That's the whole point. Guilty or not is irrelevant. The cost of proving your innocence is much higher than the pre-litigation extortion. When you get one of these letters, let us know how the "I'm not guilty" retort goes. I'll go ahead and tell you your future... they sue you anyway; after many thousands of dollars in lawyers fees, they drop the case when they see their "evidence" is transparent (if they have any at all); you're left with huge lawyers bills and still have not been proven innocent.
"Give me money or I'll sue you" is extortion. File your case, then you can broker an out-of-court settlement ("a deal".)
You keep missing the whole f'ing point. Send me your address so I can send you one of these bullshit "pre-litigation settlement" letters: "Pay me 3000$ or I will sue you for copyright infringement." It doesn't matter if you have or not; it doesn't matter if I have any evidence or not. "Pay us now, or pay us (and our lawyers) a lot more later" is how it boils down. It's. F***ing. Extortion. They send these BS letters because a stamp (email) is cheaper than filing an actual legal case in a court of law.
Until it's filed in a court of law, it is nothing more than a threat. Plain. And. Simple. These cases are extortion. They want you to settle without the hassle and expense of a court. And guess what, they sue only a fraction of those threatened. They know people don't have the time or money to fight them court, so they threaten to sue with little intention to follow through knowing most will pay regardless of guilt, and many that do fight end up dropped before it sees a courtroom because they cannot aford to lose a single case.
You can threaten to sue all you want; until you do, I have no (legal) reason to give in to your demands. And even if I do, I can still be sued.
Simple... MONEY. There's no profit motive to upgrade what's already in place, paid for, and fully functional. After all, the point of a telephone is to talk to other people, not run these d***ed modems 24/7. I doubt they'd even go far enough to get DSL to him.
Amen. They took that money and stuck it in their fat pockets. It's just like the BS $0.25 charge BellSouth charged for nearly 30 years to "cover the costs of upgrades" for touchtone service. DTMF decoders are trivial devices; and they were just as trivial 30 years ago. (Over 30 years, that amounts to nearly $1BILLION in additional revenue.)
Actually, it's not so much "shows the intent to sue" as it is a threat (ala extortion) of "pay us or we sue". That's not a settlement; they can still sue you. Once the papers are filed in a court of law, then they can approach your legal counsel for a settlement.
Closing your laptop is an immediate action, so there is no "idle time" for the system to decide to swap out everything. If you leave your laptop sitting for an hour and then close the lid, it will do the exact same thing as clicking "hibernate". To click "hibernate" manually requires a great deal of swaped-out-because-it-was-idle crap to be swapped back in. Even pressing the power button to effect hibernation (by default or by the popup) requires de-swapping. And hibernation copies out the entire contents of ram -- all of it, not just the "dirty pages".
The windows crash backtrace information is not created until the system crashes. At that point, protected code fills the pagefile with the contents of ram (or the info for the minidump.) On the next startup, the system sees the pagefile contains crash info and copies it. (I know the process far, FAR too well from debugging screwed up windows drivers.) This has nothing to do with what the poster was saying... paging ram to disk does f*** all to protect anything. A crash -- power failure, whatever -- is a crash; your unsaved work is gone. period.
If I decide anything, it will have to wake up, pull everything back off disk, to do anything. If your power settings lead to hibernation after some (long) idle time, then it doesn't f'ing matter if it's already pushed everything to disk hours previous.
it helps with crash recovery
BULL! When the system restarts, it does not care one bit what's in the pagefile. All the work you had open and unsaved is still gone. All of the filesystem delayed writes will be completed after just a few minutes of idle time, so pushing everything to the pagefile is nothing but a waste of time. And if you're on a laptop, your system very likely had to spin the drive back up to write all that crap.
A lot of commercial construction already uses aluminium for power distribution. Power companies have done so for decades.
The "let's all switch to aluminium" plan just means aluminium will be in demand and thus profitable to swipe. And in many of the places where copper is used today aluminium is not such a great substitute (namely heat exchangers.)
NYC is a pretty old city with almost unmeasurable levels of bureaucracy. (Plus it's pretty expensive to live there.) Stringing fiber all over the place is far from simple -- you cannot just start digging up streets, and the subways and underground pipes, tunnels, etc. are owned by someone (or the port authority.) Despite that, NYC does have faster (and cheaper) broadband connections, on average, than most other places.
Verizon is making inroads with FiOS, but they're limited to where they already have access to the right-of-way. (I'm about 10miles too far east:-()
Really? So you'd like getting your slashdot pages in ~1000 character chunks in completely random order? Why code every application, individually, to handle data ordering when the transport protocol can assure all applications will receive data in the order it was sent. 99% of the traffic crossing the tubes needs to be in a specific order to make any sense. Even applications using UDP need data in order -- voice and video streaming drop older/out-of-order data.
Please tell me you have no influence over anyone who even knows anyone who knows where an IETF meeting is being held. There is enough idea polution in the IETF without your contributions.
Negative. A connection is a connection -- session, stream, flow, whatever. The NAT engine has to keep state on everything flowing across it. UDP actually increases the load because there's no opening or closing process, so connections simply pop into existance and then eventually expire. If your PoS "router" can only support 4096 connections, then UDP will consume them much faster than TCP. (good routers have protocol helpers to detect when a UDP stream is done.)
PS: some really stupid NAT "routers" don't handle UDP at all. The first inside machine to send any UDP traffic gets all inbound UDP packets. E.g. it creates one NAT entry for UDP independant of ports or addresses. It used to make using NFS and VPNs a pain in the ass.
Your ISP didn't sell you "5MB". They sold you "UP TO 5MB". There is nothing in the agreement that says everybody gets 5MB all the time.
I've been in the business since the days of 14.4 modems. Consumer connections have never come with "dedicated bandwidth". A decade ago, it might have been easier to run your modem at 100% all day long, but today, the margins are much smaller; a T1 is 100x faster than a 14.4 modem while an OC-3 is only 30x faster than a 5M cable modem/dsl line. Bandwidth is not free, and the equipment that provides it is very not free.
From a consumer level, very little. 99% of consumers use their ISP's DNS servers so there would be very little need to throttle internal traffic. Plus, DNS amounts to effectively zero percent of network traffic. On my router, DNS is 0.22% of input packets and 0.13% of output packets (with no BT traffic on that network.) (83% for the link that has a DNS server on it:-))
And they are technically, and legally, correct. Your LINE is not shared. Once it gets to the DSLAM, it's no longer "your line" and very much is shared bandwidth with all the other lines coming in. So, you are always getting your full line rate to the DSLAM, but not necessarily anywhere beyond it. Cable, on the other hand, is shared with everyone else in the neighborhood, so you don't always get your full line rate. (if they're selling 10M service, then only about 4 people at a time can get there, per channel.)
Actually, you are both incorrect. One connection, or even a dozen, to a USENET server farm is very different than the hundreds to thousands of connections opened and closed by bittorrent applications. For USENET, the router has a dozen, more-or-less persistent connections to remember. For BT, it has hundreds of transient connections to remember and forget. Conclusion... BT is a lot more work for routers.
It has been common practice for ISPs to outsource USENET service for a long time now. The expense of maintaining their own hardware became too high nearly a decade ago. Add to that the decline in use, and usefulness, with the rise of "blogs" and web forums (and p2p), it didn't take any "political pressure" to kill it... it wasn't anything their customers wanted or used, so there's no point spending the money to offer USENET anymore. (If you wanted good USENET access, you were already buying it from someone else.)
Is that throughput (i.e. beyond the ISP) or just the DSL sync rate? My DSL contract says the same sort of thing... up to X Mbps (sync), speed beyond the ISP is not covered.
(Even with the expensive DS3 at the office, SLAs do not extend beyond the ISP's network. That's why all the offices use the same ISP.)
Wrong. Routers maintain state information for "flows". Otherwise, there's a route table lookup for every single packet. If you want to see this for yourself, login to your million dollar Cisco 12000, turn off route cache and watch it route packets only slightly faster than your 50$ linksys wireless "router". Many systems don't maintain a cache for UDP streams since they have no setup or teardown.
The major flaw in the logic from the idiots at uTorrent... UDP packets can be dropped pretty much at will (and often are.) Furthermore, even decade old network gear throttles UDP traffic. If they think using UDP will magically evade blocking and shaping technology, they are 100% flat out WRONG. They just made it 50 orders of magnitude easier to spot... ask yourself, what uses udp across the tubes today? DNS, IPSec tunnels, audio and video streaming... all of it known, recognizable traffic.
That's the thing... For one country to invade another, there must first be a desire to do so. Then you need the military strength to pull it off. And finally, you need the political position to get away with it. There are two things that keep a nation safe... it's army and the armies of it's friends.
Exactly how old were these monitors when the policy was introduced?
Like everything else... Old. 5+ years old. And even at 3yo, cycling them after having been run 24/7 will kill them. The gun heaters fail about 90% of the time. And 10% of the time components fail.
think of how long the average television lasts
TV's spend their entire life cycled. If you read the fine print, running a common tube TV (which is not "common" these days) 24/7 voids the warranty. And there's a big difference between a TV and a computer monitor. For one thing, you don't sit 2ft away from your TV looking at individual pixels. When it takes a TV a few minutes to reach normal brightness, people tend not to notice; when it takes 5 minutes for a computer monitor (CRT or and LCD's backlight) to brighten up, people complain. And brightness is not the only issue. Old CRT's take a while to warm up and reach proper focus and convergence -- the screen looks "fuzy" for a while after power on; this isn't noticable on TV's (esp. "SD" sets) because it's very low resolution and you're 6ft+ from it.
I stopped using my decade old Sony 21" (GDM-500) because it took too long to warm up and be usable. And it draws too much power, and generates too much heat, to run 24/7. (esp. when I have a 2lbs, 18W LCD panel.)
Slashdot Mirror
That's the whole point. Guilty or not is irrelevant. The cost of proving your innocence is much higher than the pre-litigation extortion. When you get one of these letters, let us know how the "I'm not guilty" retort goes. I'll go ahead and tell you your future... they sue you anyway; after many thousands of dollars in lawyers fees, they drop the case when they see their "evidence" is transparent (if they have any at all); you're left with huge lawyers bills and still have not been proven innocent.
"Give me money or I'll sue you" is extortion. File your case, then you can broker an out-of-court settlement ("a deal".)
You keep missing the whole f'ing point. Send me your address so I can send you one of these bullshit "pre-litigation settlement" letters:
"Pay me 3000$ or I will sue you for copyright infringement."
It doesn't matter if you have or not; it doesn't matter if I have any evidence or not. "Pay us now, or pay us (and our lawyers) a lot more later" is how it boils down. It's. F***ing. Extortion. They send these BS letters because a stamp (email) is cheaper than filing an actual legal case in a court of law.
Until it's filed in a court of law, it is nothing more than a threat. Plain. And. Simple. These cases are extortion. They want you to settle without the hassle and expense of a court. And guess what, they sue only a fraction of those threatened. They know people don't have the time or money to fight them court, so they threaten to sue with little intention to follow through knowing most will pay regardless of guilt, and many that do fight end up dropped before it sees a courtroom because they cannot aford to lose a single case.
You can threaten to sue all you want; until you do, I have no (legal) reason to give in to your demands. And even if I do, I can still be sued.
Simple... MONEY. There's no profit motive to upgrade what's already in place, paid for, and fully functional. After all, the point of a telephone is to talk to other people, not run these d***ed modems 24/7. I doubt they'd even go far enough to get DSL to him.
Amen. They took that money and stuck it in their fat pockets. It's just like the BS $0.25 charge BellSouth charged for nearly 30 years to "cover the costs of upgrades" for touchtone service. DTMF decoders are trivial devices; and they were just as trivial 30 years ago. (Over 30 years, that amounts to nearly $1BILLION in additional revenue.)
Actually, it's not so much "shows the intent to sue" as it is a threat (ala extortion) of "pay us or we sue". That's not a settlement; they can still sue you. Once the papers are filed in a court of law, then they can approach your legal counsel for a settlement.
Closing your laptop is an immediate action, so there is no "idle time" for the system to decide to swap out everything. If you leave your laptop sitting for an hour and then close the lid, it will do the exact same thing as clicking "hibernate". To click "hibernate" manually requires a great deal of swaped-out-because-it-was-idle crap to be swapped back in. Even pressing the power button to effect hibernation (by default or by the popup) requires de-swapping. And hibernation copies out the entire contents of ram -- all of it, not just the "dirty pages".
The windows crash backtrace information is not created until the system crashes. At that point, protected code fills the pagefile with the contents of ram (or the info for the minidump.) On the next startup, the system sees the pagefile contains crash info and copies it. (I know the process far, FAR too well from debugging screwed up windows drivers.) This has nothing to do with what the poster was saying... paging ram to disk does f*** all to protect anything. A crash -- power failure, whatever -- is a crash; your unsaved work is gone. period.
If I decide anything, it will have to wake up, pull everything back off disk, to do anything. If your power settings lead to hibernation after some (long) idle time, then it doesn't f'ing matter if it's already pushed everything to disk hours previous.
BULL! When the system restarts, it does not care one bit what's in the pagefile. All the work you had open and unsaved is still gone. All of the filesystem delayed writes will be completed after just a few minutes of idle time, so pushing everything to the pagefile is nothing but a waste of time. And if you're on a laptop, your system very likely had to spin the drive back up to write all that crap.
A lot of commercial construction already uses aluminium for power distribution. Power companies have done so for decades.
The "let's all switch to aluminium" plan just means aluminium will be in demand and thus profitable to swipe. And in many of the places where copper is used today aluminium is not such a great substitute (namely heat exchangers.)
NYC is a pretty old city with almost unmeasurable levels of bureaucracy. (Plus it's pretty expensive to live there.) Stringing fiber all over the place is far from simple -- you cannot just start digging up streets, and the subways and underground pipes, tunnels, etc. are owned by someone (or the port authority.) Despite that, NYC does have faster (and cheaper) broadband connections, on average, than most other places.
Verizon is making inroads with FiOS, but they're limited to where they already have access to the right-of-way. (I'm about 10miles too far east :-()
Really? So you'd like getting your slashdot pages in ~1000 character chunks in completely random order? Why code every application, individually, to handle data ordering when the transport protocol can assure all applications will receive data in the order it was sent. 99% of the traffic crossing the tubes needs to be in a specific order to make any sense. Even applications using UDP need data in order -- voice and video streaming drop older/out-of-order data.
Please tell me you have no influence over anyone who even knows anyone who knows where an IETF meeting is being held. There is enough idea polution in the IETF without your contributions.
Negative. A connection is a connection -- session, stream, flow, whatever. The NAT engine has to keep state on everything flowing across it. UDP actually increases the load because there's no opening or closing process, so connections simply pop into existance and then eventually expire. If your PoS "router" can only support 4096 connections, then UDP will consume them much faster than TCP. (good routers have protocol helpers to detect when a UDP stream is done.)
PS: some really stupid NAT "routers" don't handle UDP at all. The first inside machine to send any UDP traffic gets all inbound UDP packets. E.g. it creates one NAT entry for UDP independant of ports or addresses. It used to make using NFS and VPNs a pain in the ass.
Sorry, but UDP will crash them too. UDP, TCP, ICMP, doesn't matter; it still has to track them to know who gets what packets.
Your ISP didn't sell you "5MB". They sold you "UP TO 5MB". There is nothing in the agreement that says everybody gets 5MB all the time.
I've been in the business since the days of 14.4 modems. Consumer connections have never come with "dedicated bandwidth". A decade ago, it might have been easier to run your modem at 100% all day long, but today, the margins are much smaller; a T1 is 100x faster than a 14.4 modem while an OC-3 is only 30x faster than a 5M cable modem/dsl line. Bandwidth is not free, and the equipment that provides it is very not free.
Because from a router's perspective, there's no such thing as "connectionless".
From a consumer level, very little. 99% of consumers use their ISP's DNS servers so there would be very little need to throttle internal traffic. Plus, DNS amounts to effectively zero percent of network traffic. On my router, DNS is 0.22% of input packets and 0.13% of output packets (with no BT traffic on that network.) (83% for the link that has a DNS server on it :-))
And they are technically, and legally, correct. Your LINE is not shared. Once it gets to the DSLAM, it's no longer "your line" and very much is shared bandwidth with all the other lines coming in. So, you are always getting your full line rate to the DSLAM, but not necessarily anywhere beyond it. Cable, on the other hand, is shared with everyone else in the neighborhood, so you don't always get your full line rate. (if they're selling 10M service, then only about 4 people at a time can get there, per channel.)
Actually, you are both incorrect. One connection, or even a dozen, to a USENET server farm is very different than the hundreds to thousands of connections opened and closed by bittorrent applications. For USENET, the router has a dozen, more-or-less persistent connections to remember. For BT, it has hundreds of transient connections to remember and forget. Conclusion... BT is a lot more work for routers.
It has been common practice for ISPs to outsource USENET service for a long time now. The expense of maintaining their own hardware became too high nearly a decade ago. Add to that the decline in use, and usefulness, with the rise of "blogs" and web forums (and p2p), it didn't take any "political pressure" to kill it... it wasn't anything their customers wanted or used, so there's no point spending the money to offer USENET anymore. (If you wanted good USENET access, you were already buying it from someone else.)
Is that throughput (i.e. beyond the ISP) or just the DSL sync rate? My DSL contract says the same sort of thing... up to X Mbps (sync), speed beyond the ISP is not covered.
(Even with the expensive DS3 at the office, SLAs do not extend beyond the ISP's network. That's why all the offices use the same ISP.)
... or the network admin is the guy clogging the tubes :-)
Wrong. Routers maintain state information for "flows". Otherwise, there's a route table lookup for every single packet. If you want to see this for yourself, login to your million dollar Cisco 12000, turn off route cache and watch it route packets only slightly faster than your 50$ linksys wireless "router". Many systems don't maintain a cache for UDP streams since they have no setup or teardown.
The major flaw in the logic from the idiots at uTorrent... UDP packets can be dropped pretty much at will (and often are.) Furthermore, even decade old network gear throttles UDP traffic. If they think using UDP will magically evade blocking and shaping technology, they are 100% flat out WRONG. They just made it 50 orders of magnitude easier to spot... ask yourself, what uses udp across the tubes today? DNS, IPSec tunnels, audio and video streaming... all of it known, recognizable traffic.
That's the thing... For one country to invade another, there must first be a desire to do so. Then you need the military strength to pull it off. And finally, you need the political position to get away with it. There are two things that keep a nation safe... it's army and the armies of it's friends.
bluetooth headsets. Many are small enough to go unnoticed, and guys walking around talking to the wind is not unusual.
Make all the "yard" accesses have metal detectors. Noone headed into the yard from those points should have any metal at all on them.
Like everything else... Old. 5+ years old. And even at 3yo, cycling them after having been run 24/7 will kill them. The gun heaters fail about 90% of the time. And 10% of the time components fail.
TV's spend their entire life cycled. If you read the fine print, running a common tube TV (which is not "common" these days) 24/7 voids the warranty. And there's a big difference between a TV and a computer monitor. For one thing, you don't sit 2ft away from your TV looking at individual pixels. When it takes a TV a few minutes to reach normal brightness, people tend not to notice; when it takes 5 minutes for a computer monitor (CRT or and LCD's backlight) to brighten up, people complain. And brightness is not the only issue. Old CRT's take a while to warm up and reach proper focus and convergence -- the screen looks "fuzy" for a while after power on; this isn't noticable on TV's (esp. "SD" sets) because it's very low resolution and you're 6ft+ from it.
I stopped using my decade old Sony 21" (GDM-500) because it took too long to warm up and be usable. And it draws too much power, and generates too much heat, to run 24/7. (esp. when I have a 2lbs, 18W LCD panel.)