"He said the satellite would create 10 times less debris than the Columbia space shuttle crash in 2003."
So, so if the Shuttle created say 5 (arbitrary sized) units of debris this satellite would create a 50 units, and 5 minus 50 = negative 45 units of debris that must somehow spring from earth and re-assemble?
Where do journalists learn to speak English these days?
The oddest part of the story is that any sentient being thought they could (or should even try) to get tech support from Microsoft. I mean how green could this user be to report a BSOD 10 years ago when they were almost an hourly occurrence?
To be fair, I have to admit that my Vista ultimate has crashed exactly once in the 4 months I've been saddled with it. Once more, and I'm picking up the call to schedule my tech support call - which will arrive after my retirement.
How is it that an FCC chairman that wants a MORE OPEN standard constitutes a downside?
Why should we have to buy a TV with multiple tuners, picture in picture, dual channel viewing and all sorts of neat capabilities and then be mugged by the cable companies on the way to watch the ball game?
Cable card http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CableCARD was supposed to eliminate this, but the cable companies refused the ability to get channel guide info for sets using cable cards.
Personally, I think the FCC should outlawt cable companies from selling set top boxes PERIOD. Take the revenue out of their hands and standards would be adhered to, third parties would arrive, guide info would magically appear on the internet, and every thing would be much more consumer friendly. Mandate only cable card and free the strangle hold. Everybody will be buying a new TV in the next four years anyway, the time is ripe.
The weirdest thing about those satellite images is that they are NOT satellite images.
Many people are under the mistaken impression that Google Earth ONLY uses satellite images. That's simply untrue, and anyone who reads the GE FAQ would know this.
Those photos are aerial mapping photos produced by an airplane flying "tracks" across the city. They are then stitched together to form a mosaic, and since this was done with public funds the images are available to google earth for a modest fee. Seattle has similar images.
Any time you see the sides of an object on google earth it is NOT a satellite photo.
> Basically if you have an data retention plan that states how long you keep > documents for, and you follow that plan, then you cannot be charged with > destruction of evidence.
Have a plan and follow it? Sounds like a pretty close micro managing from the court if you ask me. Which clause of the constitution allows them to set such regulations?
My plan it to never state my plan (oops, just violated that, but wait, its ok: read on) my plan states I get to decide on a case by case basis how long or if I want to retain anything, and I also plan to frequently violate my plan just to prove it is MY PLAN.
If everything that walks in the door is presumed to be patentable and the applicant is the only one responsible for a prior art search, couldn't we handle the patent office more cheaply by installing a vending machine in every post office?
The results would be the same, except we could avoid all the wait time and salery expense.
>And when a government doesn't need a warrant to tap a phone, then you're well on the road to fascism.
How very ironic you are posting this in a thread about a country that has been chiding the US for its policy on this very issue for years. Always posing as the civilized bastion of liberty looking with disdain on US policy for tracking terrorists, and in many cases harboring known terrorists from extradition.
As long as there are legal prohibitions against use of this information to catch petty drug crimes etc, the march to fascism is pretty much stalled in its tracks.
But do come back and share your thoughts when the airplanes hit your buildings.
>the federal government leases our assets to companies who then turn around and sell back to us the > stuff we already own at a profit to themselves.
So what would YOU be able to do with the bandwidth or YOUR minuscule share there of?
Your argument, like Utah's is patently silly. Cell companies Leases the airwaves, investors put billions into towers and infrastructure and networks and storefronts, an you imply ALL OF THAT should be done for FREE because we already "OWN" the airwaves?
"But the adapter with no ground can still be safe, and comply with CSA/EN/UL standard 60950, provided the leakage current is low enough and appropriate safety-approved capacitors are installed (giving "double insulation" or "reinforced insulation" between the AC line and the DC output)."
Had that been the case, would this discussion still appear here on Slashdot?
The story reports several people feeling significant shocks, and CSA standards do not allow that. If I were you would not lend my pride of pedantry to support Dell without at least first running a few test.
I'm paying for the bandwidth. What I do with it is my business. No provider should be able to impose penalties on my particular choice of usage provided I stay within the law.
Besides, the likelyhood that they will enhance voip is virtually nill. They will degrade it so as to protect their dialup business.
You ask:
"Should bittorrent or FTP run at the same priority as VOIP?"
To which my answer would be emphatically yes. My FTP is just as high
a priority as your VOIP.
Then you state
"You are assuming a lot there, I think. Each user will be running a variety
of things"
To which I reply: then let the user prioritize, not the telco. My voip use may
compete with their long distance fees, but that is no reason to give them the
option of setting all voip traffic at a lower priority.
Discrimination could be allowed, based on type of traffic.
That's ridiculous. Why should there be discrimination based on "type of traffic" (sounds like color of skin to me) when both traffic users pay the same amount?
Its a common network. We all pay our ISPs monthly fees. Other than buying in bulk, what possible justification is there to rob Joe Sixpack's email priority to sweeten the pot for Daddy Warbucks stock quotes?
And while I'm taking pot shots at your theory (all in the spirit of debate mind you) why should end-points not matter? It costs more to get a megabyte to Point Barrow Alaska than it does to Portland Oregon. The user in Barrow already pick up that difference in cost.
Paying extra for a low latency pipe seems valid to me. My understanding is that net neutrality would prevent this intelligent discrimination.
You want band width, you pay for band width. But don't come telling me my use of the bandwidth I pay for is somehow less important than yours and therefore I can't watch baseball or view youtube so you and your suits can crack wise across the continent.
principally i cant see how anyone could support enforcing a lowest common denominator upon everyone.
How is it that a level playing field is some how cast as the "lowest common denominator" in your twisted world?
You get what you pay for and I expect to get what I pay for. Why should you get a megabyte of bandwidth at a cheaper rate than I do? Why should your megabyte perform better than mine, just because I happen to be using Skype which competes with the carrier's voip product?
There is not a bandwidth shortage in this country. This isn't an argument about rationing a scarce resource. Its an argument about allowing carriers to degrade (prioritize to death) protocols that compete with their own services.
"The prioritization of types of content, applications, or services would be allowed under the condition that it is done free of charge, and that it is done for all types of that particular content. For example, the prioritization of packets to insure Quality of Service for Voice over IP must be done for all VoIP providers free of charge to them."
Now since virtually every telco is also an IP carrier you can kiss skype goodby. Anything that competes with POTS is likely to be degraded to death.
"You will note too that Apple chose GSM, the European and worldwide standard, as opposed to CDMA, a primarily NA one, for the phone. Does that tell you anything?"
Yes, it tells us that GSM penetration in the US and Canada is almost at 50% of the area covered by CDMA.
Its really pointless the keep harping on this CDMA/GSM rag. GMS is fine for itty-bitty countries where you can't get out of sight of the nearest town. It takes vastly more towers than CDMA. In Canada, and the US those towers are being built at a record pace. But the job is orders of magnitude larger than putting up 50 towers that cover entire countries as in the EU.
Just how does this qualify as a Fork? Its Standard proceedure for an open source development project. They are GIVING it back to the community under the same license as they go it.
Slashdot Mirror
From TFA:
"He said the satellite would create 10 times less debris than the Columbia space shuttle crash in 2003."
So, so if the Shuttle created say 5 (arbitrary sized) units of debris this satellite would create a 50 units, and 5 minus 50 = negative 45 units of debris that must somehow spring from earth and re-assemble?
Where do journalists learn to speak English these days?
The oddest part of the story is that any sentient being thought they could (or should even try) to get tech support from Microsoft. I mean how green could this user be to report a BSOD 10 years ago when they were almost an hourly occurrence?
To be fair, I have to admit that my Vista ultimate has crashed exactly once in the 4 months I've been saddled with it. Once more, and I'm picking up the call to schedule my tech support call - which will arrive after my retirement.
I find it amazing there are 90 thousand movies that (some) people might actually PAY to view.
There aren't 5 movies made per year that I would invest two hours to watch, let alone pay money on top of the time wasted.
How is it that an FCC chairman that wants a MORE OPEN standard constitutes a downside?
Why should we have to buy a TV with multiple tuners, picture in picture, dual channel viewing and all sorts of neat capabilities and then be mugged by the cable companies on the way to watch the ball game?
Cable card http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CableCARD was supposed to eliminate this, but the cable companies refused the ability to get channel guide info for sets using cable cards.
Personally, I think the FCC should outlawt cable companies from selling set top boxes PERIOD. Take the revenue out of their hands and standards would be adhered to, third parties would arrive, guide info would magically appear on the internet, and every thing would be much more consumer friendly. Mandate only cable card and free the strangle hold. Everybody will be buying a new TV in the next four years anyway, the time is ripe.
The weirdest thing about those satellite images is that they are NOT satellite images.
Many people are under the mistaken impression that Google Earth ONLY uses satellite images. That's simply untrue, and anyone who reads the GE FAQ would know this.
Those photos are aerial mapping photos produced by an airplane flying "tracks" across the city. They are then stitched together to form a mosaic, and since this was done with public funds the images are available to google earth for a modest fee. Seattle has similar images.
Any time you see the sides of an object on google earth it is NOT a satellite photo.
Better yet, just encrypt your hard drives and refuse th hand over the
keys, invoking your right to avoid self incrimination.
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/12/15/1459243
Check and Mate.
> Basically if you have an data retention plan that states how long you keep
> documents for, and you follow that plan, then you cannot be charged with
> destruction of evidence.
Have a plan and follow it? Sounds like a pretty close micro managing from the court if you ask me. Which clause of the constitution allows them to set such regulations?
My plan it to never state my plan (oops, just violated that, but wait, its ok: read on) my plan states I get to decide on a case by case basis how long or if I want to retain anything, and I also plan to frequently violate my plan just to prove it is MY PLAN.
Tempest - Teapot.
A bunch of sell indulgent self-observers attributing great significance to their own blather. Not entirely unlike SlashDot and this very post.
The story is so self absorbed is leaves you wanting to quote the Geico Cave man: uh, WHAT!??!
If everything that walks in the door is presumed to be patentable and the applicant is the only one responsible for a prior art search, couldn't we handle the patent office more cheaply by installing a vending machine in every post office?
The results would be the same, except we could avoid all the wait time and salery expense.
>And when a government doesn't need a warrant to tap a phone, then you're well on the road to fascism.
How very ironic you are posting this in a thread about a country that has been chiding the US for its policy on this very issue for years. Always posing as the civilized bastion of liberty looking with disdain on US policy for tracking terrorists, and in many cases harboring known terrorists from extradition.
As long as there are legal prohibitions against use of this information to catch petty drug crimes etc, the march to fascism is pretty much stalled in its tracks.
But do come back and share your thoughts when the airplanes hit your buildings.
Wouldn't that be a Bi-corder rather than a Tri-corder?
I'm holding out for the next generation.
Yes, we would be SO MUCH better off with the Government running it.....
>the federal government leases our assets to companies who then turn around and sell back to us the
> stuff we already own at a profit to themselves.
So what would YOU be able to do with the bandwidth or YOUR minuscule share there of?
Your argument, like Utah's is patently silly. Cell companies Leases the airwaves, investors put billions into towers and infrastructure and networks and storefronts, an you imply ALL OF THAT should be done for FREE because we already "OWN" the airwaves?
Had that been the case, would this discussion still appear here on Slashdot?
The story reports several people feeling significant shocks, and CSA standards do not allow that. If I were you would not lend my pride of pedantry to support Dell without at least first running a few test.
Nope.
6 9.jpg (circuit tester image).
Tested with a Dell E1705. We had 22.3 volts between case screw and ground.
Outlet showed proper wiring with one of those little Quick test Circuit Testers
http://www.skycraftsurplus.com/ProductImages/sk20
"That provision sounds completely fair."
Not to me.
I'm paying for the bandwidth. What I do with it is my business.
No provider should be able to impose penalties on my particular
choice of usage provided I stay within the law.
Besides, the likelyhood that they will enhance voip is virtually
nill. They will degrade it so as to protect their dialup business.
You ask:
"Should bittorrent or FTP run at the same priority as VOIP?"
To which my answer would be emphatically yes. My FTP is just as high
a priority as your VOIP.
Then you state
"You are assuming a lot there, I think. Each user will be running a variety
of things"
To which I reply: then let the user prioritize, not the telco. My voip use may
compete with their long distance fees, but that is no reason to give them the
option of setting all voip traffic at a lower priority.
That's ridiculous. Why should there be discrimination based on "type of traffic" (sounds like color of skin to me) when both traffic users pay the same amount?
Its a common network. We all pay our ISPs monthly fees. Other than buying in bulk, what possible justification is there to rob Joe Sixpack's email priority to sweeten the pot for Daddy Warbucks stock quotes?
And while I'm taking pot shots at your theory (all in the spirit of debate mind you) why should end-points not matter? It costs more to get a megabyte to Point Barrow Alaska than it does to Portland Oregon. The user in Barrow already pick up that difference in cost.
You want band width, you pay for band width. But don't come telling me my use of the bandwidth I pay for is somehow less important than yours and therefore I can't watch baseball or view youtube so you and your suits can crack wise across the continent.
principally i cant see how anyone could support enforcing a lowest common denominator upon everyone.
How is it that a level playing field is some how cast as the "lowest common denominator" in your twisted world?
You get what you pay for and I expect to get what I pay for. Why should you get a megabyte of bandwidth at a cheaper rate than I do? Why should your megabyte perform better than mine, just because I happen to be using Skype which competes with the carrier's voip product?
There is not a bandwidth shortage in this country. This isn't an argument about rationing a scarce resource. Its an argument about allowing carriers to degrade (prioritize to death) protocols that compete with their own services.
I don't think you read very carefully:
From TFA:
"The prioritization of types of content, applications, or services would be allowed under the condition that it is done free of charge, and that it is done for all types of that particular content. For example, the prioritization of packets to insure Quality of Service for Voice over IP must be done for all VoIP providers free of charge to them."
Now since virtually every telco is also an IP carrier you can kiss skype goodby. Anything that competes with POTS is likely to be degraded to death.
Those damn Republicans will be trying to kill off our Internet Freedom again.
.
.
.
.
Oh, wait a minute....
Yes, it tells us that GSM penetration in the US and Canada is almost at 50% of the area covered by CDMA.
Its really pointless the keep harping on this CDMA/GSM rag. GMS is fine for itty-bitty countries where you can't get out of sight of the nearest town. It takes vastly more towers than CDMA. In Canada, and the US those towers are being built at a record pace. But the job is orders of magnitude larger than putting up 50 towers that cover entire countries as in the EU.
This from the same woman who wanted to nationalize your health care records
and damn near pulled it off.
It's amazing how short some people's memory is.
Mod parent "idiot".
Just how does this qualify as a Fork?
Its Standard proceedure for an open source development project.
They are GIVING it back to the community under the same license
as they go it.