Re:Why you gottat go and do a stupid thing like th
on
SCO DOS'ed
·
· Score: 1
It will be script kiddies doing the DDOS not the opensource community... When that one News site got hacked during the Iraqi war do you think it was that US military that did it?
For RTS... I don' tthink I would want to be the Iraqi side.. Get Out gunned too badly:) That or I would be worried I would wear out the "Flee from battle" button:)
Yeah I bet ya you picked it up from Walmart aswell:) I wasn't saying that there are never hardware failures... the 300$ PC's at walmart are 300$ because they are made of the cheapest stuff they can find to get the price down... They take very little consideration into Quality when choosing parts.
a 300$ PC from walmart? I would have to worry about harware failure with hardware thats that cheap... I would opt for older higher quality stuff from a used parts depot rather than brand spankin new questionable stuff. I have found there's alot more stability and realiability in component based MB's rather than the All in 1 MB's you see today.. not to mention the poor proformance of them aswell..
Well... if you Notice 99% of the Spam that pops in your Box says that you have chosen to opt-in at one of thier related websites. Now anyone getting annoyed by spam would actually opt-in?!?! So of couse an opt-in list would be pointless:)
I think its more PR.. after all.. There will tonnes of people that wont want to go through the process and send it anyways. Currently there is no mechansim in SMTP is enfore ANYTHING other than only accepting mail for valid recepiants... and that isn't 100% either:)
SMTP is broken due to spam... and from the language used in thie artice it doesn't sound like they are gonna do anything but change the face in hopes it wont be out right trashed by filters.. It seems more of a PR thing than anything to take some heat and focus off spammers.
One word for ya... Bullshit. I don't care how many people sign up in a Cable Node... Cable is very robust and can handle very large loads... if it slows down tonnes when people sign up its the provider being cheap and not upgradeing to accomidate new customers... Cables limitations are on its return path (Data flowing out of homes to thier side)... So you "could" many Cable internet networks off a single HFC network. assuming you can utilize 18-42 Mzh for return path signals at 6mzh (This is a semi common carrier width but can vary with equipment and configuration) you should be able to run 4 networks that should be able to serve 250-600 customers (depending on the level of service that the provider wants to deliver and they have available space for forward signals). That gives ya from 1000-2400 customers being served in a cable area.. There should be enough revenue to justify adding more fiber to break this area into a smalller ones so once again they can handle more customers. You obviously don't have a clue what your talking about.. even though you may be a victim of a Bad service provider.
N.B.
This is only true when there arn't enough customers being served by the equipment to pay for itself.. eg small handful of customers (in around 2% or less than capisty of the equipment). The you will see a drop in performance but the level of service should still be very acceptable.
Well your not 100% right there... Look at the canadian market... pricing is very similiar yet.. density difference between Japan and the us and similar to the US and Canada yet our data rates are signifficanly high for a good portion of our services.
Depending on where you are, who your provider is and engineering design will allways be the factors involved in speed... typically Downloading speeds are faster than dsl (Generaly speaking) just for the fact the use a 64 QAM (or larger) modulation of a 6 mzh band that typically provides 30Mb/s or greater capisty. It allways comes down to congestion/caps in the networks... Typically DSL connections are capped (Cable for the large part only upstream is capped due to rampant abuse by a minority I might add).. When put head to head They should be able to provide Similiar transfer rates on average when put in similar conditions. Anyone who makes a Blanket statement that DSL is faster than Cable or even the other way around just doesn't have a clue what they are talking about. Generally speaking the HFC(Hybrid Fiber Coax) Networks are vastly cheaper to roll out than what is required for DSL so that is where the main portion of the upper hand comes into play..
Not to mention this is also a study that admits that Time Warner Cable, the nation's second-largest cable television network was not included in the study.. Why was it left out? isn't that going to skew the study if the second largest network providers for the cable side is left out of the picture? This is a study and the results heavily depend on who does the study and who pays for it and the relationship of those two companies... I a positive that a DSL provider could easily do a study to prove the exact oppisite of this study... After all thats what studies are about... Proving your point... and as for a unbiased study would ned to entail every provider and be sastsicalical only study that didn't actually draw a conclusion. Once you start to draw a conclusion you drop or generalsize information for people to digest... once you do that you will start to add bias to your study because you have discluded information...
In short i urge everyone to try all highspeed technologies in thier area before setteling down on one.. Form your own opinion and find what meets your needs.. Don't let someone in a marketing department make decisions for you... and as far as your know it all friends that tell ya don't even bother trying this cause it sucks.... find out for yourself. 9 out of 10 know it all types know the least ammount from my experience.. Not to mention if they are right and it really does suck... Just make sure that when booking for an apointment that its not going to cost you mega $$ or try thier service.. If after a few short days the service is really that bad.. phone em up and tell em to fix or or remove it because your going to try a competitor... I am sure you will either get Great customer service or know you don't want thier service and you wont be at much of a loss.
IPV6 should do away with additional IP charges.. They are charging as a deterrent for IP abuse due to the inavailability of excess Ip addresses in IPV4. One could speculate that one(of the many) of the reasons why the roll out of IPV6 is taking so long when we are in such a bind for IP space could be revenues from additional IP's. From my understanding ARIN does not see the additional revenues generated from charging for additional IP space. Mainly they look at utilization of IP space before handing out new blocks. In our current "crisis" most of this money collect for additional IP space should be collected by ARIN and used to fund the finishing touches on IPv6. Also once IPv6 is offically rolled out to the backbone IP space should be free and current IPv4 space be frozen to force companys to make the switch.. as I can see alot of companies dragging thier feet so they can keep thier legacy v4 layer 3 gear going as long as possible.
Its been about what... 6-7 years that v4 space is extreamly slim pickins... It should have been rolled out and in active use years ago... Well atleast the address space or an additional octet to relive the crunch that exists.
Sure this will create some havoc for people with improperly administrated networks.. but really! Those networks that are not properly administrated should be shaken up as much and as often as possible as these networks are also highly likely to be problems anyway. Having Open Mail relays., Improperly secured servers and the like that do the most "Dammage" on the internet.
Well realistically the only thing this will do will make him shift his spamming efforts to more "Legitimate" spamming methods to help pay lawyer fees/fines.
Thats another thing that really pisses me off... Not only do they send you the email once.. but its common for me to see the same damn piece of spam 3 or 4 times a day in my spam folder.. Like Oh geeze this must be important if they are sending it more than just once..
I think its more because of the low number than anything else... I would like to see what method these complaints were made with to get a responce. It is extreamly likely if it only takes 46,000 to get the FTC to do something ALOT more people will before using these methods. after all spam effects 95% of the internet population and to get 46,000 to fill out a complaint about spam would be to easy
Umm.. Thats not such a good idea either:) After all for mentioning something like that you could be Considered a terrorist under the Homeland security Act.. After alll That would be a DDOS attack on the FTC's email servers:) Mind you it would be interesting to see what size of pipe and how large a server cluster they would need to Recive all the spam that never sees inboxes due to Filters:) That would be Such a interesting statistic... 1 out of every Million emails actually makes it to the inbox.. then 1 out of every Million of those actually gets opened.. then 1 out of every million of those generates a Positive responce to the spammer. It would be stagering to see how much money was spent so that 1 person could purchase something from a spam mail.. The cost I bet ya would be well hard to speculate.
Re:It's All Just Cost Of Doing Business
on
FTC vs Spammers
·
· Score: 1
Personally I love the Idea of Declaring them Enemy Combatants engaged in cyberterrorism..
Re:Keep the government out of this!
on
FTC vs Spammers
·
· Score: 1
At least Ashcroft hasn't labeled spammers as enemy combatants engaged in cyberterrorism and shipped them all off to Guantonomo Bay without a trial -- yet.
If only he would... I would pay money to see a Spammers house get hit by several mortar rounds before being stormed by a few dozen troops that have itchy trigger fingers. Now this aproach would definately slow down the spam..
It only takes that many complaints for the FTC to do something about a Spammer? Geeze... Thats not alot.. Should be Soo easy to wipe out the big Spam kings if it only takes 46,000 complaints to the FTC... considering there are Willions of people that it pisses off enough to do something about it... Not many know what to do about it... I Guess the answer is Complain to the FTC!
Does this mean if I chose a term and used it incorrectly does that make it right. I did a fair amount of looking for a Dictionary that defines Broadband as relating to highspeed and was unable to find one. Broadband is a new Buzz word being associated with highspeed. Does that make Broadband mean highspeed even though its been around decades and highspeed is just nearing a decade old? This is more of a misconception.. 99% of the public think that broadband and highspeed are one in the same when actually they are 2 totally diffrent things.. Is this right for the general public to remain mislead?
Game Servers:) Full Motion Video ect.. Just imagine your friend across the city buy a PPV event and your cars broke.. So he sets up his Video Camera aimed at the TV and streams it across the city man for you to watch at your house:)
I really hate to break the news to you.. but Broadband allready is damn near everywhere... Any place that has Cable has Broadband.. as Cable has been Broadband based since it first started.
I think your refering to High-speed internet that uses broadband.
Well... You wouldn't.. I haven't heard of a Single set-top box thats being made that is made for fiber to home.. so what your talking about is vaporware. But an Intelligent rollout of this type of service would have a Main box downstairs where the fiber terminates and all your Coax/Twisted pair ect would plug into it so They could utilize cheap standard equipment... After all even telco wire can support 45Mbit transmission over short distances. Mind you you may need a set-top-box still for the cable like services... but there isn't a reason why they can't use the coax thats allready in place.. But this sounds alot more like Speculation and fishing by someone that hasn't crunched the numbers to see what it would cost to roll this out.
Woo! You have got the idea... Fiber network maintence could easily be added in with property tax as Fiber networks arn't that costly to maintain.. and like you said.. It would eliminate infastructure monopoly and For once bring back the Mom and Pop ISP's that fired the internet up back into play. This is how infastructure should be setup these days as cable co's are starting to sell phone service and telco's are starting to sell cable service the only difference is the medium that is used to deliver the service.
But since this idea make alot of common sense and breaks down the barrier of entry into these businesses I am sure they will put up a huge fight.. After all this is a Idea that is brilliant and good for competition so I am sure there will be a big fuss and it will get killed. Its how business is done these days...
Slashdot Mirror
It will be script kiddies doing the DDOS not the opensource community... When that one News site got hacked during the Iraqi war do you think it was that US military that did it?
For RTS... I don' tthink I would want to be the Iraqi side.. Get Out gunned too badly :) That or I would be worried I would wear out the "Flee from battle" button :)
Yeah I bet ya you picked it up from Walmart aswell :) I wasn't saying that there are never hardware failures... the 300$ PC's at walmart are 300$ because they are made of the cheapest stuff they can find to get the price down... They take very little consideration into Quality when choosing parts.
a 300$ PC from walmart? I would have to worry about harware failure with hardware thats that cheap... I would opt for older higher quality stuff from a used parts depot rather than brand spankin new questionable stuff. I have found there's alot more stability and realiability in component based MB's rather than the All in 1 MB's you see today.. not to mention the poor proformance of them aswell..
Well UCE and opt-in are too diffrent things.. If you opt-in then its not UCE anymore... U being Unsolisted...
Well... if you Notice 99% of the Spam that pops in your Box says that you have chosen to opt-in at one of thier related websites. Now anyone getting annoyed by spam would actually opt-in?!?! So of couse an opt-in list would be pointless :)
I think its more PR.. after all.. There will tonnes of people that wont want to go through the process and send it anyways. Currently there is no mechansim in SMTP is enfore ANYTHING other than only accepting mail for valid recepiants... and that isn't 100% either :)
SMTP is broken due to spam... and from the language used in thie artice it doesn't sound like they are gonna do anything but change the face in hopes it wont be out right trashed by filters.. It seems more of a PR thing than anything to take some heat and focus off spammers.
One word for ya ... Bullshit. I don't care how many people sign up in a Cable Node... Cable is very robust and can handle very large loads... if it slows down tonnes when people sign up its the provider being cheap and not upgradeing to accomidate new customers... Cables limitations are on its return path (Data flowing out of homes to thier side)... So you "could" many Cable internet networks off a single HFC network. assuming you can utilize 18-42 Mzh for return path signals at 6mzh (This is a semi common carrier width but can vary with equipment and configuration) you should be able to run 4 networks that should be able to serve 250-600 customers (depending on the level of service that the provider wants to deliver and they have available space for forward signals). That gives ya from 1000-2400 customers being served in a cable area.. There should be enough revenue to justify adding more fiber to break this area into a smalller ones so once again they can handle more customers. You obviously don't have a clue what your talking about.. even though you may be a victim of a Bad service provider.
N.B.
This is only true when there arn't enough customers being served by the equipment to pay for itself.. eg small handful of customers (in around 2% or less than capisty of the equipment). The you will see a drop in performance but the level of service should still be very acceptable.
Well your not 100% right there... Look at the canadian market... pricing is very similiar yet.. density difference between Japan and the us and similar to the US and Canada yet our data rates are signifficanly high for a good portion of our services.
Depending on where you are, who your provider is and engineering design will allways be the factors involved in speed... typically Downloading speeds are faster than dsl (Generaly speaking) just for the fact the use a 64 QAM (or larger) modulation of a 6 mzh band that typically provides 30Mb/s or greater capisty. It allways comes down to congestion/caps in the networks... Typically DSL connections are capped (Cable for the large part only upstream is capped due to rampant abuse by a minority I might add).. When put head to head They should be able to provide Similiar transfer rates on average when put in similar conditions. Anyone who makes a Blanket statement that DSL is faster than Cable or even the other way around just doesn't have a clue what they are talking about. Generally speaking the HFC(Hybrid Fiber Coax) Networks are vastly cheaper to roll out than what is required for DSL so that is where the main portion of the upper hand comes into play..
Not to mention this is also a study that admits that Time Warner Cable, the nation's second-largest cable television network was not included in the study.. Why was it left out? isn't that going to skew the study if the second largest network providers for the cable side is left out of the picture? This is a study and the results heavily depend on who does the study and who pays for it and the relationship of those two companies... I a positive that a DSL provider could easily do a study to prove the exact oppisite of this study... After all thats what studies are about... Proving your point... and as for a unbiased study would ned to entail every provider and be sastsicalical only study that didn't actually draw a conclusion. Once you start to draw a conclusion you drop or generalsize information for people to digest... once you do that you will start to add bias to your study because you have discluded information...
In short i urge everyone to try all highspeed technologies in thier area before setteling down on one.. Form your own opinion and find what meets your needs.. Don't let someone in a marketing department make decisions for you... and as far as your know it all friends that tell ya don't even bother trying this cause it sucks.... find out for yourself. 9 out of 10 know it all types know the least ammount from my experience.. Not to mention if they are right and it really does suck... Just make sure that when booking for an apointment that its not going to cost you mega $$ or try thier service.. If after a few short days the service is really that bad.. phone em up and tell em to fix or or remove it because your going to try a competitor... I am sure you will either get Great customer service or know you don't want thier service and you wont be at much of a loss.
IPV6 should do away with additional IP charges.. They are charging as a deterrent for IP abuse due to the inavailability of excess Ip addresses in IPV4. One could speculate that one(of the many) of the reasons why the roll out of IPV6 is taking so long when we are in such a bind for IP space could be revenues from additional IP's. From my understanding ARIN does not see the additional revenues generated from charging for additional IP space. Mainly they look at utilization of IP space before handing out new blocks. In our current "crisis" most of this money collect for additional IP space should be collected by ARIN and used to fund the finishing touches on IPv6. Also once IPv6 is offically rolled out to the backbone IP space should be free and current IPv4 space be frozen to force companys to make the switch.. as I can see alot of companies dragging thier feet so they can keep thier legacy v4 layer 3 gear going as long as possible. Its been about what... 6-7 years that v4 space is extreamly slim pickins... It should have been rolled out and in active use years ago... Well atleast the address space or an additional octet to relive the crunch that exists. Sure this will create some havoc for people with improperly administrated networks.. but really! Those networks that are not properly administrated should be shaken up as much and as often as possible as these networks are also highly likely to be problems anyway. Having Open Mail relays., Improperly secured servers and the like that do the most "Dammage" on the internet.
Makes me wonder if soon we will see stories about Elvis sightings, Brittany Spears and Bin Ladens secret love child and the like on /.
Well realistically the only thing this will do will make him shift his spamming efforts to more "Legitimate" spamming methods to help pay lawyer fees/fines.
Thats another thing that really pisses me off... Not only do they send you the email once.. but its common for me to see the same damn piece of spam 3 or 4 times a day in my spam folder.. Like Oh geeze this must be important if they are sending it more than just once..
I think its more because of the low number than anything else... I would like to see what method these complaints were made with to get a responce. It is extreamly likely if it only takes 46,000 to get the FTC to do something ALOT more people will before using these methods. after all spam effects 95% of the internet population and to get 46,000 to fill out a complaint about spam would be to easy
Umm.. Thats not such a good idea either :) After all for mentioning something like that you could be Considered a terrorist under the Homeland security Act.. After alll That would be a DDOS attack on the FTC's email servers :) Mind you it would be interesting to see what size of pipe and how large a server cluster they would need to Recive all the spam that never sees inboxes due to Filters :) That would be Such a interesting statistic... 1 out of every Million emails actually makes it to the inbox.. then 1 out of every Million of those actually gets opened.. then 1 out of every million of those generates a Positive responce to the spammer. It would be stagering to see how much money was spent so that 1 person could purchase something from a spam mail.. The cost I bet ya would be well hard to speculate.
Personally I love the Idea of Declaring them Enemy Combatants engaged in cyberterrorism..
At least Ashcroft hasn't labeled spammers as enemy combatants engaged in cyberterrorism and shipped them all off to Guantonomo Bay without a trial -- yet.
If only he would... I would pay money to see a Spammers house get hit by several mortar rounds before being stormed by a few dozen troops that have itchy trigger fingers. Now this aproach would definately slow down the spam..
It only takes that many complaints for the FTC to do something about a Spammer? Geeze... Thats not alot.. Should be Soo easy to wipe out the big Spam kings if it only takes 46,000 complaints to the FTC... considering there are Willions of people that it pisses off enough to do something about it... Not many know what to do about it... I Guess the answer is Complain to the FTC!
Does this mean if I chose a term and used it incorrectly does that make it right. I did a fair amount of looking for a Dictionary that defines Broadband as relating to highspeed and was unable to find one. Broadband is a new Buzz word being associated with highspeed. Does that make Broadband mean highspeed even though its been around decades and highspeed is just nearing a decade old? This is more of a misconception.. 99% of the public think that broadband and highspeed are one in the same when actually they are 2 totally diffrent things.. Is this right for the general public to remain mislead?
Game Servers :) Full Motion Video ect.. Just imagine your friend across the city buy a PPV event and your cars broke.. So he sets up his Video Camera aimed at the TV and streams it across the city man for you to watch at your house :)
"Broadband is catching on throughout the country"
I really hate to break the news to you.. but Broadband allready is damn near everywhere... Any place that has Cable has Broadband.. as Cable has been Broadband based since it first started.
I think your refering to High-speed internet that uses broadband.
Well... You wouldn't.. I haven't heard of a Single set-top box thats being made that is made for fiber to home.. so what your talking about is vaporware. But an Intelligent rollout of this type of service would have a Main box downstairs where the fiber terminates and all your Coax/Twisted pair ect would plug into it so They could utilize cheap standard equipment... After all even telco wire can support 45Mbit transmission over short distances. Mind you you may need a set-top-box still for the cable like services... but there isn't a reason why they can't use the coax thats allready in place.. But this sounds alot more like Speculation and fishing by someone that hasn't crunched the numbers to see what it would cost to roll this out.
Woo! You have got the idea... Fiber network maintence could easily be added in with property tax as Fiber networks arn't that costly to maintain.. and like you said.. It would eliminate infastructure monopoly and For once bring back the Mom and Pop ISP's that fired the internet up back into play. This is how infastructure should be setup these days as cable co's are starting to sell phone service and telco's are starting to sell cable service the only difference is the medium that is used to deliver the service.
But since this idea make alot of common sense and breaks down the barrier of entry into these businesses I am sure they will put up a huge fight.. After all this is a Idea that is brilliant and good for competition so I am sure there will be a big fuss and it will get killed. Its how business is done these days...