After thinking about this a bit more, I have a suggestion to developers writing network applications.
Stop making it so darned easy to shape your application's traffic! Network companies aren't using sophisticated hashing algorithms to do this bandwidth shaping, instead they are using simple TCP/UDP port numbers. (To be true, I have seen some application-specific network devices that use hashing algorithms that require regular fireware updates.)
If bandwidth shaping is here to stay, as many posts here indicate, then use your software to work around it. For example, use multiple ports, test the bandwidth of each one, then send a burst of network information down the fastest. Or, change the data traffic port for each version. Or, have a "fire wall mode" that will funnel all network traffic through port 80, or another ISP favored port number.
If ISPs and network security administrators are going to use network ports to screw up your application's traffic, then your applications must not rely on those ports causing the problem.
Don't read this as me whining about losing bandwidth. I've moved since then, anyway. What I wanted to convey is this: The trouble with bandwidth shaping or bandwidth limiting is users having no idea it happens. Even if the ISP tells you in the fine-print contract about bandwidth shaping in general, you'll never know whether it is causing your application failure. Instead, high-speed applications will simply not be adopted because the ISP cannot provide the quality of service required. Users will be reluctant to adopt other high-speed applications, as well.
Telecommunications is a regulated market. The telephone companies especially are expected to be up-front about their service and billing. This bandwidth shaping (or "denial of service", let's call it what it really is) would not be allowed if it was a more well known technology like telephone calls, television, or electricity. I say, get the FCC involved and let them decide whether this is illegal or just unfair.
ISPs are increasingly using bandwidth shaping to provide more functionality for their in-house services and less functionality for other services. The trouble is users have no idea this is occurring. The user purchases "speeds up to 1.5 Mbps" with that assumption that the ISP will make every effort to obtain those speeds. The ISP never reveals their plan for low-bandwidth applications to get full speed and high-bandwidth applications to get low speed.
Bandwidth shaping deceived the actual speeds when troubleshooting user complaints. While the ISP can have the user "test" the throughput with a FTP-protocol transfer to a local server, the ISP allows full bandwidth for that particular service to that particular server. The ISP is using technical smoke-and-mirrors to rip off their customers.
Lowering user speeds based on usage is clearly unfair, if not illegal. I have seen first-hand how a tel-com DSL provider lowered the bandwidth, yet continued charging for the higher level of service. After my DSL provider performed a "speed check" without my knowledge, my maximum download speed was throttled to 650 Kbps down from 1.5 Mbps, but my monthly charge was never modified since my 512 Kbps upstream was not changed. It took a day of diagnostics and harassing their technical and customer support before I found out those details. (The only resolution they would provide is lowering it further to 512 Kbps up / 256 Kbps down and charging $9.99 less.) This happened after two years using the service at the 1.5 Mbps faster speed, and I believe it was because I was an active consumer of their bandwidth.
Internet Service Providers have one customer mold in their mind: Their perfect user checks email (through the ISP's SMTP server) and browses web pages. They are trying to sell high-speed access for low-response time for these activities, however, as users become more aware of high-speed services (P2P, Streaming movies, Vontage, Online video game entertainment) that customer mold changes. ISPs are having trouble adjusting to these users, and they are throttling their access in hopes they get frustrated and go away or stop using these high-speed services.
Someone who knows how the regulatory system works should pursue a complaint with the FCC when they encounter the bandwidth throttling on a specific application. This would bring light to the unscrupulous practice. The difficulty they would have is trying to determine how much actual throttling was done and how much of the latency was application specific or caused by problems outside the ISP.
Less and less ISPs provide free use of the bandwidth you purchase. Users pay for the entire spectrum of bandwidth, but ISPs will slow down your traffic if you are not using that bandwidth in the way they want. This is slowing down adoption of new technologies (problems with Vontage?) and eliminating business ideas that would require dedicated bandwidth.
Though most of them are "fetch my hoe" or "deliver this note" or "kill me some rats" quests, there are some good story quest chains in World of Warcraft. I think my favorite ones are in the Plaguelands. The Redpath quest chain is really enjoyable.
After the fall of Darrowshire, the Redpath family was split up. The ghost of the daughter starts the chain sending you off to located the remaining living family members. Through magic you rewrite their historic battle to allow yourself to enter into the defense of the town. The last quest involves gathering up to 39 other friends to fight along side the ghostly town defenders against the undead scourge onslaught. Really an epic conclusion to an interesting fantasy story.
Many comments have mentioned the case and keyboard and mouse and monitor and speakers were not included. Of course, they were not included because PC gamers building a new system already have another computer. These peripherals are assumed to be present in computer gamers' enviornments. The article did not include prices on a chair for sitting upon, but I will assume a gamer probably already has this peripheral. They don't need help purchasing one because if they didn't have a chair or a case or a keyboard, then they surely know it and can go buy it without the help of a computer purchasing walkthrough. These peripherals have not changed in decades, and Tom's Hardware does not include it in their gaming-rig loadouts.
The articles and replies are dropping the word addition around like they are armchair psychologists. Perhaps critics see a computer resembling a television, and they don't bother understanding the underlying functions. While there are some people who might use gaming to escape from their other responsibilities (like any other form of escape), the choice to participate is just that -- a choice.
What are some reasons people would choose to participate in these online activities? Communication - no other mechanism allows people around the world to work together in-real-time to accomplish goals. Players improve communication skills to improve their game and interact with people of all different backgrounds. Teamwork - Getting involved with an epic quest that involves 5-40 other people is exhillarating. Leadership - Forming groups, clans, guilds, and partnerships is easy and fun. Players learn how to direct others while keeping the groups together. Entertainment - Games are the top-of-the-line graphical and technical achievements. Movies and many books cannot compare to the cinematics and story lines in popular games. Expenses - For as much as $50 up-front cost and $15 a month, you are allowed unlimited participation in ever-changing entertainment. Organization and Critical Thinking - Games require fast reactions, understanding complex rule-sets, and using and even creating websites. After an intense game session, you might even feel mentally exhausted.
Comparing this to addictions like smoking is ludicrous. Smoking not only has no personal value, but it is are detrimental to one's health. Gaming is safe and cheap, and there are many qualities that can improve a player's lifestyle.
I know of someone who was involved with a three month in-game leadership program. Their clan used voice communications and protocols so that twenty or more players could be lead effectively. The conclusion of this training was an epic battle where the student would lead three groups of twenty at once (60 players) and coordinate strategies for each group. This is clearly an activity that improved the gamer's well-being, while others of his age were out in smoky bars drinking each night away. Gaming, in this case, generated life-long skills.
People who would force someone, causing no problems for anyone -- including their own self, to seek psychological attention, should themselves get some immediate psychological attention.
On request, yes... in theory. But, in practical implementation ISPs will block it for everyone. Why? (1) If they typo someone's configuration they will be sued. (2) It requires alot less computational power to deny access to all user than check each web site request against the governor's list, then to cross reference against the list of customers requesting blocking, then to cross reference against the DHCP server.
if [bad-www] then block
or
if [bad-www] and [source-ip = DHCP IP] and [customer database reference = DHCP IP] then block
Which do you think they will do? Which is easier to set up and administer?
On request, yes... in theory. But, in practical implementation ISPs will block it for everyone. Why? (1) If they typo someone's configuration they will be sued. (2) It requires alot less computational power to deny access to all user than check each web site request against the governor's list, then to cross reference against the list of customers requesting blocking, then to cross reference against the DHCP server.
if then block
or
if and and then block
Which do you think they will do? Which is easier to set up and administer?
Billboard Jan 8, 2005 - Regarding the federal Syndney court battle over Sherman's Kazaa technology and major labels attempt to "recover compensation for past illegal downloads":
[The labels' lead barrister] Bannon also asked [Sherman chief technologist] Morle to sign on to Kazaa using a "special command line." This lead to those in attendance witnessing a connection to an alleged central server in Denmark, which Morle said he thought had been "phased out." The labels claim there is a "bank of some 20 computers in Denmark" contolling Kazaa. During the 13-day trial, the parties submitted "hundreds of pages" of documents and sworn affidavids of expert witnesses as evidence. Only a portion of these winesses provided live testimony. Attempting to establish the operators' ability to control the network, other industry experts said user statistics have been collected by Sharman, users' activities could be monitored, and logs could be maintained to trace users' locations.
The post (Power On Self Test) in the bios completing successfully is all the insurance that the hardware works you will *ever* need.
I disagree. I request assembly and burn-in on built systems every time. The BIOS will never tell you about power issues, hardware incompatibilities, or other gremlins. I do field installs of computer equipment that is tested before leaving the factory, and it is not at all uncommon for problems to occur within the first day of operation. After the first 24 hours of use these devices rarely have problems through the next couple years.
One other factor I have seen in building home PCs: When you order parts piece-meal, one can fall into a trap of ordering a defective part. When the mail-order company sends out a stand alone card (especially OEM parts), they know it will be difficult for you to return it if there are problems. Plus, the customer support can always say there were problems outside of their control if you catch them on it.
If you have saved $10 on not having a PC company doing a burn-in, then that's great for you. For my money (and time!), I will continue paying someone to confirm everything is in working order before I accept delivery.
Having trouble with the fellow next to you talking too loudly? A cell phone user cussing out their employee? Here's a nutty thought: Ask them politely to keep their voice down. Now, I know that sounds a little wacky to those of you who would rather hang back silently judging, but let me tell you I have tried it many times successfully. It requires a little known ability called courtesy, but with practice, you may be able to acquire this skill, too. Good luck, and welcome to the wonderful world of talking to strangers!
Re: How would you cooperate with law enforcement?
on
Computer Forensics
·
· Score: 1
Odd this was modded Funny. You'd better consider consulting a lawyer when involved with a criminal investigation. I hope the book has a chapter on when to simply use your company's law representation and when it makes sense to contact independent council. You better believe your company is using thier legal resources (and maybe considering their case against you!)
In Seoul this fall, I visited a good number of their very cool "PC Rooms" (pronounced "PC bong"... lol). I was determined to find out the Lineage - Korea Connection !! Gotta admit first this might not be the whole story because some of the details were lost in the language barrier. Yeah, it's true, Lineage is big-time popular there. However, I think I discovered at least part of the reason behind the popularity. Apparently, entering one's Korean ID number (might not have been a national ID number, maybe tied to a phone number?) unlocked one free Lineage / Lineage II account. As much as I wanted to play, no one had any idea how a westerner without this ID number could register on the Korean Lineage servers, and I tried about four crowded "PC Rooms" with the same results. One guy actually let me register with their unused ID number saying he was never planning to use his Lineage II account. Although a weird server problem kept it from working, I got to see the whole registration process, and it was remarkably unobtrusive (no immediate questions about credit cards, home telephone numbers, next of kin... American companies, are you listening?). While I don't think the game is entirely free to Koreans, I do think Lineage makes it very easy for Koreans to get started maybe offering an automatic free month or so. Even still, consider these regular players are walking out of their apartments down to the "PC Room" (generally one per two/three blocks sometimes more or less). It was surprising finding at even 7 AM Saturday there were people down there racking up XPs online!
This is a system that aids people who have trouble looking out car windows?? Wake me up when the car can react to street signs by slowing to speed limit or making a complete stop at the light. Otherwise, no thanks -- I can see just fine.
For one thing, a fully regulated entity wouldn't have much incentive to upgrade the lines. Plus, while this might work for some industries, take into consideration all the carriers. No one (taxpayers or otherwise) should have to pay for nationwide WiFi service, for example.
In fact, the broadband market should already be very well opened to competition through regulation. It's been many years since The Telecommunication Act of 1996 was passed to do open their markets. The question is why is it not working out like predicted? There are a few companies that are moving into very specific cable markets, like Knology. However, this act was supposed to open up all markets (telcomm, cable, wireless, satellite) to anyone who wanted to sell services over existing bandwidth.
The fact we aren't seeing more competition can only be explained (a) if there are no interested firms, (b) if existing customers are too apathetic to new/quality services, or (c) if the regulation of the act are not being enforced. Does anyone know how the regulations of this act have played out in the past eight years in corportate practice? The article seems to indicate that FCC has been dragging their feet enforcing at least the cable market.
As far as I can tell, the regulation of TA1996 should be more than adequate for competition, in theory. Maybe future regulation will be a federal push encouraging existing carriers to roll out broadband to rural locations, although most people have satellite out there.
Franklin EBookman: $200 -- Access to 10,000's of Public-Domain open EBooks, Software for reading encoded EBooks (Mobireader), Periodicals downloads through free 3rd-party software, and All the web-news I can cut-and-paste into a text file. In total, this equals more reading than can be done in a lifetime.
I know you are trying to present a conservative opinion, but expanding school budgets, offering alternative classes, and opening after-school programs is extremely liberal thinking. Welcome to the Left!
Develop your web pages to The Web Standards and not to a Program's Standard!! The application will change from version to version in possibly undocumented ways, but the web stardard will always be documented. Any diviation in IE from the web standard should be considered a software bug.
Slashdot Mirror
After thinking about this a bit more, I have a suggestion to developers writing network applications.
Stop making it so darned easy to shape your application's traffic! Network companies aren't using sophisticated hashing algorithms to do this bandwidth shaping, instead they are using simple TCP/UDP port numbers. (To be true, I have seen some application-specific network devices that use hashing algorithms that require regular fireware updates.)
If bandwidth shaping is here to stay, as many posts here indicate, then use your software to work around it. For example, use multiple ports, test the bandwidth of each one, then send a burst of network information down the fastest. Or, change the data traffic port for each version. Or, have a "fire wall mode" that will funnel all network traffic through port 80, or another ISP favored port number.
If ISPs and network security administrators are going to use network ports to screw up your application's traffic, then your applications must not rely on those ports causing the problem.
Don't read this as me whining about losing bandwidth. I've moved since then, anyway. What I wanted to convey is this: The trouble with bandwidth shaping or bandwidth limiting is users having no idea it happens. Even if the ISP tells you in the fine-print contract about bandwidth shaping in general, you'll never know whether it is causing your application failure. Instead, high-speed applications will simply not be adopted because the ISP cannot provide the quality of service required. Users will be reluctant to adopt other high-speed applications, as well.
Telecommunications is a regulated market. The telephone companies especially are expected to be up-front about their service and billing. This bandwidth shaping (or "denial of service", let's call it what it really is) would not be allowed if it was a more well known technology like telephone calls, television, or electricity. I say, get the FCC involved and let them decide whether this is illegal or just unfair.
ISPs are increasingly using bandwidth shaping to provide more functionality for their in-house services and less functionality for other services. The trouble is users have no idea this is occurring. The user purchases "speeds up to 1.5 Mbps" with that assumption that the ISP will make every effort to obtain those speeds. The ISP never reveals their plan for low-bandwidth applications to get full speed and high-bandwidth applications to get low speed.
Bandwidth shaping deceived the actual speeds when troubleshooting user complaints. While the ISP can have the user "test" the throughput with a FTP-protocol transfer to a local server, the ISP allows full bandwidth for that particular service to that particular server. The ISP is using technical smoke-and-mirrors to rip off their customers.
Lowering user speeds based on usage is clearly unfair, if not illegal. I have seen first-hand how a tel-com DSL provider lowered the bandwidth, yet continued charging for the higher level of service. After my DSL provider performed a "speed check" without my knowledge, my maximum download speed was throttled to 650 Kbps down from 1.5 Mbps, but my monthly charge was never modified since my 512 Kbps upstream was not changed. It took a day of diagnostics and harassing their technical and customer support before I found out those details. (The only resolution they would provide is lowering it further to 512 Kbps up / 256 Kbps down and charging $9.99 less.) This happened after two years using the service at the 1.5 Mbps faster speed, and I believe it was because I was an active consumer of their bandwidth.
Internet Service Providers have one customer mold in their mind: Their perfect user checks email (through the ISP's SMTP server) and browses web pages. They are trying to sell high-speed access for low-response time for these activities, however, as users become more aware of high-speed services (P2P, Streaming movies, Vontage, Online video game entertainment) that customer mold changes. ISPs are having trouble adjusting to these users, and they are throttling their access in hopes they get frustrated and go away or stop using these high-speed services.
Someone who knows how the regulatory system works should pursue a complaint with the FCC when they encounter the bandwidth throttling on a specific application. This would bring light to the unscrupulous practice. The difficulty they would have is trying to determine how much actual throttling was done and how much of the latency was application specific or caused by problems outside the ISP.
Less and less ISPs provide free use of the bandwidth you purchase. Users pay for the entire spectrum of bandwidth, but ISPs will slow down your traffic if you are not using that bandwidth in the way they want. This is slowing down adoption of new technologies (problems with Vontage?) and eliminating business ideas that would require dedicated bandwidth.
Though most of them are "fetch my hoe" or "deliver this note" or "kill me some rats" quests, there are some good story quest chains in World of Warcraft. I think my favorite ones are in the Plaguelands. The Redpath quest chain is really enjoyable.
After the fall of Darrowshire, the Redpath family was split up. The ghost of the daughter starts the chain sending you off to located the remaining living family members. Through magic you rewrite their historic battle to allow yourself to enter into the defense of the town. The last quest involves gathering up to 39 other friends to fight along side the ghostly town defenders against the undead scourge onslaught. Really an epic conclusion to an interesting fantasy story.
Many comments have mentioned the case and keyboard and mouse and monitor and speakers were not included. Of course, they were not included because PC gamers building a new system already have another computer. These peripherals are assumed to be present in computer gamers' enviornments. The article did not include prices on a chair for sitting upon, but I will assume a gamer probably already has this peripheral. They don't need help purchasing one because if they didn't have a chair or a case or a keyboard, then they surely know it and can go buy it without the help of a computer purchasing walkthrough. These peripherals have not changed in decades, and Tom's Hardware does not include it in their gaming-rig loadouts.
Pointless to compare it to drinking? Read the article, "Naveed Khan from London says that gaming can be as serious an addiction as alcoholism."
The articles and replies are dropping the word addition around like they are armchair psychologists. Perhaps critics see a computer resembling a television, and they don't bother understanding the underlying functions. While there are some people who might use gaming to escape from their other responsibilities (like any other form of escape), the choice to participate is just that -- a choice.
What are some reasons people would choose to participate in these online activities? Communication - no other mechanism allows people around the world to work together in-real-time to accomplish goals. Players improve communication skills to improve their game and interact with people of all different backgrounds. Teamwork - Getting involved with an epic quest that involves 5-40 other people is exhillarating. Leadership - Forming groups, clans, guilds, and partnerships is easy and fun. Players learn how to direct others while keeping the groups together. Entertainment - Games are the top-of-the-line graphical and technical achievements. Movies and many books cannot compare to the cinematics and story lines in popular games. Expenses - For as much as $50 up-front cost and $15 a month, you are allowed unlimited participation in ever-changing entertainment. Organization and Critical Thinking - Games require fast reactions, understanding complex rule-sets, and using and even creating websites. After an intense game session, you might even feel mentally exhausted.
Comparing this to addictions like smoking is ludicrous. Smoking not only has no personal value, but it is are detrimental to one's health. Gaming is safe and cheap, and there are many qualities that can improve a player's lifestyle.
I know of someone who was involved with a three month in-game leadership program. Their clan used voice communications and protocols so that twenty or more players could be lead effectively. The conclusion of this training was an epic battle where the student would lead three groups of twenty at once (60 players) and coordinate strategies for each group. This is clearly an activity that improved the gamer's well-being, while others of his age were out in smoky bars drinking each night away. Gaming, in this case, generated life-long skills.
People who would force someone, causing no problems for anyone -- including their own self, to seek psychological attention, should themselves get some immediate psychological attention.
Curse my lack of preview usage.
On request, yes ... in theory. But, in practical implementation ISPs will block it for everyone. Why? (1) If they typo someone's configuration they will be sued. (2) It requires alot less computational power to deny access to all user than check each web site request against the governor's list, then to cross reference against the list of customers requesting blocking, then to cross reference against the DHCP server.
if [bad-www] then block
or
if [bad-www] and [source-ip = DHCP IP] and [customer database reference = DHCP IP] then block
Which do you think they will do? Which is easier to set up and administer?
On request, yes ... in theory. But, in practical implementation ISPs will block it for everyone. Why? (1) If they typo someone's configuration they will be sued. (2) It requires alot less computational power to deny access to all user than check each web site request against the governor's list, then to cross reference against the list of customers requesting blocking, then to cross reference against the DHCP server.
if then block
or
if and and then block
Which do you think they will do? Which is easier to set up and administer?
You've seen the humvee the governor drives? I think you hit the rational behind this per-mile-tax right on the proveribal head.
CNN reported today Ebay was lowering their prices for posting items.
Billboard Jan 8, 2005 - Regarding the federal Syndney court battle over Sherman's Kazaa technology and major labels attempt to "recover compensation for past illegal downloads":
[The labels' lead barrister] Bannon also asked [Sherman chief technologist] Morle to sign on to Kazaa using a "special command line." This lead to those in attendance witnessing a connection to an alleged central server in Denmark, which Morle said he thought had been "phased out." The labels claim there is a "bank of some 20 computers in Denmark" contolling Kazaa.
During the 13-day trial, the parties submitted "hundreds of pages" of documents and sworn affidavids of expert witnesses as evidence. Only a portion of these winesses provided live testimony.
Attempting to establish the operators' ability to control the network, other industry experts said user statistics have been collected by Sharman, users' activities could be monitored, and logs could be maintained to trace users' locations.
I disagree. I request assembly and burn-in on built systems every time. The BIOS will never tell you about power issues, hardware incompatibilities, or other gremlins. I do field installs of computer equipment that is tested before leaving the factory, and it is not at all uncommon for problems to occur within the first day of operation. After the first 24 hours of use these devices rarely have problems through the next couple years.
One other factor I have seen in building home PCs: When you order parts piece-meal, one can fall into a trap of ordering a defective part. When the mail-order company sends out a stand alone card (especially OEM parts), they know it will be difficult for you to return it if there are problems. Plus, the customer support can always say there were problems outside of their control if you catch them on it.
If you have saved $10 on not having a PC company doing a burn-in, then that's great for you. For my money (and time!), I will continue paying someone to confirm everything is in working order before I accept delivery.
Having trouble with the fellow next to you talking too loudly? A cell phone user cussing out their employee? Here's a nutty thought: Ask them politely to keep their voice down. Now, I know that sounds a little wacky to those of you who would rather hang back silently judging, but let me tell you I have tried it many times successfully. It requires a little known ability called courtesy, but with practice, you may be able to acquire this skill, too. Good luck, and welcome to the wonderful world of talking to strangers!
Odd this was modded Funny. You'd better consider consulting a lawyer when involved with a criminal investigation. I hope the book has a chapter on when to simply use your company's law representation and when it makes sense to contact independent council. You better believe your company is using thier legal resources (and maybe considering their case against you!)
In Seoul this fall, I visited a good number of their very cool "PC Rooms" (pronounced "PC bong" ... lol). I was determined to find out the Lineage - Korea Connection !! Gotta admit first this might not be the whole story because some of the details were lost in the language barrier. Yeah, it's true, Lineage is big-time popular there. However, I think I discovered at least part of the reason behind the popularity. Apparently, entering one's Korean ID number (might not have been a national ID number, maybe tied to a phone number?) unlocked one free Lineage / Lineage II account. As much as I wanted to play, no one had any idea how a westerner without this ID number could register on the Korean Lineage servers, and I tried about four crowded "PC Rooms" with the same results. One guy actually let me register with their unused ID number saying he was never planning to use his Lineage II account. Although a weird server problem kept it from working, I got to see the whole registration process, and it was remarkably unobtrusive (no immediate questions about credit cards, home telephone numbers, next of kin... American companies, are you listening?). While I don't think the game is entirely free to Koreans, I do think Lineage makes it very easy for Koreans to get started maybe offering an automatic free month or so. Even still, consider these regular players are walking out of their apartments down to the "PC Room" (generally one per two/three blocks sometimes more or less). It was surprising finding at even 7 AM Saturday there were people down there racking up XPs online!
This is a system that aids people who have trouble looking out car windows?? Wake me up when the car can react to street signs by slowing to speed limit or making a complete stop at the light. Otherwise, no thanks -- I can see just fine.
Nice to see another player in the online games market, but this topic has been covered by Slashdot only last year.
For one thing, a fully regulated entity wouldn't have much incentive to upgrade the lines. Plus, while this might work for some industries, take into consideration all the carriers. No one (taxpayers or otherwise) should have to pay for nationwide WiFi service, for example.
First off, cable companies are already regulated.
In fact, the broadband market should already be very well opened to competition through regulation. It's been many years since The Telecommunication Act of 1996 was passed to do open their markets. The question is why is it not working out like predicted? There are a few companies that are moving into very specific cable markets, like Knology. However, this act was supposed to open up all markets (telcomm, cable, wireless, satellite) to anyone who wanted to sell services over existing bandwidth.
The fact we aren't seeing more competition can only be explained (a) if there are no interested firms, (b) if existing customers are too apathetic to new/quality services, or (c) if the regulation of the act are not being enforced. Does anyone know how the regulations of this act have played out in the past eight years in corportate practice? The article seems to indicate that FCC has been dragging their feet enforcing at least the cable market.
As far as I can tell, the regulation of TA1996 should be more than adequate for competition, in theory. Maybe future regulation will be a federal push encouraging existing carriers to roll out broadband to rural locations, although most people have satellite out there.
Franklin EBookman: $200 -- Access to 10,000's of Public-Domain open EBooks, Software for reading encoded EBooks (Mobireader), Periodicals downloads through free 3rd-party software, and All the web-news I can cut-and-paste into a text file. In total, this equals more reading than can be done in a lifetime.
Why buy DRM when you can have Open Goodness?
I know you are trying to present a conservative opinion, but expanding school budgets, offering alternative classes, and opening after-school programs is extremely liberal thinking. Welcome to the Left!
Develop your web pages to The Web Standards and not to a Program's Standard!! The application will change from version to version in possibly undocumented ways, but the web stardard will always be documented. Any diviation in IE from the web standard should be considered a software bug.
That's Shift-F11 (View -> Small Screen). There is no Shift-F12 hotkey, at least not on the current version 7.23 for Windows.