For awhile, the company I worked for had an office in an office park but the road on which the building was located was not in any map database. So every map system would direct people to the wrong place. Limo drivers would often call to get directions. Secretaries had to tell people to disregard the directions from online map systems like Mapquest or Google Maps.
I checked and saw that the Google maps for our office were (at least at the time) copyright Navteq. So I went to the Navteq website, found the "report a problem" page, took a screen shot of the bad map with the missing road, and went into a paint program and drew the missing road and added the proper location of our building's address and submitted the report. Then several months later (maybe as many as six) I received an email reply from Navteq the their people had verified my submission (they didn't say if it was via drive-by or satellite photo inspection) and that their map info was updated -- but that it might take awhile to appear in the systems that utilize their data. I think it took another 3-6 months to percolate into Google.
I just checked the address in Google maps, and the "missing road" is still there, but the street address location, while close, is no longer correct (and it's a "different" incorrect place than before). The map data copyright is no longer Navteq -- and not Teleatlas either. It's Google. There is a handy "report a problem" link right there by the map data copyright that wasn't there in the Navteq days.
Free trade is where I say 'hey, I've got this widget, you want to buy it?' and you say 'sure, here's $10' and we exchange cash for widget, without the government interfering at any point.
You don't need huge treaties for free trade, you just need governments to get out of the way.
Sounds nice but is completely incorrect. A huge percentage of the present US economy is based on intellectual property: computer software, television shows, movies, music, the designs of complex things (computer chips, etc.).
The only way to generate money from IP is to use governments to create and enforce laws. Otherwise, people will just make free copies of things.
Now, note that if you want to say that this is OK, that is fine, but it's a completely different argument. You would be destroying the present US economy and our present bad economic situation and huge US debt would be made much, much worse. The argument at hand is the/. author's comment of whether IP should be part of a free trade agreement, and the answer is an unequivocal "yes." Since one of the biggest things the US exports ("trades") is IP, it can only be "yes."
Also note that there are different flavors of IP: trademarks, copyrights, patents. Mostly what we're talking about here is copyright, so let's not get into the software patent quagmire.
If you look closely at the video, there were TWO versions of the app demo'd. Neither were on Windows Mobile. One was an iPhone app. The other was a Palm Pre / webOS app. Alas, the guy who demo'd the webOS version didn't have a microphone and you can't hear him talk in the video. Also, instead of using a live Palm Pre, he used the free Palm Pre emulator environment (running on a MacOS laptop), employing the Pre / webOS emulator which uses Sun's (Oracle's) VirtualBox platform.
But it's not an iPhone-only app. They have a webOS version.
Not a Windows Mobile version, though.
The question now: Is the Linux driver that good or the Windows driver that bad?
Wrong question. In fact, that's not even a real question; it's just two sides of the same coin.
The real question is whether the Linux driver performs better because it's coded better than the Windows driver, or whether it's because of some deficiencies in the Windows driver architecture, Windows graphics stack or the Windows OS itself.
In other words, is this truly a case where Linux is better than Windows? Or is this just a case of one driver being better than another. If it's the latter (as the "question" above implies), they could just write a better Windows driver. Not all that interesting in that case.
You're failing to consider the following: VIM (and Emacs, but I'm a vi person) have very powerful built-in capabilities that allow you to do things like make very specific global changes, using regular expressions, etc. Most basic text editors lack this. I frequently watch people doing silly things like putting pound-sign (#) characters as comments at the beginning of, say, 10 lines to comment out a section of a script or config file. They're doing it in Windows Notepad or something similar one line at a time. Come on; that's trivial in vi to do very quickly. And that's just the beginning of what you can do. Such a complete waste of time and productivity due to poor tools (provided natively) and poor choices (not getting and learning better tools).
As for Kate -- that exmplifies another thing you've failed to consider. Kate's not available everywhere. In fact, since my present personal website server runs Ubuntu under Gnome, I've never seen Kate to my knowledge. Meanwhile, VIM (or vi) is available everywhere. It's navtive to all versions of Unix and Linux. So if you're a Unix / Linux system admin, it's available on HP-UX, Solaris, AIX, Red Hat, Ubuntu, SuSe, etc. No matter where you end up, it's there, and it works and it's powerful. Plus, VIM/GVIM can be easily added to other systems like Windows. And it's free.
Another important aspect, as others have pointed out, is that vi is not required to run as a GUI (though GVIM is available if you want it); you can run it in a terminal window like ssh or telnet. Kate can't do that. Period.
The vi learning curve admittedly sucks. But I was forced to deal with that in 1985 on systems where that was the only real choice. Since I'm over the hump, it's not an issue for me.
VIM & GVIM have built-in support for side-by-side display of two files with the differences highlighted (produced via "diff", of course). It's called a "split diff."
Now all you have to do is train your business users to edit files with VIM.
Good luck with that.
But here's the deal: you need to figure out the problem you're solving (err, the problem the overlords are trying to solve). They may not understand this, but it is fundamentally and basically impossible for a text editing program to show you a change history that you can simply "hide" or "display" as Word and other word processors do. This is because they can store the data in a format that internally tracks changes. A raw text file, by definition, can only store one set of data. It is 100% inpossile to store the changes inside. Period. End of story. Thus, an editor could show changes made during a given session, or differences between two files, but it can never open a file and show a history of changes on a text file. If it were integrated with a source code control / versioning system, that's different. But in that case, it's not "opening a text file" it's "opening a repository".
They've just removed the "We're experiencing technical difficulties" message from their Support page, and indeed their DNS servers appear to be working reliably again. My website / email (not hosted with them) were down due to the DNS problems, but eveything seems fine now.
How did they fix it w/out updating Google Desktop?
on
Google Fixes IE Bug
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The article notes that Google fixed it because they didn't have to update any client code (implying that if an update would be required, they wouldn't have done it). Ignoring the fact that that's not necessarily a good reason, my question is how is this possible at all?
The article mentions that they simply "tightend" some setting on the main Google site. This is surprising. Google Desktop is an offline application -- you can use it when you are not on the Internet.
Of course, the main way that the bug will be exploited is when you *are* on the internet and you browse a malicious site. So I have to presume that there is some file (like a.css or.html) that Desktop references from the main Google website rather than from it's local code, and that this somehow is related to the IE bug that can be exploited.
The article was completely vague on this. Anyone have more definitive information?
The CIA is going to be all over this. Now their flying spy insects can be blood-powered and not have to use an electrical power source to re-charge. CIA mosquito spy-bugs. Great. And then we'll have another vector for spreading disease. Oh, wait, maybe these things don't really exist. Give it time.
Just passing along this bit of trivia. The QVC HQ and studios are on the site of the former Commodore plant in West Chester, Pennsylvania (outside Philadelphia).
The article mentions Linux briefly, and basically lays the entire GNU project at Linus Torvalds feet. There's no mention of RMS or the GNU project, who basically wrote all of the stuff above the kernel but just never got around to writing the kernel itself. Quite a bit of an oversight and over-simplification.
To an extent, this rivalry was stripped of relevance by an unexpected entrant. In 1991, an obscure university student in Finland, Linus Torvalds, announced a project to write a new, open-source clone of Unix from scratch--what has come to be known as Linux.
I beg to differ. Had/. posted this story when it was submitted, I would have gone to see Gibson at the Free Library of Philadelphia's Central Library. I live in the area, but hadn't read about it. I suppose I should read my Ink-wire a little more closely, but thought I relied on/. for things like this.
This is a pretty common occurrance from what I can tell. The rejection / posted by someone else two days later thing has happened to me once or twice.
To all the naysayers posting here, I'll quote the article which quotes "The Valley": You don't get it. You're a/. reader using the Internet at its best, but you don't get it.
"Big broadband" (as the article calls it) is the future. All the commotion we currently have about getting DSL or Cable modems or slow fixed wireless or sattelite broadband is just plain silly. The further commotion about VoIP over the current "Little Broadband" is even sillier.
OK,/.ers, I'm sure you can get this. I've seen quite a lot of new housing develpments constructed recently here in (formerly) rural Chester County PA. And I've seen tons being built in Las Vegas (consistantly one of the fastest growing cities in the US for the past few years). Can you believe in this day and age we're still pulling several ancient copper wire pairs (same exact technology as Mr. Bell himself used) to each new home built? Plus, we also pull a coax-cable? Plus, when the home owner runs into the horrible service and high rates of the local cable monopoly, they slap a satellite dish on their house? This is for *new* construction!
At this point in history, we should be pulling fiber to each new home built and just peeling off bandwidth for TV, HDTV, VoIP, Internet, etc.
Google. You'll find that it's already being done by "smart" communities -- and not just for new construction. Five cities in Utah I believe recently announced plans. Kutztown PA was a pioneer.
It's not a quesiton of "if" it should be done. We will fall further behind other countries like South Korea if we do not do it. Plus, as my little example and the article clearly point out, it's actually cost effective.
It's a question of when it will happen, and how.
There are tons of political and special interest issues to be dealt with. And how should it be regulated and managed?
I like the way it's currently happening. Local municipalities are installing the networks and managing them as local utilities. This eliminates "big Government" issues. It doesn't eliminate the inefficiencies of government vs. free business -- but the "last mile" element of providing connectivity is pretty much doomed to be dealt with as a regulated utility / monopoly of some sort, whether it's telephone, cable, power or even natural gas. Perhaps each municipality should go out to bid and let companies compete to construct the system and operate it for the first 10 years. The bids would include construction cost and also the absolutely guaranteed consumer rates (even if they are rates that include increases over the 10 year period). After the contract is up, companies bid on operating and maintaining the network for the next 10 years. The actual ownership of the network remains with the local municipality. Perhaps use a state PUC umbrella to govern and coordinate these things. but the PUC is so beholdin' to the utilities they supposedly regulate here in PA that I'm not too fond of this model.
My thoughts exactly; I believe Wal*Mart has one of the largest. I suspect that's the flaw in this set of awards: perhaps the only organizations considered are those that applied. If no-one at Wal*Mart submitted an application, they're not listed.
Similarly, I suspect the US SSA has one of the largest databases around, but they were not listed. The word "commercial" is sprinkled throughout the contest description, but it's not clear if the organization itself has to be commercial, or just the database software. In any event, the "Land Registry" is listed among the winners, and they appear to be a UK government entity, though I'm not sure.
Alas, as far as I know, Uniden does not make a multi-handset 2-line 5.8 Ghz phone. In fact, as far as I know, no-one does, not even Vtech/ATT 5.8/2.4 phones.
As for Panasonic, the different models apparently vary tremendously in how they affect 802.11b. As it happens, it was an expensive Panasonic which caused the "take entire network down when off hook" behavior, and I swore not to get another Panasonic based just on that. Perhaps they've fixed things, but it wasted a huge amount of my time and money.
Here's something I haven't seen mentioned so far: VoIP + 802.11[abg] == a better cordless phone because it won't interfere with 802.11[abg] networks -- it runs on top of them!
This may seem like a minor thing, or an obvious thing when reading this, but for me it would be a great thing.
I've been through such problems trying to find cordless phones that don't interfere with my home 802.11b network. A cordless that ran ON 802.11b would only take up bandwidth; not interfere. And if I switched to 802.11 a or g, I'd have more bandwidth.
Think there's not much need or no market? Here's what I went through (short version):
900 Mhz phones not an option because of interference from other sources, and mainly because none of the vendors are releasing feature-full phones based on 900 Mhz. Want multi-handset with two lines? Forget it.
Some 2.4 Ghz phones completely trash 802.11b when off hook. Other models / brands will seem to cause no problem at all -- except occasionally (and regularly) your computers will loose their 802.11b connection. Even with the phone on-hook. Plus, sometimes you'll get static on the phone when there's a lot of data on the 802.11b network.
There is no standards body setting standards for or certifying compatility of 2.4 Ghz band devices. There is only one way to find out if a phone will interfere with your 802.11b network: Buy it, take it home, plug it in, use it, wait, see if anything weird happens. Took me a few days to notice the "computers drop off the network problem". Hopefully you have time to return the phone...
New 5.8 Ghz phones are no solution. Turns out they use 5.8 Ghz in one direction (base to handset, I think), but 2.4 Ghz in the other direction.
Actually, if the "gurus" truly referred to a NAT firewall as "security through obscurity" then they are indeed dumbasses. STO refers to security based on "unpublished" information. Example: using a transmission protocol or compression mechanism that is undocumented. All it takes is a little reverse engineering -- or someone publishing the secret protocol or algorithm -- and all security is lost.
NAT firewalls are not based on an unpublished algorithm. They truly hide the network behind them -- and this may be what is confusing the dumbasses -- the word "hide" as in obscurity. But there's no relation. This is a fairly well hidden network, and more importantly a network with a fair degree of protection. Research papers have been done on attempting to identify NAT'ed networks and perhaps even attempting to identify the number of computers behind the NAT device, but it's not simple or foolproof and certainly does not allow anyone to get "through" the NAT firewall.
I think the inventors of the RFID blocking idea are brilliant, no doubt about it. Elegant solution. However, for technical reasons, the privacy mode "defaults" the wrong way. Here's what I mean: a standard human being without an RFID blocker, by default, has no privacy. In order to get back your privacy, you have to remember to wear your RFID blocker. They talk about building this into watches and such, but that doesn't address the basic problem.
Though it may not be technologically feasible, the whay it should work is that people should have to conciously do something to loose their privacy; not the other way 'round.
Plus, of course, as has been mentioned elsewhere, these blockers would likely break some of the basic functions for which RFID is designed. In theory, with RFID, you could wheel your fully-loaded shopping cart through the checkout isle, and everything in your cart would automatically be read via RF and added to your tab. Would save everyone tons of time at the checkout! Put shopping bags in your cart at the start of your trip, then place goods directly into the bags as you shop! But this breaks if you're wearing an RFID blocker.
I'm from the US, not the UK, but my understanding is that the basically commercial-free BBC is funded at least partly via a tax on the number of televisions in a home. If BBC content is freely downloadable from the Internet, eventually as broadband improves, the BBC would need to replace the TV funding which will dwindle over time (long term).
There are tons of options, but it means this can't be a free lunch forever. A tax on broadband use? A tax on number of computers owned (similar to TVs)? Commercials in downloaded content?
Slashdot Mirror
Wasted time reading this article due to the poor title. Should have been "How To Line a Thermonuclear Fusion Reactor"
For awhile, the company I worked for had an office in an office park but the road on which the building was located was not in any map database. So every map system would direct people to the wrong place. Limo drivers would often call to get directions. Secretaries had to tell people to disregard the directions from online map systems like Mapquest or Google Maps. I checked and saw that the Google maps for our office were (at least at the time) copyright Navteq. So I went to the Navteq website, found the "report a problem" page, took a screen shot of the bad map with the missing road, and went into a paint program and drew the missing road and added the proper location of our building's address and submitted the report. Then several months later (maybe as many as six) I received an email reply from Navteq the their people had verified my submission (they didn't say if it was via drive-by or satellite photo inspection) and that their map info was updated -- but that it might take awhile to appear in the systems that utilize their data. I think it took another 3-6 months to percolate into Google. I just checked the address in Google maps, and the "missing road" is still there, but the street address location, while close, is no longer correct (and it's a "different" incorrect place than before). The map data copyright is no longer Navteq -- and not Teleatlas either. It's Google. There is a handy "report a problem" link right there by the map data copyright that wasn't there in the Navteq days.
Free trade is where I say 'hey, I've got this widget, you want to buy it?' and you say 'sure, here's $10' and we exchange cash for widget, without the government interfering at any point.
You don't need huge treaties for free trade, you just need governments to get out of the way.
Sounds nice but is completely incorrect. A huge percentage of the present US economy is based on intellectual property: computer software, television shows, movies, music, the designs of complex things (computer chips, etc.).
The only way to generate money from IP is to use governments to create and enforce laws. Otherwise, people will just make free copies of things.
Now, note that if you want to say that this is OK, that is fine, but it's a completely different argument. You would be destroying the present US economy and our present bad economic situation and huge US debt would be made much, much worse. The argument at hand is the /. author's comment of whether IP should be part of a free trade agreement, and the answer is an unequivocal "yes." Since one of the biggest things the US exports ("trades") is IP, it can only be "yes."
Also note that there are different flavors of IP: trademarks, copyrights, patents. Mostly what we're talking about here is copyright, so let's not get into the software patent quagmire.
If you look closely at the video, there were TWO versions of the app demo'd. Neither were on Windows Mobile. One was an iPhone app. The other was a Palm Pre / webOS app. Alas, the guy who demo'd the webOS version didn't have a microphone and you can't hear him talk in the video. Also, instead of using a live Palm Pre, he used the free Palm Pre emulator environment (running on a MacOS laptop), employing the Pre / webOS emulator which uses Sun's (Oracle's) VirtualBox platform. But it's not an iPhone-only app. They have a webOS version. Not a Windows Mobile version, though.
The question now: Is the Linux driver that good or the Windows driver that bad?
Wrong question. In fact, that's not even a real question; it's just two sides of the same coin. The real question is whether the Linux driver performs better because it's coded better than the Windows driver, or whether it's because of some deficiencies in the Windows driver architecture, Windows graphics stack or the Windows OS itself. In other words, is this truly a case where Linux is better than Windows? Or is this just a case of one driver being better than another. If it's the latter (as the "question" above implies), they could just write a better Windows driver. Not all that interesting in that case.
In the deep, distant past, I don't think you could bind macros to keys in vi. So it's an old argument that's no longer valid.
You're failing to consider the following: VIM (and Emacs, but I'm a vi person) have very powerful built-in capabilities that allow you to do things like make very specific global changes, using regular expressions, etc. Most basic text editors lack this. I frequently watch people doing silly things like putting pound-sign (#) characters as comments at the beginning of, say, 10 lines to comment out a section of a script or config file. They're doing it in Windows Notepad or something similar one line at a time. Come on; that's trivial in vi to do very quickly. And that's just the beginning of what you can do. Such a complete waste of time and productivity due to poor tools (provided natively) and poor choices (not getting and learning better tools).
As for Kate -- that exmplifies another thing you've failed to consider. Kate's not available everywhere. In fact, since my present personal website server runs Ubuntu under Gnome, I've never seen Kate to my knowledge. Meanwhile, VIM (or vi) is available everywhere. It's navtive to all versions of Unix and Linux. So if you're a Unix / Linux system admin, it's available on HP-UX, Solaris, AIX, Red Hat, Ubuntu, SuSe, etc. No matter where you end up, it's there, and it works and it's powerful. Plus, VIM/GVIM can be easily added to other systems like Windows. And it's free.
Another important aspect, as others have pointed out, is that vi is not required to run as a GUI (though GVIM is available if you want it); you can run it in a terminal window like ssh or telnet. Kate can't do that. Period.
The vi learning curve admittedly sucks. But I was forced to deal with that in 1985 on systems where that was the only real choice. Since I'm over the hump, it's not an issue for me.
"Chinese researchers have realised that a sheet of nanotubes behaves like a speaker when you send an audio current through it. ...
None of that boring old electrical current for them.
VIM & GVIM have built-in support for side-by-side display of two files with the differences highlighted (produced via "diff", of course). It's called a "split diff." Now all you have to do is train your business users to edit files with VIM. Good luck with that. But here's the deal: you need to figure out the problem you're solving (err, the problem the overlords are trying to solve). They may not understand this, but it is fundamentally and basically impossible for a text editing program to show you a change history that you can simply "hide" or "display" as Word and other word processors do. This is because they can store the data in a format that internally tracks changes. A raw text file, by definition, can only store one set of data. It is 100% inpossile to store the changes inside. Period. End of story. Thus, an editor could show changes made during a given session, or differences between two files, but it can never open a file and show a history of changes on a text file. If it were integrated with a source code control / versioning system, that's different. But in that case, it's not "opening a text file" it's "opening a repository".
Are you completely blind? (I'm sure this will result in the same response as trolling, but I'm not)
They've just removed the "We're experiencing technical difficulties" message from their Support page, and indeed their DNS servers appear to be working reliably again. My website / email (not hosted with them) were down due to the DNS problems, but eveything seems fine now.
Just back up the one's you're going to lose. Duh.
The article notes that Google fixed it because they didn't have to update any client code (implying that if an update would be required, they wouldn't have done it). Ignoring the fact that that's not necessarily a good reason, my question is how is this possible at all? The article mentions that they simply "tightend" some setting on the main Google site. This is surprising. Google Desktop is an offline application -- you can use it when you are not on the Internet. Of course, the main way that the bug will be exploited is when you *are* on the internet and you browse a malicious site. So I have to presume that there is some file (like a .css or .html) that Desktop references from the main Google website rather than from it's local code, and that this somehow is related to the IE bug that can be exploited.
The article was completely vague on this. Anyone have more definitive information?
The CIA is going to be all over this. Now their flying spy insects can be blood-powered and not have to use an electrical power source to re-charge. CIA mosquito spy-bugs. Great. And then we'll have another vector for spreading disease. Oh, wait, maybe these things don't really exist. Give it time.
Just passing along this bit of trivia. The QVC HQ and studios are on the site of the former Commodore plant in West Chester, Pennsylvania (outside Philadelphia).
This is a pretty common occurrance from what I can tell. The rejection / posted by someone else two days later thing has happened to me once or twice.
To all the naysayers posting here, I'll quote the article which quotes "The Valley": You don't get it. You're a /. reader using the Internet at its best, but you don't get it.
"Big broadband" (as the article calls it) is the future. All the commotion we currently have about getting DSL or Cable modems or slow fixed wireless or sattelite broadband is just plain silly. The further commotion about VoIP over the current "Little Broadband" is even sillier.
OK, /.ers, I'm sure you can get this. I've seen quite a lot of new housing develpments constructed recently here in (formerly) rural Chester County PA. And I've seen tons being built in Las Vegas (consistantly one of the fastest growing cities in the US for the past few years). Can you believe in this day and age we're still pulling several ancient copper wire pairs (same exact technology as Mr. Bell himself used) to each new home built? Plus, we also pull a coax-cable? Plus, when the home owner runs into the horrible service and high rates of the local cable monopoly, they slap a satellite dish on their house? This is for *new* construction!
At this point in history, we should be pulling fiber to each new home built and just peeling off bandwidth for TV, HDTV, VoIP, Internet, etc.
Google. You'll find that it's already being done by "smart" communities -- and not just for new construction. Five cities in Utah I believe recently announced plans. Kutztown PA was a pioneer.
It's not a quesiton of "if" it should be done. We will fall further behind other countries like South Korea if we do not do it. Plus, as my little example and the article clearly point out, it's actually cost effective.
It's a question of when it will happen, and how.
There are tons of political and special interest issues to be dealt with. And how should it be regulated and managed?
I like the way it's currently happening. Local municipalities are installing the networks and managing them as local utilities. This eliminates "big Government" issues. It doesn't eliminate the inefficiencies of government vs. free business -- but the "last mile" element of providing connectivity is pretty much doomed to be dealt with as a regulated utility / monopoly of some sort, whether it's telephone, cable, power or even natural gas. Perhaps each municipality should go out to bid and let companies compete to construct the system and operate it for the first 10 years. The bids would include construction cost and also the absolutely guaranteed consumer rates (even if they are rates that include increases over the 10 year period). After the contract is up, companies bid on operating and maintaining the network for the next 10 years. The actual ownership of the network remains with the local municipality. Perhaps use a state PUC umbrella to govern and coordinate these things. but the PUC is so beholdin' to the utilities they supposedly regulate here in PA that I'm not too fond of this model.
I was told in school internet meant INTERnational NETwork. can someone clarify? Yeah. Your school teacher is wrong. So's most of the article.
My thoughts exactly; I believe Wal*Mart has one of the largest. I suspect that's the flaw in this set of awards: perhaps the only organizations considered are those that applied. If no-one at Wal*Mart submitted an application, they're not listed. Similarly, I suspect the US SSA has one of the largest databases around, but they were not listed. The word "commercial" is sprinkled throughout the contest description, but it's not clear if the organization itself has to be commercial, or just the database software. In any event, the "Land Registry" is listed among the winners, and they appear to be a UK government entity, though I'm not sure.
Alas, as far as I know, Uniden does not make a multi-handset 2-line 5.8 Ghz phone. In fact, as far as I know, no-one does, not even Vtech/ATT 5.8/2.4 phones. As for Panasonic, the different models apparently vary tremendously in how they affect 802.11b. As it happens, it was an expensive Panasonic which caused the "take entire network down when off hook" behavior, and I swore not to get another Panasonic based just on that. Perhaps they've fixed things, but it wasted a huge amount of my time and money.
This may seem like a minor thing, or an obvious thing when reading this, but for me it would be a great thing.
I've been through such problems trying to find cordless phones that don't interfere with my home 802.11b network. A cordless that ran ON 802.11b would only take up bandwidth; not interfere. And if I switched to 802.11 a or g, I'd have more bandwidth.
Think there's not much need or no market? Here's what I went through (short version):
900 Mhz phones not an option because of interference from other sources, and mainly because none of the vendors are releasing feature-full phones based on 900 Mhz. Want multi-handset with two lines? Forget it.
Some 2.4 Ghz phones completely trash 802.11b when off hook. Other models / brands will seem to cause no problem at all -- except occasionally (and regularly) your computers will loose their 802.11b connection. Even with the phone on-hook. Plus, sometimes you'll get static on the phone when there's a lot of data on the 802.11b network.
There is no standards body setting standards for or certifying compatility of 2.4 Ghz band devices. There is only one way to find out if a phone will interfere with your 802.11b network: Buy it, take it home, plug it in, use it, wait, see if anything weird happens. Took me a few days to notice the "computers drop off the network problem". Hopefully you have time to return the phone...
New 5.8 Ghz phones are no solution. Turns out they use 5.8 Ghz in one direction (base to handset, I think), but 2.4 Ghz in the other direction.
Actually, if the "gurus" truly referred to a NAT firewall as "security through obscurity" then they are indeed dumbasses. STO refers to security based on "unpublished" information. Example: using a transmission protocol or compression mechanism that is undocumented. All it takes is a little reverse engineering -- or someone publishing the secret protocol or algorithm -- and all security is lost.
NAT firewalls are not based on an unpublished algorithm. They truly hide the network behind them -- and this may be what is confusing the dumbasses -- the word "hide" as in obscurity. But there's no relation. This is a fairly well hidden network, and more importantly a network with a fair degree of protection. Research papers have been done on attempting to identify NAT'ed networks and perhaps even attempting to identify the number of computers behind the NAT device, but it's not simple or foolproof and certainly does not allow anyone to get "through" the NAT firewall.
Though it may not be technologically feasible, the whay it should work is that people should have to conciously do something to loose their privacy; not the other way 'round.
Plus, of course, as has been mentioned elsewhere, these blockers would likely break some of the basic functions for which RFID is designed. In theory, with RFID, you could wheel your fully-loaded shopping cart through the checkout isle, and everything in your cart would automatically be read via RF and added to your tab. Would save everyone tons of time at the checkout! Put shopping bags in your cart at the start of your trip, then place goods directly into the bags as you shop! But this breaks if you're wearing an RFID blocker.
There are tons of options, but it means this can't be a free lunch forever. A tax on broadband use? A tax on number of computers owned (similar to TVs)? Commercials in downloaded content?