Obviously, you don't live in areas like South Florida, where there are radiation sensing devices clearly visible on the Turnpike, Sawgrass Expressway, and other major roads designed to detect this exact thing. I don't see that they are something that the US culture is inherently predisposed against tolerating either. If for some reason you have some highly radioactive material in your car, and the sensors pick it up, and you get pulled over (or worse), I don't think the people in the area would have many complaints about invasion of privacy or anything similar.
I would imagine, but don't know, that there are similar detection devices in the subways of major cities across America. At least I would hope so...
There are limits that the OS, or GUI environment, can place on copying the data. Sure, a doctor can take a picture of the screen, but how likely is that, really? If you don't allow copy and paste within the application, and you deny screen capture, then that would avoid 95% of the issue. There will be that 5% that takes a picture of the screen, if that, but then you are talking about a concerted effort to copy patient data and that can be handled by laws or regulations.
Nope, I've installed networks in hospitals for the last 15 years, and had the pleasure of working all over the US in areas that both were forced to use union labor for cable pulls and those that were not. My comments come from personal experience, not some far-right cable news guys.
And the ironic part is that the most likely reason why they had to wait to get someone out to pull some basic cables is that they probably had to use union labor. And the government was responsible for allowing unions.
I don't think it is actually that difficult to create a system that does not allow copying of patient data into the clipboard. You should be able to prevent screen shots when critical data is displayed also. I'm uninterested enough to avoid spending the time looking up whether this is actually possible with the existing Windows or X API's, but there's no reason why this functionality can't be provided.
If you don't like this, call them at 888-549-3776, and go on their web site and write a complaint and ask for a refund if you ISP is paying them, and charging you, and you don't want their "service." If you really want to make a difference, pick a random day of the week and time and schedule a reminder to call them once a week on this topic. It does cost them, and they will take notice, if enough people call them enough times on a regular basis. A short-lived complaint blast that goes away after a day, or week, will either not be noticed, or ignored because it was a one-time event. You can also contact your congress critter and tell them you would like them to investigate such practices and put a stop to it. But again, it would be better if you regularly brought this to their attention rather than a one-time event.
ISP's give preferential treatment to traffic to/from speed test sites, so what it says you will get is what you will get only when accessing the speed test sites.
You do realize that almost all ISP's already have preferential treatment of traffic to speakeasy and any of the other known speed testing sites, right?
$100M in revenue isn't actually all that much. Not when you consider all of the salary and overhead costs (benefits, taxes, buildings and office space) just to employ all of the people in the group that makes the Zune. Plus, it also has to cover the cost of making the devices, as this isn't profit. Either that, or the information provided is not accurate...
I actually own two NCsoft games. Then about a year or two ago came across one of the Microsoft FUD adds with NCsoft as the example company. I wrote an email informing them that I did not appreciate their participation in the program and would not be purchasing any of their software in the future. I followed through. I doubt they will, but I wouldn't be upset if they did go under just for bad karma.
I've been buying from Mwave for years also, and they have screwed up my order once. That is the reason I'll continue to buy from them. Not that they screwed up the order, but in the way they handled it. Basically, I was buying a bare-bones system for my son, and I purchased a system that in the description said it had full PCI slots, whereas it was actually one of those half-height systems where full-height cards would not fit. I realize that they say they are not responsible for what the descriptions of the items say, as they take them from the manufacturer's, but they took the wrong description and falsely labeled the item, which I'm convinced was an honest mistake. Once the situation was explained they were more than glad to accept the first system back with no restocking fee, and ship me another unit with a regular full-height case and charge me the $5 different between the systems. You'll hear stories on here about other vendors where the customer service is not so great. At mwave at least, I've been satisfied.
For a twist on this story, recall the recent story about the effort by convicted sex offenders to expunge or not list their names and crimes on the Internet? It seems reasonable not to list the names of the merely accused, but conviction records are public record. I can see how there may be some discussion on how and what detail may be required, such as requiring the listing of the actual crimes found guilty of, but banning the publication of convicted criminals doesn't sit right with me. I'm thinking of the sicko 25yo who rapes a young boy or girl, as opposed to the 18yo who got caught with his 16yo girlfriend. As long as some of the details of the crime are included, I don't see a reason at all to withhold names of people actually convicted of crimes. It may also be appropriate to note whether they were convicted by a jury of their peers, or cop'd a plea and confessed to a lesser crime, which some claim they were not even guilty of, to avoid the hassle.
You missed one. In fact, the most important method of implementing QoS. That is to do your #2, accepting the marking, up until the agreed upon rates, and then remark any traffic exceeding that rate at a lower value, and possibly dropping traffic that violates the agreed upon rates. For instance, you could have ISPs and backbone providers agree to honor each others' QoS markings. Between the end-user and the ISP is where the "agreed upon rates" would be implemented. To allow for VoIP traffic users could be allowed to mark traffic at a high priority, up to a rate of 100Kbps, which should cover any currently known VoIP codec. "Interactive" traffic, such as web browsing and interactive gaming, can be marked with "medium" priority, and be limited to 512K (upstream). All other traffic would be marked low priority and not limited. If an end-user tries to mark everything as high priority the ISP, in accordance with their advertised policy, would accept the first 100Kbps and then mark down all other traffic marked as high priority to low priority. There could be different tiers that users could sign up for, for different dollar amounts. I'd much prefer this method to one that has me paying for any bandwidth downloaded, and paying more when I exceed some threshold...
It's not advisable to run CAT anything (copper) between two buildings. There are potential ground differences and you could end up with problems. Run fiber.
You need to look no further than Eliot Spitzer. He was caught by the fact that there is now widespread spying on EVERYONE's bank accounts. Any transaction over $10,000 in your account is reported to the government.
It was my understanding that the reporting of transactions over $10K was mandatory, and has been so for years. You seem to be grand-standing by stressing that it is "now widespread." It has always been widespread. A quick google search shows that the Bank Secrecy Act was signed into law in 1970. That's 38 friggin years. Yea, the fact that it is "now widespread" and "spying" are really backed up by the facts here, not.
Perhaps the amounts should be changed, as $10K today is certainly not the same as $10 in 1970. That, however, is a different arguement.
No, you're wrong. At the time of the auction such property is owned by the government. The government "seized" the property. They are selling it at an auction. They are the owner, and they get the proceeds.
The proper way to institute change, if change is desired, is to write up an RFC and submit it to the IETF to change, or enhance, the DNS protocol. It is not to make up your own proprietary protocols and then interject them into the mix by using the same interface (ports, etc) that standard protocols use. From a protocol standpoint, this is even worse than Comcast forging RST packets for torrents, RR is forging the entire friggin DNS system.
I can't understand how a logical person would say opt-in for something like this is a good thing.
I can't believe that got modded 5 informative. We are talking about OpenDNS in this thread, not RR's DNS redirection. OpenDNS does not, and can't, track by MAC address. It's just a DNS server.
With respect to RR's service, again it may use a script that sends your MAC address, but this is not how the service actually works (it can't be, based on how the DNS protocol works). What they might be doing is gathering your MAC address and using that to put you in a different DHCP scope that sets your DNS server to their "corrupted" DNS servers instead of the standard DNS servers. That's a plausible explanation. That the DNS server itself is tracking your MAC address is not.
Without access to TW's internal network that would be impossible. If they are a Layer-3 hop away the MAC address of the modem is nowhere in the request packet, hence they can't tell what the MAC address is. The only way to determine the MAC address of the device is if you had a device on the same IP subnet, or some type of access to the TW router. That access could be command line access, or SNMP access. I doubt TW would give either to OpenDNS.
Cisco has new Premium PoE blades for the 4500 E-Series chassis that provide up to 30W of power per port. As for other comments already posted, it has nothing to do with how much power the ASIC or general purpose chips in the AP's consume, that is minimal at best, and you are not going to get your power savings there. The additional requirements are for powering the additional radios in the AP's, and pumping out that power over the air. There's basically no getting around that. Some vendors say they can, but their AP's are apparently not fully powered.
I'm not a fan of analogies, but I suppose it would be like upgrading from a VW Bug to some super-duper sports vehicle, while keeping the same engine. It may look all nice on the outside, but it is just not going to perform without the horsepower (Watts) under the hood...
Slashdot Mirror
Obviously, you don't live in areas like South Florida, where there are radiation sensing devices clearly visible on the Turnpike, Sawgrass Expressway, and other major roads designed to detect this exact thing. I don't see that they are something that the US culture is inherently predisposed against tolerating either. If for some reason you have some highly radioactive material in your car, and the sensors pick it up, and you get pulled over (or worse), I don't think the people in the area would have many complaints about invasion of privacy or anything similar. I would imagine, but don't know, that there are similar detection devices in the subways of major cities across America. At least I would hope so...
There are limits that the OS, or GUI environment, can place on copying the data. Sure, a doctor can take a picture of the screen, but how likely is that, really? If you don't allow copy and paste within the application, and you deny screen capture, then that would avoid 95% of the issue. There will be that 5% that takes a picture of the screen, if that, but then you are talking about a concerted effort to copy patient data and that can be handled by laws or regulations.
Nope, I've installed networks in hospitals for the last 15 years, and had the pleasure of working all over the US in areas that both were forced to use union labor for cable pulls and those that were not. My comments come from personal experience, not some far-right cable news guys.
And the ironic part is that the most likely reason why they had to wait to get someone out to pull some basic cables is that they probably had to use union labor. And the government was responsible for allowing unions.
I don't think it is actually that difficult to create a system that does not allow copying of patient data into the clipboard. You should be able to prevent screen shots when critical data is displayed also. I'm uninterested enough to avoid spending the time looking up whether this is actually possible with the existing Windows or X API's, but there's no reason why this functionality can't be provided.
In Florida, five years, after which it is probably useless anyway.
If you don't like this, call them at 888-549-3776, and go on their web site and write a complaint and ask for a refund if you ISP is paying them, and charging you, and you don't want their "service." If you really want to make a difference, pick a random day of the week and time and schedule a reminder to call them once a week on this topic. It does cost them, and they will take notice, if enough people call them enough times on a regular basis. A short-lived complaint blast that goes away after a day, or week, will either not be noticed, or ignored because it was a one-time event. You can also contact your congress critter and tell them you would like them to investigate such practices and put a stop to it. But again, it would be better if you regularly brought this to their attention rather than a one-time event.
ISP's give preferential treatment to traffic to/from speed test sites, so what it says you will get is what you will get only when accessing the speed test sites.
You do realize that almost all ISP's already have preferential treatment of traffic to speakeasy and any of the other known speed testing sites, right?
$100M in revenue isn't actually all that much. Not when you consider all of the salary and overhead costs (benefits, taxes, buildings and office space) just to employ all of the people in the group that makes the Zune. Plus, it also has to cover the cost of making the devices, as this isn't profit. Either that, or the information provided is not accurate...
So everyone else in California is subsidizing this guy's purchase of this solar panel system. Nice.
I actually own two NCsoft games. Then about a year or two ago came across one of the Microsoft FUD adds with NCsoft as the example company. I wrote an email informing them that I did not appreciate their participation in the program and would not be purchasing any of their software in the future. I followed through. I doubt they will, but I wouldn't be upset if they did go under just for bad karma.
That would be informative if it were actually true.
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/Reader/8.0/help.html?content=WS58a04a822e3e50102bd615109794195ff-7d19.html
This may be useful for you:
http://www.pdfcropper.com/
This is all readily available via a Google search.
I've been buying from Mwave for years also, and they have screwed up my order once. That is the reason I'll continue to buy from them. Not that they screwed up the order, but in the way they handled it. Basically, I was buying a bare-bones system for my son, and I purchased a system that in the description said it had full PCI slots, whereas it was actually one of those half-height systems where full-height cards would not fit. I realize that they say they are not responsible for what the descriptions of the items say, as they take them from the manufacturer's, but they took the wrong description and falsely labeled the item, which I'm convinced was an honest mistake. Once the situation was explained they were more than glad to accept the first system back with no restocking fee, and ship me another unit with a regular full-height case and charge me the $5 different between the systems. You'll hear stories on here about other vendors where the customer service is not so great. At mwave at least, I've been satisfied.
For a twist on this story, recall the recent story about the effort by convicted sex offenders to expunge or not list their names and crimes on the Internet? It seems reasonable not to list the names of the merely accused, but conviction records are public record. I can see how there may be some discussion on how and what detail may be required, such as requiring the listing of the actual crimes found guilty of, but banning the publication of convicted criminals doesn't sit right with me. I'm thinking of the sicko 25yo who rapes a young boy or girl, as opposed to the 18yo who got caught with his 16yo girlfriend. As long as some of the details of the crime are included, I don't see a reason at all to withhold names of people actually convicted of crimes. It may also be appropriate to note whether they were convicted by a jury of their peers, or cop'd a plea and confessed to a lesser crime, which some claim they were not even guilty of, to avoid the hassle.
The game crashes on you, or the OS crashes on you?
You missed one. In fact, the most important method of implementing QoS. That is to do your #2, accepting the marking, up until the agreed upon rates, and then remark any traffic exceeding that rate at a lower value, and possibly dropping traffic that violates the agreed upon rates. For instance, you could have ISPs and backbone providers agree to honor each others' QoS markings. Between the end-user and the ISP is where the "agreed upon rates" would be implemented. To allow for VoIP traffic users could be allowed to mark traffic at a high priority, up to a rate of 100Kbps, which should cover any currently known VoIP codec. "Interactive" traffic, such as web browsing and interactive gaming, can be marked with "medium" priority, and be limited to 512K (upstream). All other traffic would be marked low priority and not limited. If an end-user tries to mark everything as high priority the ISP, in accordance with their advertised policy, would accept the first 100Kbps and then mark down all other traffic marked as high priority to low priority. There could be different tiers that users could sign up for, for different dollar amounts. I'd much prefer this method to one that has me paying for any bandwidth downloaded, and paying more when I exceed some threshold...
It's not advisable to run CAT anything (copper) between two buildings. There are potential ground differences and you could end up with problems. Run fiber.
It was my understanding that the reporting of transactions over $10K was mandatory, and has been so for years. You seem to be grand-standing by stressing that it is "now widespread." It has always been widespread. A quick google search shows that the Bank Secrecy Act was signed into law in 1970. That's 38 friggin years. Yea, the fact that it is "now widespread" and "spying" are really backed up by the facts here, not.
Perhaps the amounts should be changed, as $10K today is certainly not the same as $10 in 1970. That, however, is a different arguement.
No, you're wrong. At the time of the auction such property is owned by the government. The government "seized" the property. They are selling it at an auction. They are the owner, and they get the proceeds.
The proper way to institute change, if change is desired, is to write up an RFC and submit it to the IETF to change, or enhance, the DNS protocol. It is not to make up your own proprietary protocols and then interject them into the mix by using the same interface (ports, etc) that standard protocols use. From a protocol standpoint, this is even worse than Comcast forging RST packets for torrents, RR is forging the entire friggin DNS system.
I can't understand how a logical person would say opt-in for something like this is a good thing.
I can't believe that got modded 5 informative. We are talking about OpenDNS in this thread, not RR's DNS redirection. OpenDNS does not, and can't, track by MAC address. It's just a DNS server.
With respect to RR's service, again it may use a script that sends your MAC address, but this is not how the service actually works (it can't be, based on how the DNS protocol works). What they might be doing is gathering your MAC address and using that to put you in a different DHCP scope that sets your DNS server to their "corrupted" DNS servers instead of the standard DNS servers. That's a plausible explanation. That the DNS server itself is tracking your MAC address is not.
Without access to TW's internal network that would be impossible. If they are a Layer-3 hop away the MAC address of the modem is nowhere in the request packet, hence they can't tell what the MAC address is. The only way to determine the MAC address of the device is if you had a device on the same IP subnet, or some type of access to the TW router. That access could be command line access, or SNMP access. I doubt TW would give either to OpenDNS.
Hence, you are barking up the wrong tree.
Cisco has new Premium PoE blades for the 4500 E-Series chassis that provide up to 30W of power per port. As for other comments already posted, it has nothing to do with how much power the ASIC or general purpose chips in the AP's consume, that is minimal at best, and you are not going to get your power savings there. The additional requirements are for powering the additional radios in the AP's, and pumping out that power over the air. There's basically no getting around that. Some vendors say they can, but their AP's are apparently not fully powered.
I'm not a fan of analogies, but I suppose it would be like upgrading from a VW Bug to some super-duper sports vehicle, while keeping the same engine. It may look all nice on the outside, but it is just not going to perform without the horsepower (Watts) under the hood...
You know there is such a thing as noise cancelling headphones...