The actual events will require both Silverlight and Vista.
Thereby making absolutely certain that the videos won't be cached, transcoded and redistributed within seconds of their first webcast. You won't be able to archive them or time shift them or view them on the evil Lunix or your otherwise capable crackberry or eee pc. Right? Right? Because Vista's secure media transport and display has been perfected and will never be cracked.
This streamed olympic footage will not be available for fair use, ever. Not even long after even those who participated have ceased to care. Me, I don't care already. If they stream it to an open platform I might watch some of it but Vista alone is too much of a price to pay, let alone Silverlight. I think instead I'll click over to CNN and see if they manage to smuggle out footage of protesters.
You misunderstood me. I agree that broadband over powerline is dumb. Fiber is the way to go, and some PUDs are deploying it. Their customers get these awesome Taiwan broadband levels for about $50/month. Fiber does not have an RF signature.
To provide service to the broadband neglected in the US -- like, for example, allowing the public power districts that already have wires running to the homes do it.
If there were no copyright these lawyers would not have the excuse of stolen IP to invade our privacy. Let's not parry their thrust -- let's cut them off at the knees. Abolish copyright and this problem and many like it just go away.
We have the power to fix all these problems at a stroke.
Believe it or not People That Matter monitor slashdot. They reap our ideas, our opinions and our memes. It matters to Them. Because it matters to Them, it matters to us.
Whether you like it or not we're not just wanking to external pci-e here. This stuff really does matter, and I'm one of Them so I know.
The real problem with bandwidth in the US today is astonishingly margins. Comcast et. al. make billions a month serving their high margin dense customers and neglect the less dense rural customers. They do this because the corporate margin number is of extreme importance to the CEO and the stockholders as it inflates the value of the stock. That means they companies are leaving money on the table with the lower margin (but quite profitable) rural customers because serving them would give them more profits net but lower margins as a percentage of investment. Likewise with technology improvements -- if they can't get more money for more bandwidth, they won't build it even if the only change is a $10,000 switch that replaces a $100,000 switch and works 10 times as fast. They've already paid for the $100,000 switch and made millions on it. They could replace it with the newer cheaper, just as reliable tech but they won't because people won't pay extra for the extra bandwidth. They can afford to do this because their monopolies are enforced by law and new competitors that could build out a more modern infrastructure would have to drag new fiber at horrendous cost.
This is classic monopoly economics. To defeat it we need to defeat the monopoly by having public agencies tell them "if you won't serve these customers, we will."
I see you've agreed on a release schedule for Microsoft Chair Joke 2.0 SP1. Are you sure you've tested it enough to be certain most customers won't find it a negative improvement, or is that the irony component that makes the Microsoft Chair Joke 2.0 SP1 funny, whereas Microsoft Chair Joke 2.0 was not?
Here's a novel idea: if you intend to sell metered service, sell metered service. Wow. That's just blowing me away with its simplicity. How could they have not thought of that?
Call it "Bandwidth Plus" or something.
Better yet, call your local politician and tell him it would be really cool if power districts could sell communications services, because, you know, they own the rights of way and the incumbent communications providers aren't interested in building out the post roads of the 21st century.
When I.T. professionals and consumers got a look at Vista, they all had this same question for Microsoft: That's it?
Vista as delivered is significantly different from Vista as promised. So different as to be perhaps unrecognizable. It breaks everything, fixes nothing that wasn't already fixed with third party software, and expands Microsoft's victory over Novell on the network by being consistently unreliable with Novell networking.
I was wondering if this NYTimes article would hit slashdot. It reads a little like the author's an Apple fan, but not offensively so.
While the author issues Microsoft some good guidance, they won't take it. They can't hear us at all. It's time to switch.
Get a good hosts list. This will tell your computer that a long list of websites are unreachable. Good ones include badware hosts and ad farms.
You can prevent your computer from talking to large chunks of the Internet. If you don't go to websites in hacker country you can configure your firewall or routing table to prevent communication with bad netblocks like china, Brazil and Lithuania.
All of that data you don't even get makes your browser that much faster whatever it is.
Have you considered that mortality itself serves an evolutionarily important purpose? Given the long history of life on Earth it seems likely that a lifeform that lived forever (like amoebae) has been tried and failed to dominate for some reason. Otherwise we would reproduce by fission.
Slashdot Mirror
The government? Providing necessary infrastructure companies can't or won't? How dare they!
The actual events will require both Silverlight and Vista.
Thereby making absolutely certain that the videos won't be cached, transcoded and redistributed within seconds of their first webcast. You won't be able to archive them or time shift them or view them on the evil Lunix or your otherwise capable crackberry or eee pc. Right? Right? Because Vista's secure media transport and display has been perfected and will never be cracked.
This streamed olympic footage will not be available for fair use, ever. Not even long after even those who participated have ceased to care. Me, I don't care already. If they stream it to an open platform I might watch some of it but Vista alone is too much of a price to pay, let alone Silverlight. I think instead I'll click over to CNN and see if they manage to smuggle out footage of protesters.
So it's more of a narrow test even than you might think. To participate you have to have more money than sense. The advertisers should love it.
Until the servers go down, anyway. Microsoft might have some smart folks, but they're no YouTube.
You misunderstood me. I agree that broadband over powerline is dumb. Fiber is the way to go, and some PUDs are deploying it. Their customers get these awesome Taiwan broadband levels for about $50/month. Fiber does not have an RF signature.
To provide service to the broadband neglected in the US -- like, for example, allowing the public power districts that already have wires running to the homes do it.
The point of the GPL is to ensure the code remains free. If all code is free the code needs no such protection.
End copyright. All this goes away if we abolish copyright.
If there were no copyright these lawyers would not have the excuse of stolen IP to invade our privacy. Let's not parry their thrust -- let's cut them off at the knees. Abolish copyright and this problem and many like it just go away.
We have the power to fix all these problems at a stroke.
Abolish copyright. End the insanity.
I was laughing at myself. I guess it's just another bad joke. :-(
Believe it or not People That Matter monitor slashdot. They reap our ideas, our opinions and our memes. It matters to Them. Because it matters to Them, it matters to us.
Whether you like it or not we're not just wanking to external pci-e here. This stuff really does matter, and I'm one of Them so I know.
That's an indirect Godwin. Yay I win. Next thread?
The real problem with bandwidth in the US today is astonishingly margins. Comcast et. al. make billions a month serving their high margin dense customers and neglect the less dense rural customers. They do this because the corporate margin number is of extreme importance to the CEO and the stockholders as it inflates the value of the stock. That means they companies are leaving money on the table with the lower margin (but quite profitable) rural customers because serving them would give them more profits net but lower margins as a percentage of investment. Likewise with technology improvements -- if they can't get more money for more bandwidth, they won't build it even if the only change is a $10,000 switch that replaces a $100,000 switch and works 10 times as fast. They've already paid for the $100,000 switch and made millions on it. They could replace it with the newer cheaper, just as reliable tech but they won't because people won't pay extra for the extra bandwidth. They can afford to do this because their monopolies are enforced by law and new competitors that could build out a more modern infrastructure would have to drag new fiber at horrendous cost.
This is classic monopoly economics. To defeat it we need to defeat the monopoly by having public agencies tell them "if you won't serve these customers, we will."
The world needs greeters too.
I see you've agreed on a release schedule for Microsoft Chair Joke 2.0 SP1. Are you sure you've tested it enough to be certain most customers won't find it a negative improvement, or is that the irony component that makes the Microsoft Chair Joke 2.0 SP1 funny, whereas Microsoft Chair Joke 2.0 was not?
Oh, jeebus. Now you've got me doing it.
It's always a trap.
Here's a novel idea: if you intend to sell metered service, sell metered service. Wow. That's just blowing me away with its simplicity. How could they have not thought of that?
Call it "Bandwidth Plus" or something.
Better yet, call your local politician and tell him it would be really cool if power districts could sell communications services, because, you know, they own the rights of way and the incumbent communications providers aren't interested in building out the post roads of the 21st century.
Every gigabyte of install space is an added deployment labor cost. The bits don't wander onto the platters by themselves, you know.
And then there's the fact that it won't deploy with traditional tools -- as if Microsoft wanted to corner the market on deployment tools...
Of course the problems to overcome in making an image that's deployable on existing enterprise architecture dwarfs the issues above.
When I.T. professionals and consumers got a look at Vista, they all had this same question for Microsoft: That's it?
Vista as delivered is significantly different from Vista as promised. So different as to be perhaps unrecognizable. It breaks everything, fixes nothing that wasn't already fixed with third party software, and expands Microsoft's victory over Novell on the network by being consistently unreliable with Novell networking.
I was wondering if this NYTimes article would hit slashdot. It reads a little like the author's an Apple fan, but not offensively so.
While the author issues Microsoft some good guidance, they won't take it. They can't hear us at all. It's time to switch.
It's really amazing that phone companies still don't have mandatory minimal access levels for net access outside major metropolitan areas.
For a solution to this problem google my sig.
Is there anything it can't do? Hey! Somebody gen me up an Ada interpreter in Javascript real quick.
and enhanced security you can do these things: \
Get a good hosts list. This will tell your computer that a long list of websites are unreachable. Good ones include badware hosts and ad farms.
You can prevent your computer from talking to large chunks of the Internet. If you don't go to websites in hacker country you can configure your firewall or routing table to prevent communication with bad netblocks like china, Brazil and Lithuania.
All of that data you don't even get makes your browser that much faster whatever it is.
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." - Godwin's Law
Corrolary 1: As soon as Godwin's law is satisfied the discussion is finished and whoever Godwin'd the discussion loses.
Quirk's exception: Deliberate Godwins are void.
These are generally held to apply more broadly to all web forums as well as usenet.
Have you considered that mortality itself serves an evolutionarily important purpose? Given the long history of life on Earth it seems likely that a lifeform that lived forever (like amoebae) has been tried and failed to dominate for some reason. Otherwise we would reproduce by fission.
>I find it hard to imagine a population with more irrational fear that the one right now.
Your imagination needs maintenance. Please report to the programming center.