In relation to what you said, something else often quoted is the loss of ice in Antarctica (Ross Ice Shelf). But ice in some areas of Antarctica is actually increasing.
Michael Crichton's recent novel "State of Fear" is a good read concerning global warming. Skipping the actual plot of the story, let me get to the point he's trying to make - he isn't saying global warming isn't happening. He isn't saying it is.
The fact is we don't know for sure. Some things seem to show that it is, while others show. There is no conclusive evidence.
I'm stationed in Iraq right now and I've often wondered if the RIAA has any idea of the scale of piracy here. We can get (admittedly, crappy theatre copies) DVD's of movies that have just been released. In addition, we get pirated DVD's of all sorts of movies for anything between $1 - $5. Once a movie reaches the PX (Post eXchange), we can expect a pirated copy from "HajiVision" (yes, this might seem politically incorrect to some of you, but bear with me - this is what we call it here, and some of our Iraqi Interpreters themselves refer to other Iraqis as "Hajis") in a day or to. Oh yeah, and let me mention the Boxed Sets of all sorts of TV shows from the US. Anything from Friends to Simpsons to House to Battlestar Galactica - you name it, they have it. A lot of these are made by enterprising Iraqis who either make copies of pirated videos they get from China or one of the SE Asian countries. Others download DVD rips from the web and then burn their own copies.
The RIAA probably has no clue. Or maybe they do, and can't do anything about it. Then again, maybe if they said something like "The insurgents make money off pirated DVD's! Piracy is helping terrorism!" maybe Piracy can become a part of OIF./sarcasm
Initially, the advisors of the founder of CSM were afraid that the "Christian" in the title would throw of secular readers, but it was a requirement of the founder of the publication, Mary Baker Eddy. When I first heard about this magazine, I thought it was some front for Creationist arguments against creation or something of the sort. But once I read the articles, I found them to be very well balanced, devoid of sensationalism, and very informative. But the "Christian" in the name puzzled me, because I didn't really find anything pertaining to Christianity or anything overtly religious. So finally I looked up this Wikipedia article, which explains it nicely.
Now, not only do service personnel currently serving have to worry about IEDs and being fired upon, but they are now subject to possible identity theft. A real failure. After this, how could one have faith enough to serve an inept institution?"
I'm in Iraq right now. Yes, we have to deal with IED's and being fired upon. And yes, having to worry about this isn't all that great either. But that has absolutely nothing to do with "serving an inept institution" as you call it. We don't serve an institution. We serve in the Armed Forces of the United States. I serve in the Army, and I don't think that the Army is inept. This isn't a failure of the US Army as a whole, but it was due to the indiscretionary act of one person. He violated OPSEC (Operational Security) and he had no business taking sensitive information into his personal computer. This is HIS fault, and I hope he gets prosecuted to the fullest possible extent under the UCMJ. So please, like the parent said, no editioralization is necessary. We serve because we took an oath. We serve because we are professionals. We serve because words like Loyalty, Honor, Duty and Courage mean something to us. It doesn't mean that it means nothing to a civilian. But I hate it when people assume we are nothing but mindless drones. I, personally, try to keep politics away from the military. Which is why I don't endorse any side of political debate, when speaking as a soldier. I'm here to do a job, and I'm here as a professional.
One thing about being here is that it's all about luck. We can only do so much as far as tactics go, and as far as being "aware of our surroundings" and being "careful". A lot depends on luck.
Good point. I wanted to buy a Gamecube when it came out, but didn't do so until late 2003 (or maybe it was early 2004) when I was able to get it for $99. I mainly wanted it to play Zelda. However, speaking of titles, I've found that Gamecube titles come up woefully short against PS2/Xbox. I've always found the Gamecube selection to be much smaller. I'm in Iraq right now, and they sell games here for all consoles at the PX. Here too, I don't find too many titles. Some titles that are on the PS2 and XBox, aren't on the Gamecube. I don't know too much about titles and deals between different game companies and consoles, but is there a reason Nintendo doesn't have that many titles? Will the Revolution have the same problem?
I don't see this as good at all. And I don't say this because of where _I_ work...
Competition is good. That I can see. AMD did show up Intel more than a few times and Intel is responding and changing. That's what business and competition is all about. I have to admit that I lost some respect for AMD once they did this. I have always thought that they provided good processors at good prices and at times I have even bought AMD. But the lawsuit? I don't think so.
Think about this, AMD fanboys. If Intel were to disappear today, do you think AMD will have ANYWHERE near the capacity to supply the market? The answer is a plain and simple "No". Intel has a large amount of fabs that churn out processors for its supplies. AMD doesn't have that strength. The fact is that Intel supplies a majority of the market and keeps it going. AMD is an excellent competitor and keeps Intel on its toes. And that is what we need to see. Not lawsuits. I wonder how much this is actually going to cost consumers.
Well, I can see why they would do this, but saying "I'm banning X software because I don't know what it does" really means "I'm banning X software because I'm too stupid and lazy to find out". Usually most companies have a policy where you can at least recommend that a software be "unblocked" and provide reasons to justify it. However, in the end, it will always come down to productivity.
At work, they block a bunch of ports. I would simply set up SSH tunnels through the HTTP proxy to my server back home, and then run stuff through there. A good way to get through the firewall. However, your average JoeUser or even decently computer literate user may not know that much about SSH tunnels. I let my friends (who work at the same place) use my server for ssh tunnels - I just give them very limited accounts on my FreeBSD machine that they can only use for tunneling. This could be a niche that can be exploited. You could perhaps provide a tunneling service similar to an anonymizing proxy on the internet, for a nominal fee.
I'm responsible for several installs of Firefox in our MWR (Morale, Welfare, and Recreation) center internet trailers. One of my buddies, who isn't extremely computer-literate, but passably so noticed the firefox icons in many of the computers. He says he likes it a whole lot better than IE. At the very least I figure the soldiers will get curious about it and try it out, which is what some of them have done. The part that gets them really quick is the "tabs" - when I show it to them, they go "Wow! this makes it so much easier!". It's not that many people won't use firefox, it's that many don't know.
IE is nowhere near dead yet. On my personal website, I still show only 27% for firefox, 70% for MSIE, and 3% for Opera/Konqueror/etc.
Well the recording-industry is, and has been suffering from a frog-in-the-well syndrome for a long time. Instead of trying to figure out disruptive technology, and how they can adapt/enhance their business model, they try to threaten it or squash it out of existence.
Like the article said, the RIAA's biggest mistake was trying to "cure" the symptoms and not the cause(s). So they went after Napster, but they failed to (to use a cliche) see which way the wind was blowing. They should have seen what was coming with napster - how P2P would be a major force to reckon with. Instead of seeing how they could use P2P to their advantage, they decided they wanted to crush it altogether.
How successful have they been at treating the symptoms? Now what exactly are the causes? Firstly I think it's the completely shitty kind of music that they churn out - the factory made, cookie-cutter style crap. I understand the whole deal about trying to make money for their shareholders, but seriously - a lot of the music is crap (which is why I try to support local bands and listen to indie stuff). A CD may have 1 or 2 good songs, but then you have to buy all the other 10 songs that come with it, and that you may not like as much. Clearly this wasn't good enough for them, because they want you to buy it all.
I wonder how different the entire scene would have been if they RIAA had seen the changes happening and adopted a model that we see today - where they can charge per song.
One major problem is that people tend to have their "IM Cliques". Meaning that some people (and their friends) usually have a preferred client. They usually don't want to switch over to anything else, because their friends are all on AOL/AIM/MSN/Yahoo!. One solution is like Trillian which consolidates everything into one interface. The other suggestions made by the article are good, but I still think it would be a little hard to migrate people from their "cliques" over to something new.
Which is why I like to use Trillian. It's pretty convenient, and you don't have to have 3 separate programs. It works well with AIM, MSN, Yahoo, and a host of other protocols/clients/whathaveyou.
The free version is good, but if you're willing to fork up $25, then the Pro version is worth it as well.
I use me@gmail.com for the username, but for the connection, I use talk.google.com.
It gets in, authenticates, and then disconnects with a series of "iq errors" (any idea what they are?):
[Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:04:55] *** Creating connection "myusername@gmail.com/" [Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:04:56] *** Server supports TLS encryption... [Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:04:56] *** Negotiating XMPP SSL connection... [Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:04:57] *** Connection established using EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (TLSv1/SSLv3) [Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:05:05] *** Attempting to authenticate using PLAIN [Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:05:06] *** Authenticated. [Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:05:15] *** You have successfully connected to Jabber. [Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:05:15] *** ERROR: iq error 501 [Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:05:15] *** Retrieved user roster from server. [Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:05:16] *** ERROR: iq error 501 [Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:05:16] *** ERROR: iq error 503 from gmail.com [Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:05:16] *** ERROR: iq error 503 from gmail.com
I enlisted four and a half years ago in the Army National Guard, and in two weeks time I'm actually leaving for Iraq. As per the regulation, we are supposed to wear the Army issue briefs. That's what we did during Basic Training - but God knows those things aren't made for comfort. They chafe, and once you've been in the field for a few weeks - well, let's just say that the risk of infection increases. Which is why it pays to carry a lot of baby wipes and Gold Bond.
I actually wear boxers instead of the standar-issue briefs now and it is definitely more comfortable. But anyway, now that I'm headed for the desert, I wouldn't mind having this nifty new underwear - I hope the US Army takes up this good idea. You don't realize how much you take the little things for granted until you're out in the field and out of clean pairs of underwear.
Pecos, Germane, McQueen, Fry (to name a few) are only being converting now. Actually, since last November. Before that, they were all two-lane roads. Arizona Avenue and Chandler Blvd are both 6-lane. But two blocks south from that intersection is Pecos and Arizona, where Pecos used to be a 2-lane road. They're still widening it.
There was no scarcasm flag on your definition of the "boonies", much of what you described is consistant with a developing rural area, and from what I remember of Chandler in the 1980's, Chandler IS in the boonies.
Yes, there was sarcasm. I say "boonies", because compared to Tempe, parts of downtown Chandler DO feel like the boonies. Also, what you remember of Chandler is from about 20 years ago. Phoenix (including its suburbs) is one the fastest growing cities in the United States. Chandler has developed a whole lot since the 1980's. Downtown Chandler isn't a completely rural area - but compared to other parts of Phoenix, it sure feels like it, because it's on the edge of new development.
I am very familiar with people moving in from metropolitan areas to the boonies because housing prices are lower and then do nothing but bitch because TV reception totally sucks, the telephone system (including DSL) is not what they are used to
Like I mentioned before, you have obviously not understood my post. I made it clear that I was well aware that broadband services aren't all that great, and that I was waiting for more subscribers to sign up. The crux of my post was that I was wondering what would entice more people to sign up if the prices aren't that attractive - which is far different from what you *perceive* my point to be.
Obviously you have a sub-par comprehension of the English language. I reiterate:
I only found out about the attenuation when I tried to bump my speed up to 3Mbps. Distance from the central office has a lot to do with it as well. Apparently, it may become better over the next year as we get more subscribers to the service from this area of chandler. But it still sucks though.
So I guess how far you are away (for DSL, anyway) seems to matter, as does how many people subscribe (which will give them incentive to put in more optical fiber or whatever). But if prices aren't attractive, how many are going to subscribe?
I was trying to point out that we need more subscribers, but that we can't get any without attractive pricing - which is the problem with broadband in the US today. I wasn't trying to complain about the sucky DSL service - just that I KNOW it's sucky and that I hope it can get better. Furthermore, my description of Chandler as the boonies, is more sarcastic than anything else. Downtown Chandler is only 9 miles from Tempe, and 8 miles from the Intel campus, which is a more developed part of town.
I recently moved from Tempe, AZ to Downtown Chandler, AZ, because I graduated college and now work at Intel (which is in Chandler). For those who haven't been to Phoenix, downtown Chandler is in the boonies. The area has only been seeing intense development over the past year or so (some roads are still two-lane farm roads, and they're only starting to widen them). I had a 1.5M down, 896k up DSL line when I used to live by ASU in Tempe. I get my service from Qwest. Ever since I moved here, I've been having connection issues with my Cisco dropping train and then refusing the retrain. They say that line attenuation is too high. It got better over the months, but it still does it again. I only found out about the attenuation when I tried to bump my speed up to 3Mbps. Distance from the central office has a lot to do with it as well. Apparently, it may become better over the next year as we get more subscribers to the service from this area of chandler. But it still sucks though.
So I guess how far you are away (for DSL, anyway) seems to matter, as does how many people subscribe (which will give them incentive to put in more optical fiber or whatever). But if prices aren't attractive, how many are going to subscribe?
Slashdot Mirror
In relation to what you said, something else often quoted is the loss of ice in Antarctica (Ross Ice Shelf). But ice in some areas of Antarctica is actually increasing.
Michael Crichton's recent novel "State of Fear" is a good read concerning global warming. Skipping the actual plot of the story, let me get to the point he's trying to make - he isn't saying global warming isn't happening. He isn't saying it is.
The fact is we don't know for sure. Some things seem to show that it is, while others show. There is no conclusive evidence.
I'm stationed in Iraq right now and I've often wondered if the RIAA has any idea of the scale of piracy here. We can get (admittedly, crappy theatre copies) DVD's of movies that have just been released. In addition, we get pirated DVD's of all sorts of movies for anything between $1 - $5. Once a movie reaches the PX (Post eXchange), we can expect a pirated copy from "HajiVision" (yes, this might seem politically incorrect to some of you, but bear with me - this is what we call it here, and some of our Iraqi Interpreters themselves refer to other Iraqis as "Hajis") in a day or to. Oh yeah, and let me mention the Boxed Sets of all sorts of TV shows from the US. Anything from Friends to Simpsons to House to Battlestar Galactica - you name it, they have it. A lot of these are made by enterprising Iraqis who either make copies of pirated videos they get from China or one of the SE Asian countries. Others download DVD rips from the web and then burn their own copies.
/sarcasm
The RIAA probably has no clue. Or maybe they do, and can't do anything about it. Then again, maybe if they said something like "The insurgents make money off pirated DVD's! Piracy is helping terrorism!" maybe Piracy can become a part of OIF.
Initially, the advisors of the founder of CSM were afraid that the "Christian" in the title would throw of secular readers, but it was a requirement of the founder of the publication, Mary Baker Eddy. When I first heard about this magazine, I thought it was some front for Creationist arguments against creation or something of the sort. But once I read the articles, I found them to be very well balanced, devoid of sensationalism, and very informative. But the "Christian" in the name puzzled me, because I didn't really find anything pertaining to Christianity or anything overtly religious. So finally I looked up this Wikipedia article, which explains it nicely.
s/Isreal/Israel/g
;)
Don't worry. Israel is real.
Interesting merger if it happens.
Cue the Intel bashing.
Now, not only do service personnel currently serving have to worry about IEDs and being fired upon, but they are now subject to possible identity theft. A real failure. After this, how could one have faith enough to serve an inept institution?"
I'm in Iraq right now. Yes, we have to deal with IED's and being fired upon. And yes, having to worry about this isn't all that great either. But that has absolutely nothing to do with "serving an inept institution" as you call it. We don't serve an institution. We serve in the Armed Forces of the United States. I serve in the Army, and I don't think that the Army is inept. This isn't a failure of the US Army as a whole, but it was due to the indiscretionary act of one person. He violated OPSEC (Operational Security) and he had no business taking sensitive information into his personal computer. This is HIS fault, and I hope he gets prosecuted to the fullest possible extent under the UCMJ. So please, like the parent said, no editioralization is necessary. We serve because we took an oath. We serve because we are professionals. We serve because words like Loyalty, Honor, Duty and Courage mean something to us. It doesn't mean that it means nothing to a civilian. But I hate it when people assume we are nothing but mindless drones. I, personally, try to keep politics away from the military. Which is why I don't endorse any side of political debate, when speaking as a soldier. I'm here to do a job, and I'm here as a professional.
Sorry for going so far off-topic.
One thing about being here is that it's all about luck. We can only do so much as far as tactics go, and as far as being "aware of our surroundings" and being "careful". A lot depends on luck.
So any little thing is helpful. Thanks.
Good point. I wanted to buy a Gamecube when it came out, but didn't do so until late 2003 (or maybe it was early 2004) when I was able to get it for $99. I mainly wanted it to play Zelda. However, speaking of titles, I've found that Gamecube titles come up woefully short against PS2/Xbox. I've always found the Gamecube selection to be much smaller. I'm in Iraq right now, and they sell games here for all consoles at the PX. Here too, I don't find too many titles. Some titles that are on the PS2 and XBox, aren't on the Gamecube. I don't know too much about titles and deals between different game companies and consoles, but is there a reason Nintendo doesn't have that many titles? Will the Revolution have the same problem?
I don't see this as good at all. And I don't say this because of where _I_ work...
Competition is good. That I can see. AMD did show up Intel more than a few times and Intel is responding and changing. That's what business and competition is all about. I have to admit that I lost some respect for AMD once they did this. I have always thought that they provided good processors at good prices and at times I have even bought AMD. But the lawsuit? I don't think so.
Think about this, AMD fanboys. If Intel were to disappear today, do you think AMD will have ANYWHERE near the capacity to supply the market? The answer is a plain and simple "No". Intel has a large amount of fabs that churn out processors for its supplies. AMD doesn't have that strength. The fact is that Intel supplies a majority of the market and keeps it going. AMD is an excellent competitor and keeps Intel on its toes. And that is what we need to see. Not lawsuits. I wonder how much this is actually going to cost consumers.
Well, I can see why they would do this, but saying "I'm banning X software because I don't know what it does" really means "I'm banning X software because I'm too stupid and lazy to find out". Usually most companies have a policy where you can at least recommend that a software be "unblocked" and provide reasons to justify it. However, in the end, it will always come down to productivity.
At work, they block a bunch of ports. I would simply set up SSH tunnels through the HTTP proxy to my server back home, and then run stuff through there. A good way to get through the firewall. However, your average JoeUser or even decently computer literate user may not know that much about SSH tunnels. I let my friends (who work at the same place) use my server for ssh tunnels - I just give them very limited accounts on my FreeBSD machine that they can only use for tunneling. This could be a niche that can be exploited. You could perhaps provide a tunneling service similar to an anonymizing proxy on the internet, for a nominal fee.
I'm responsible for several installs of Firefox in our MWR (Morale, Welfare, and Recreation) center internet trailers. One of my buddies, who isn't extremely computer-literate, but passably so noticed the firefox icons in many of the computers. He says he likes it a whole lot better than IE. At the very least I figure the soldiers will get curious about it and try it out, which is what some of them have done. The part that gets them really quick is the "tabs" - when I show it to them, they go "Wow! this makes it so much easier!". It's not that many people won't use firefox, it's that many don't know.
IE is nowhere near dead yet. On my personal website, I still show only 27% for firefox, 70% for MSIE, and 3% for Opera/Konqueror/etc.
Understand who your customer is, what problems you need to solve, and how much they are willing to pay for it.
Ohhh! But No! The way the RIAA works now is:
Have your customers understand you, what problems (ooh!! P2P!! PIRACY!!) you need to have them solve for you, and how much you can make pay for it
From what I've seen, the RIAA hasn't been about understanding their customers. At all.
Well the recording-industry is, and has been suffering from a frog-in-the-well syndrome for a long time. Instead of trying to figure out disruptive technology, and how they can adapt/enhance their business model, they try to threaten it or squash it out of existence.
Like the article said, the RIAA's biggest mistake was trying to "cure" the symptoms and not the cause(s). So they went after Napster, but they failed to (to use a cliche) see which way the wind was blowing. They should have seen what was coming with napster - how P2P would be a major force to reckon with. Instead of seeing how they could use P2P to their advantage, they decided they wanted to crush it altogether.
How successful have they been at treating the symptoms? Now what exactly are the causes? Firstly I think it's the completely shitty kind of music that they churn out - the factory made, cookie-cutter style crap. I understand the whole deal about trying to make money for their shareholders, but seriously - a lot of the music is crap (which is why I try to support local bands and listen to indie stuff). A CD may have 1 or 2 good songs, but then you have to buy all the other 10 songs that come with it, and that you may not like as much. Clearly this wasn't good enough for them, because they want you to buy it all.
I wonder how different the entire scene would have been if they RIAA had seen the changes happening and adopted a model that we see today - where they can charge per song.
But like I said... frog in the well.
One major problem is that people tend to have their "IM Cliques". Meaning that some people (and their friends) usually have a preferred client. They usually don't want to switch over to anything else, because their friends are all on AOL/AIM/MSN/Yahoo!. One solution is like Trillian which consolidates everything into one interface. The other suggestions made by the article are good, but I still think it would be a little hard to migrate people from their "cliques" over to something new.
Which is why I like to use Trillian. It's pretty convenient, and you don't have to have 3 separate programs. It works well with AIM, MSN, Yahoo, and a host of other protocols/clients/whathaveyou.
The free version is good, but if you're willing to fork up $25, then the Pro version is worth it as well.
It's working - sort of. Check it out here.
Yeah, the server name is talk.google.com, and the username is [my gmail id]@gmail.com - seems to be working now, albeit with the iq errors. Thanks!
Let me try it - the purple dot seems to show a disconnected state though (faded).
I've been trying to get it on Trillian Pro.
I use me@gmail.com for the username, but for the connection, I use talk.google.com.
It gets in, authenticates, and then disconnects with a series of "iq errors" (any idea what they are?):
[Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:04:55] *** Creating connection "myusername@gmail.com/"
[Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:04:56] *** Server supports TLS encryption...
[Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:04:56] *** Negotiating XMPP SSL connection...
[Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:04:57] *** Connection established using EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (TLSv1/SSLv3)
[Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:05:05] *** Attempting to authenticate using PLAIN
[Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:05:06] *** Authenticated.
[Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:05:15] *** You have successfully connected to Jabber.
[Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:05:15] *** ERROR: iq error 501
[Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:05:15] *** Retrieved user roster from server.
[Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:05:16] *** ERROR: iq error 501
[Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:05:16] *** ERROR: iq error 503 from gmail.com
[Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 17:05:16] *** ERROR: iq error 503 from gmail.com
;) You'd be surprised how much protection a pair of boxers offer!
How long before the US Army follows suit?
I enlisted four and a half years ago in the Army National Guard, and in two weeks time I'm actually leaving for Iraq. As per the regulation, we are supposed to wear the Army issue briefs. That's what we did during Basic Training - but God knows those things aren't made for comfort. They chafe, and once you've been in the field for a few weeks - well, let's just say that the risk of infection increases. Which is why it pays to carry a lot of baby wipes and Gold Bond.
I actually wear boxers instead of the standar-issue briefs now and it is definitely more comfortable. But anyway, now that I'm headed for the desert, I wouldn't mind having this nifty new underwear - I hope the US Army takes up this good idea. You don't realize how much you take the little things for granted until you're out in the field and out of clean pairs of underwear.
Pecos, Germane, McQueen, Fry (to name a few) are only being converting now. Actually, since last November. Before that, they were all two-lane roads. Arizona Avenue and Chandler Blvd are both 6-lane. But two blocks south from that intersection is Pecos and Arizona, where Pecos used to be a 2-lane road. They're still widening it.
There was no scarcasm flag on your definition of the "boonies", much of what you described is consistant with a developing rural area, and from what I remember of Chandler in the 1980's, Chandler IS in the boonies.
Yes, there was sarcasm. I say "boonies", because compared to Tempe, parts of downtown Chandler DO feel like the boonies. Also, what you remember of Chandler is from about 20 years ago. Phoenix (including its suburbs) is one the fastest growing cities in the United States. Chandler has developed a whole lot since the 1980's. Downtown Chandler isn't a completely rural area - but compared to other parts of Phoenix, it sure feels like it, because it's on the edge of new development.
I am very familiar with people moving in from metropolitan areas to the boonies because housing prices are lower and then do nothing but bitch because TV reception totally sucks, the telephone system (including DSL) is not what they are used to
Like I mentioned before, you have obviously not understood my post. I made it clear that I was well aware that broadband services aren't all that great, and that I was waiting for more subscribers to sign up. The crux of my post was that I was wondering what would entice more people to sign up if the prices aren't that attractive - which is far different from what you *perceive* my point to be.
Obviously you have a sub-par comprehension of the English language. I reiterate:
I only found out about the attenuation when I tried to bump my speed up to 3Mbps. Distance from the central office has a lot to do with it as well. Apparently, it may become better over the next year as we get more subscribers to the service from this area of chandler. But it still sucks though.
So I guess how far you are away (for DSL, anyway) seems to matter, as does how many people subscribe (which will give them incentive to put in more optical fiber or whatever). But if prices aren't attractive, how many are going to subscribe?
I was trying to point out that we need more subscribers, but that we can't get any without attractive pricing - which is the problem with broadband in the US today. I wasn't trying to complain about the sucky DSL service - just that I KNOW it's sucky and that I hope it can get better. Furthermore, my description of Chandler as the boonies, is more sarcastic than anything else. Downtown Chandler is only 9 miles from Tempe, and 8 miles from the Intel campus, which is a more developed part of town.
I recently moved from Tempe, AZ to Downtown Chandler, AZ, because I graduated college and now work at Intel (which is in Chandler). For those who haven't been to Phoenix, downtown Chandler is in the boonies. The area has only been seeing intense development over the past year or so (some roads are still two-lane farm roads, and they're only starting to widen them). I had a 1.5M down, 896k up DSL line when I used to live by ASU in Tempe. I get my service from Qwest. Ever since I moved here, I've been having connection issues with my Cisco dropping train and then refusing the retrain. They say that line attenuation is too high. It got better over the months, but it still does it again. I only found out about the attenuation when I tried to bump my speed up to 3Mbps. Distance from the central office has a lot to do with it as well. Apparently, it may become better over the next year as we get more subscribers to the service from this area of chandler. But it still sucks though.
So I guess how far you are away (for DSL, anyway) seems to matter, as does how many people subscribe (which will give them incentive to put in more optical fiber or whatever). But if prices aren't attractive, how many are going to subscribe?