas to describe this new found reality? Yeah if we had the formulas, we could improve upon the system and likely create entire new systems beneficial to humanity; however, let's not sit on this for years while scientists scratch their heads in some lab. Reality existed way before science even came to be. Reality doesn't need science to exist.
Now this is not to deminish the role of science, as it has been extremely useful to humanity (a huge understatement); however, people hail it around as if it were some kind of fundamentalist religion. "If we don't know about it, and can't explain it (yet), it can't be true"... until the day they can explain it, and then all of a sudden you see the headlines "Scienctists discover new blah blah blah". Nearly all scientific discovery had no formulas to explain it prior to its discovery.
In countless cases, discovery comes first, the science to explain it comes AFTER.
Actually, I think the problem is that you CAN'T explain it, at least not with your current set of physic formuals. Too bad they are incomplete as you well know.
Science is based on observing the universe around us, formulating hypothesis, and then testing them out repeatedly to confirm them.
Ignoring opportunities to investigate that which appears to contradict your incomplete formulas should be looked at very seriously, because if anything, it could help you complete them.
Now, how about organizing a set of Western scientists to go to Japan and study this baby reported by Reuters and available commercially:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrxfMz2eDME
Why spend your time being arrogant, when you can spend your time finding labels & formulas for this new reality, and end this entire Oil/Energy price scam?
Arrogance, ignorance and holding on to old ideas do not make for a good scientist.
Everyone denied the Earth was spherical, but here we are today.
The thing I find ironic is that scientists admit they do not know everything, otherwise why would they proclaim new "discoveries" every other day, yet when something proves their mathematical "laws" can't account for everything, it is immediately dismissed as fraud. How unscientific!
With gas prices sky rocketing, I'm surprised more people aren't paying attention to inventors who have *already* created water powered cars that actually run. People, this isn't about 1 or 2 fringe scientists coming up with some hoax in their basements; this is something being discovered, built and used by people all over the world already. From US to Japan to Australia and beyond, if you don't believe me, just watch the videos below.
The piracy war will ultimately be won by pirates. So all these law suites are kind of pointless in the end. Even if they manage to kill P2P somehow, I can still go to my buddies house and swap movies with a portable HD. And eventually, in the not too distant future, we'll be able to swap the ENTIRE collection of every movie and song EVER made via snicker-net!
Check it out:
Assuming 1 aXXo movie = 700 MB, the average MP3 = 5 MB, and a $200 hard drive increases in capacity every 1.5 years (not unreasonable), then:
-5 years (2012) - Weâ(TM)ll have 7 Terabyte hard drives costing $200, capable of storing 9,643 Movies or 1.3 Million songs!!
-10 years (2017) - Weâ(TM)ll have 51 Terabyte hard drives costing $200, capable of storing 73,225 movies or 10.3 MILLION songs
-15 years (2022) - Weâ(TM)ll have a 389 Terabyte hard drive costing $200, that can store 556,000 Movies!!! or 77.8 Million songs (Is there even that many songs in the history of the world?!?!?)
-20 years (2027) - Weâ(TM)ll have a 2956 TERABYTE hard drive, costing $200, that can store 4.2 MILLION MOVIES or 590 MILLION MP3s!
==================
GAME *UCKING OVER!
===================
By 2030, we will have every movie and song in the world stored on our freaking wrist watches.
So, don't buy those motherboards and we'll see how long that will last. I refused to buy DRM based hardware.
I think it's time Sweeden (pirate bay) started manufacturing motherboards, so they can make them without this silly chip in it.
Sharing is part of human evolution. If we stop sharing, we stunt our growth. For a more detailed explanation of this, see the movie "Steal this film 2". Excellent documentary on the history and future of piracy.
Even though technology is making easier and faster for companies to adopt this kind of behaviour, for the time being you still have some options...
1) Work for companies with over worked and under-budged IT departments who fight fires daily and have no long term plans - These companies are highly likely not to have any time to be reading your emails. Hell, you'd be lucky if the mail server stays up all week.
2) Write emails in foreign languages. In North America this works well, where so many people only speak English. Alternatively, teach your loved ones to use encryption in emails.
3) Use a fax machine. I know, waste of paper, but most companies don't have technology implemented to sniff/wiretap fax transmissions.
4) RDP to your home PC and write an email from there to your loved ones.
5) Make calls from conference rooms instead of your desk. This won't work if you call people daily, but its good if you need to make personal calls once a week or so. At the very least, it won't show up on your phone's call log, or the PBX's log about your phone.
6)If none of these are an option, you are working for a company that doesn't respect your privacy. Stand up for yourself, and go find another job.
... to be an American. I think you guys gave up way too many rights in the past few years. (This is not meant to be a flaimbait).
Ok, so under certain circumstances & organizations I agree that having others read your email regularly could be justified, but that would be like 1 out of 1000 companies at most. Also, who's reading the email of the person who reads your emails? Unless you work for the NSA, FBI, etc, this kind of behaviour does not breed positive morale or a relaxed work environment, nevermind that you have next to zero privacy.
Unfortunately, technology is making it easier and faster for companies to adopt this kind of behaviour. I agree that employers need to make sure that employees aren't wasting a lot of company time and resources doing innapropriate things. But emailing your mother or wife that you are meeting them at 6pm after work at whatever coffee shop, or calling them for this same purpose is just a part of life, as is work. Don't you talk about what time you are going to work on your own personal non-work time with these same people? Well, then wtf is the difference? I think spending 10 minutes a day on personal calls or emails should be allowed. Why can't I call my daughter every other day to see how she is doing? I'm not going to be very productive at work if in the back of my mind I'm worried about the safety and well being of my daughter as she walks home from school at 3pm.
And if 10 minutes really is so detremental to my company, then hell, let me work an extra 10 minutes each day, but for #()$* sakes, give me the freedom to stay in touch with my loved ones!
The issue is not backbone bandwidth. Bell has multiple OC192's and probably OC768's+. These are already there, probably heavily unutilized, and used for more than just Internet traffic (i.e. LAN extension business traffic).
The justification for shaping traffic is to minimize peering costs with other ISPs.
I have no idea how Bell went so wrong in the court case. If I were them, I'd fire the lawyers... but ultimately, I'm hoping this works out for the end-users.
Personally, it would suck for our pipes to be shaped, or torrent traffic interfered with. But also, as end-users we have to understand that you can't go around using multi-hundred million dollar backbone infrastructures for a $40 (or whatever) flat monthly fee with unlimited use.
just my 2 bits.
Article"...deterrent towards those who would attempt to DDoS government networks"
Excuse my naiveness, but how exactly does building an army of botnet(s) equal to a deterrence / defensive mechanism against those who would attempt to DDoS government networks?
Is this a case of, we now have "nukes" so don't try nuking us, or we'll nuke you back?
Is the US army proposing a cyber arms race here?
Also, if all their subnets are attacked via DDoS, there'll be no out path to execute a counter attack... unless that's what all those barely unused IBM, HP, Xerox, etc.. IPv4/8 blocks are being reserved for.
Hmmm... You might consider patening it and selling the concept to thinkgeek. Have you any idea just how many offices out there have boxes of floppies in the backoffice that they don't know what to do with??
Other ideas:
-Reduce the size to about 1/3, ideally 1/5th, the mass market it.
- make a machine that can seperate floppy disks into 3 parts for recycling. (inner disk + outter plastic shell + center metalic ring). Then be able to shoot each part in 3 directions where recycling buckets would be laid. I bet if you managed to get girl scouts to go around offices offering to recycle a company's floppy disks for free, you and the girl guides around the world could possibly win some kind of environmental award.
How's that for a twist on a joke?:) Well done btw.
What's with people having so much faith in the security of open source software? Seriously, how many hundreds of thousands of lines makes up SELinux? Have you even reviewed 500 of those lines yourself? The vast size of it, makes it impossible for any one individual or even group of small individuals to KNOW for sure it is all perfectly safe. Now prove to me that some group expert coders that have actually reviewed every single god damn line of it and found nothing wrong with it, and maybe then I'll start trusting it.
Rough Analogy: It's all about logistics people. Just because there is a freedom of information act out there, doesn't mean every single government document has ever been reviewed, and it doesn't make the government trustworthy.
I think trusting a piece of software put together by a government agency who makes a living spying on its own citizens, is kind of like taking a gun and shooting your foot. I don't care how open source it may be, I wouldn't touch that Linux version with a 10 foot pole!
250 GB might sound pretty good now, but what about 2 or 3 years from now? When 50GB Blue-Ray and HDTV is the standard and everyone is streaming TV from the Internet?
Its just like agreeing that 640K mem was enough for everyone. It might sound like lots at the get go, but over time, it becomes an increasingly small insufficient number.
My recommendation is that the number should be based on some formula that changes once or twice a year based on the items in that formula. Formula might look somehting like:
VARIABLES: ========== 1) Average cost of peer bandwidth they pay for to their peers (i.e. 5 cents / GByte) 2) Infrastructure Costs per subscriber over lifecycle of equipment (i.e. $500 per client over 5 or 10 years or whatever the average lifecycle is). 3) Company Expenses (employee salaries, R&D, etc etc) 4) Profit % (10 - 20%?)
This way as costs increase or decrease, the customers are treated fairly. Of course you'd need watchdogs monitoring these variables from the outside so that the company doesn't lie.
This way, maybe in 3 years as Peer BW drops in price, the average consumer also sees a reduction in their bills or an increase in their BW caps which should in theory keep up with other technologies (iTV, torrents or whatever turns your crank).
Or just bring your own satellite dish, Chinese firewalls can't block that;-) Looking forward to the day that public spectrum wireless technologies can be propogated for 10's or 100's of miles. Then China's boarders will have Internet leaking in from every corner. They're facing a losing, not to mention, stupid and expensive battle. Only a question of time.. tick, tock, tick, tock.
And trying ot hack other countries? That is seriously stupid. Wait till the Russians and Israilies get wind of that, j00'll be begging for mercy.
Slashdot Mirror
What such routers are doing is only "outbound packet DSCP marking". In English this means that once you configure such routers, only the packets that you send out to the Internet will be marked to exibit the behaviour you desire; however... and this is a BIG however, the fact of the matter is that:
1) Whilst you have marked some packets high, medium and low pririty, your ISP and every other Telco/ISP on the Internet may completely ignore those markings (preferences) of yours.
2) In fact, some of them may "remark" all your packets back to the same level, effectively disabling QoS.
3) Most routers mark packets outbound, and little emphasis is placed on inbound marking. This is because by the time the packet gets to you, unless YOUR router is saturated the packet will get through with low latency.
In order for QoS to work effectively the following things must be in place:
1) Every single network device along your network path must support QoS. This is NOT the case with 99% of the Internet. Not because the routers aren't capable of such, but rather because the ISPs disable this function for customer marked traffic.
2) Even if every network device from your home PC, router, to your ISP, the 6 telcos in the middle of the Internet cloud and your destination website in China supported QoS, chances are they would not all agree on what each marking would mean, and therfore they would interpret them incorrectly (from your perspective).
3) QoS only comes into effect when a network point is saturated, during all other times of bandwidth being available, QoS has next to no effect.
Further,
VoIP is UDP based, and is highly sensitive to latency. The Internet is a place where latency is highly unpredictable and the more network hops (the further geographically) your packets have to travel, the higher the end to end latency will be; as such, VoIP is likely to remain a low quality voice transport for a while. Contrastly, your analogue telephone line, when you make a call from US to China, actually reserves an entire set of *dedicated* DS1 (64Kbits/sec) analogue pipes from one end to the other. In other words, there is zero sharing; hence the guarantee and high quality.
Perhaps one day, when all the major Telcos and ISPs have more pipe than they know what to do with, long distance VoIP will come close in quality to analogue phones... until then it's a complete crap shoot. You might get amazing quality to some locations on some days, at certain times 99/100 times, and to other locations 80/100 times the VoIP call is utterly useless.
In resume, you can tweak your home router all you want. It might help slightly since your router would become a saturated network point due to you using bitorrent simultaneously; however, the other 8+ hops to get to "China" are completely out of your control.
My recommendation is that if you have a say 1Mbit Up/Down pipe for broadband internet; that before you make your VoIP call, that you throttle your bittorent software (in the software itself) to use only 850Kbits up/down. VoIP protocols can suck up anywhere between 8Kbit/sec (highly compressed) to 110 Kbits/sec (uncompressed). So by leaving 150Kbits for VoIP, there's a good chance the VoIP and torrents can co-exist peacefully.
Cheers, ADeptus
I think it was around 2003 too, that I realized that the Microsoft website's search engine was just absolutely horrible. To this day, if I want to find anything on there fast, I just use google with the "site:microsoft.com" as part of my search. Funny also how most of all those problems Bill detailed in 2003 are still a problem today in XP. Perhaps they are no longer specific to movie maker, but for the most part that entire experience seems awefuly familiar. :-(
2) Separating hydrogen from water is NOT breaking any form of phsyics. The question would be the chemical/energy cost to do it.
For something to think getting hydrogen out of water is UBER crazy talk, doesn't realize that the laser printer on their desk is creating ozone by the electrical charges bouncing oxygen atoms around.
Using water as energy is not hard, converting it to a 'useful' form of energy that is more than the energy required to convert it or break it apart it is the trick, but wouldn't break any Physics Laws.
Look I'm a scientist at heart. Absolutely nothing can exist if it breaks natural laws. PERIOD, no exceptions - EVER! My main point is that we don't yet know all the natural laws, so why cling so hard to the few that we do know, dismissing anything that appears to bring them into question, when we simultaenously admit they are incomplete?
But I'm not sure I buy the idea of the inventor needing to explain it in scientific terms to the scientific community, before the world embraces it because:
1) Perhaps the inventor is not a scientist or not well versed enough to explain it suffciently well. Not a great excuse granted, as he could probably find a scientist to do this for him if he tried hard enough.
2) Chances are that for an invention such as this there is no way to explain it with today's science.
Alternetively, there is a very high possibility that these Japanese guys are not telling the whole story, and that some chemical reaction is going on WITH water, implying something else must be added/replaced from time to time.
But I think your last point about the four-colour-theorem proof is a good analogy for the point I'm trying to make...
If it works, it works, let's start using it. Just how much does it matter that we have formulas to describe this new found reality? Yeah if we had the formulas, we could improve upon the system and likely create entire new systems beneficial to humanity; however, let's not sit on this for years while scientists scratch their heads in some lab. Reality existed way before science even came to be. Reality doesn't need science to exist.
Now this is not to deminish the role of science, as it has been extremely useful to humanity (a huge understatement); however, people hail it around as if it were some kind of fundamentalist religion. "If we don't know about it, and can't explain it (yet), it can't be true"... until the day they can explain it, and then all of a sudden you see the headlines "Scienctists discover new blah blah blah". Nearly all scientific discovery had no formulas to explain it prior to its discovery.
In countless cases, discovery comes first, the science to explain it comes AFTER.
Absolutely. So let's go study this thing, instead of claiming "impossible" and ignoring it all together.
Science is based on observing the universe around us, formulating hypothesis, and then testing them out repeatedly to confirm them.
Ignoring opportunities to investigate that which appears to contradict your incomplete formulas should be looked at very seriously, because if anything, it could help you complete them.
Now, how about organizing a set of Western scientists to go to Japan and study this baby reported by Reuters and available commercially: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrxfMz2eDME
Why spend your time being arrogant, when you can spend your time finding labels & formulas for this new reality, and end this entire Oil/Energy price scam? Arrogance, ignorance and holding on to old ideas do not make for a good scientist.
Everyone denied the Earth was spherical, but here we are today.
The thing I find ironic is that scientists admit they do not know everything, otherwise why would they proclaim new "discoveries" every other day, yet when something proves their mathematical "laws" can't account for everything, it is immediately dismissed as fraud. How unscientific!
Japanese Water Car Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1OWDcWoXHs
Australian Water Car Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXzK-zrWDgI&feature=related
Water Car Inventor Murdered on News:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6yRn4IAsrU&feature=related
Salt Water Car, created by Engineer on Channel 3 news:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fK346YMhG0&feature=related
Car runs on 80% water:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgL8Gxz8Io0&feature=related
100 miles on 4z of water:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrhRxLgA9bY&feature=related
I could go on... but you can do your own google/youtube searches.
"A closed mind is a good thing to lose"
Main Website: http://waterpoweredcar.com/
Videos:
Genius US Inventor (water car): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZOsOB3z3IE
From Australia: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXzK-zrWDgI&feature=related
Water Car Inventor Murdered -news channel report: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6yRn4IAsrU&feature=related
Ford Conversion: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-piMEZ2WcQU&feature=related
From Japan: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1OWDcWoXHs&feature=related
Company selling water cars: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4mz7MPSquU&feature=related
WAKE UP AMERICA, your government lies to you! Well, ok, so does every other government, but this particular issue (water car) is worth fighting for.
(and you don't even have to wait 15 years)
Check it out:
Assuming 1 aXXo movie = 700 MB, the average MP3 = 5 MB, and a $200 hard drive increases in capacity every 1.5 years (not unreasonable), then:
-5 years (2012) - Weâ(TM)ll have 7 Terabyte hard drives costing $200, capable of storing 9,643 Movies or 1.3 Million songs!!
-10 years (2017) - Weâ(TM)ll have 51 Terabyte hard drives costing $200, capable of storing 73,225 movies or 10.3 MILLION songs
-15 years (2022) - Weâ(TM)ll have a 389 Terabyte hard drive costing $200, that can store 556,000 Movies!!! or 77.8 Million songs (Is there even that many songs in the history of the world?!?!?)
-20 years (2027) - Weâ(TM)ll have a 2956 TERABYTE hard drive, costing $200, that can store 4.2 MILLION MOVIES or 590 MILLION MP3s!
==================
GAME *UCKING OVER!
===================
By 2030, we will have every movie and song in the world stored on our freaking wrist watches.
I don't recall 8086's hitting computer stores until like 1988 or so. What was Intel doing with these things for 10 years?
So, don't buy those motherboards and we'll see how long that will last. I refused to buy DRM based hardware.
I think it's time Sweeden (pirate bay) started manufacturing motherboards, so they can make them without this silly chip in it.
Sharing is part of human evolution. If we stop sharing, we stunt our growth.
For a more detailed explanation of this, see the movie "Steal this film 2". Excellent documentary on the history and future of piracy.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3636669624532830059
1) Work for companies with over worked and under-budged IT departments who fight fires daily and have no long term plans - These companies are highly likely not to have any time to be reading your emails. Hell, you'd be lucky if the mail server stays up all week.
2) Write emails in foreign languages. In North America this works well, where so many people only speak English. Alternatively, teach your loved ones to use encryption in emails.
3) Use a fax machine. I know, waste of paper, but most companies don't have technology implemented to sniff/wiretap fax transmissions.
4) RDP to your home PC and write an email from there to your loved ones.
5) Make calls from conference rooms instead of your desk. This won't work if you call people daily, but its good if you need to make personal calls once a week or so. At the very least, it won't show up on your phone's call log, or the PBX's log about your phone.
6)If none of these are an option, you are working for a company that doesn't respect your privacy. Stand up for yourself, and go find another job.
... to be an American. I think you guys gave up way too many rights in the past few years. (This is not meant to be a flaimbait).
Ok, so under certain circumstances & organizations I agree that having others read your email regularly could be justified, but that would be like 1 out of 1000 companies at most. Also, who's reading the email of the person who reads your emails? Unless you work for the NSA, FBI, etc, this kind of behaviour does not breed positive morale or a relaxed work environment, nevermind that you have next to zero privacy.
Unfortunately, technology is making it easier and faster for companies to adopt this kind of behaviour. I agree that employers need to make sure that employees aren't wasting a lot of company time and resources doing innapropriate things. But emailing your mother or wife that you are meeting them at 6pm after work at whatever coffee shop, or calling them for this same purpose is just a part of life, as is work. Don't you talk about what time you are going to work on your own personal non-work time with these same people? Well, then wtf is the difference? I think spending 10 minutes a day on personal calls or emails should be allowed. Why can't I call my daughter every other day to see how she is doing? I'm not going to be very productive at work if in the back of my mind I'm worried about the safety and well being of my daughter as she walks home from school at 3pm.
And if 10 minutes really is so detremental to my company, then hell, let me work an extra 10 minutes each day, but for #()$* sakes, give me the freedom to stay in touch with my loved ones!
The issue is not backbone bandwidth. Bell has multiple OC192's and probably OC768's+. These are already there, probably heavily unutilized, and used for more than just Internet traffic (i.e. LAN extension business traffic). The justification for shaping traffic is to minimize peering costs with other ISPs. I have no idea how Bell went so wrong in the court case. If I were them, I'd fire the lawyers... but ultimately, I'm hoping this works out for the end-users. Personally, it would suck for our pipes to be shaped, or torrent traffic interfered with. But also, as end-users we have to understand that you can't go around using multi-hundred million dollar backbone infrastructures for a $40 (or whatever) flat monthly fee with unlimited use. just my 2 bits.
Hahaha, thanks for the laugh. I literally LOL'ed :)
Article"...deterrent towards those who would attempt to DDoS government networks" Excuse my naiveness, but how exactly does building an army of botnet(s) equal to a deterrence / defensive mechanism against those who would attempt to DDoS government networks? Is this a case of, we now have "nukes" so don't try nuking us, or we'll nuke you back? Is the US army proposing a cyber arms race here? Also, if all their subnets are attacked via DDoS, there'll be no out path to execute a counter attack... unless that's what all those barely unused IBM, HP, Xerox, etc.. IPv4 /8 blocks are being reserved for.
Hmmm... You might consider patening it and selling the concept to thinkgeek. Have you any idea just how many offices out there have boxes of floppies in the backoffice that they don't know what to do with?? Other ideas: -Reduce the size to about 1/3, ideally 1/5th, the mass market it. - make a machine that can seperate floppy disks into 3 parts for recycling. (inner disk + outter plastic shell + center metalic ring). Then be able to shoot each part in 3 directions where recycling buckets would be laid. I bet if you managed to get girl scouts to go around offices offering to recycle a company's floppy disks for free, you and the girl guides around the world could possibly win some kind of environmental award. How's that for a twist on a joke? :) Well done btw.
What's with people having so much faith in the security of open source software? Seriously, how many hundreds of thousands of lines makes up SELinux? Have you even reviewed 500 of those lines yourself? The vast size of it, makes it impossible for any one individual or even group of small individuals to KNOW for sure it is all perfectly safe. Now prove to me that some group expert coders that have actually reviewed every single god damn line of it and found nothing wrong with it, and maybe then I'll start trusting it.
Rough Analogy: It's all about logistics people. Just because there is a freedom of information act out there, doesn't mean every single government document has ever been reviewed, and it doesn't make the government trustworthy.
I think trusting a piece of software put together by a government agency who makes a living spying on its own citizens, is kind of like taking a gun and shooting your foot.
I don't care how open source it may be, I wouldn't touch that Linux version with a 10 foot pole!
250 GB might sound pretty good now, but what about 2 or 3 years from now? When 50GB Blue-Ray and HDTV is the standard and everyone is streaming TV from the Internet?
Its just like agreeing that 640K mem was enough for everyone. It might sound like lots at the get go, but over time, it becomes an increasingly small insufficient number.
My recommendation is that the number should be based on some formula that changes once or twice a year based on the items in that formula. Formula might look somehting like:
VARIABLES:
==========
1) Average cost of peer bandwidth they pay for to their peers (i.e. 5 cents / GByte)
2) Infrastructure Costs per subscriber over lifecycle of equipment (i.e. $500 per client over 5 or 10 years or whatever the average lifecycle is).
3) Company Expenses (employee salaries, R&D, etc etc)
4) Profit % (10 - 20%?)
FORMULA:
==========
Peer BW cost + Infrastrucutre cost + Expenses + Profit % = ??? $$$ / GigaByte.
This way as costs increase or decrease, the customers are treated fairly. Of course you'd need watchdogs monitoring these variables from the outside so that the company doesn't lie.
This way, maybe in 3 years as Peer BW drops in price, the average consumer also sees a reduction in their bills or an increase in their BW caps which should in theory keep up with other technologies (iTV, torrents or whatever turns your crank).
Or just bring your own satellite dish, Chinese firewalls can't block that ;-)
Looking forward to the day that public spectrum wireless technologies can be propogated for 10's or 100's of miles. Then China's boarders will have Internet leaking in from every corner. They're facing a losing, not to mention, stupid and expensive battle. Only a question of time.. tick, tock, tick, tock.
And trying ot hack other countries? That is seriously stupid. Wait till the Russians and Israilies get wind of that, j00'll be begging for mercy.
Mr. Obvious asks:
What does a University need with 2 Million medical records? Since when did patients agree that Universities could have a copy of their information?
Yeah right. Try uploading buddy. Then come back and tell me you are not capped.