Does anyone responding to this thread really understand VoIP and the 150ms delay requirement? It has nothing to do with the delay you may hear on a "long" analog phone call. The 150ms restriction is due to the algorithm used in VoIP. One of the phone sets in a VoIP call encodes the voice into a data stream. It's UDP, so there is no packet reordering a-la TCP. If there is a delay more than a specific amount of time, that packet is dropped by the receiving station, even if it gets there entact. The packet data would be too late to use in reconstructing the voice stream. So if there is significant delay, or jitter, in a VoIP call it's not like someone says "Hello" at one end and at the other you hear "Hello" 1-2 seconds later. That's just not the way it works. Instead, you'd possibly hear something like "he..o" where part of the voice stream is just dropped. It has nothing to do with how much delay you are willing to put up with on a phone conversation, rather it's how much of a jumbled and broken conversation you are willing to put up with. I'd have to think that most people would answer that with little at all or none.
150ms is not fictional, but it certainly appears to be misunderstood...
O.K., how about this: VS 8 Performance makes it unuseable? I'm not sure it falls directly on your request for links to issues with.Net, but it may be involved..Net 2.0 is a lot different than.Net 1.0/1.1. Are the VS 2005 (VS 8) IDE's written in.Net 2.0? It could be a prime example of one of Microsoft's own applications having performance issues due to the new version of.Net.
You're talking about a future product. Vaproware at this point. I guess we can feel good that Microsoft Windows will finally catch up to the functionality of Linux desktops at some point in the future.
I'd have to agree. Windows XP still has this stupid behavior. Particularly frustrating is Microsoft applications not making themselves modal for certain dialog boxes, or the modal feature not working like it should. I've had to change my password on at least one occasion because a password dialog that should have been modal was not, or the modal feature didn't work correctly, resulting in my googling for my password. I'm not paranoid, but I'd assume that search keys are stored somewhere easily accessible. Thank God that E*Trade has a SecureID token!
No you don't. No one gets 54Mbps throughput on 802.11a/b/g wireless. That may be the advertized rate, but it's not your typical or even maximum bandwidth.
Still, you are correct that even 802.11b at low speeds is good enought for VoIP as far as throughput. It's more SNR and the (lack of real) QoS that are the problems areas.
That's not how QoS works, or what video and/or voice communications require. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the technology to want to charge for bandwidth. Voice and video take a comparatively small amount of bandwidth when measured against the size of the pipe that broadband customers have. Voice takes so little that you could run it on a dial-up line. It's more the queuing, latency and jitter that affects such traffic. That requires that voice and video be put at a higher priority than normal data (FTP/HTTP) traffic.
The difference is all of these past technologies came nowhere near the quality of the product from the studios themselves. Current technology (CD's and DVD's) exactly duplicate what you'd get if you purchased it from the studios, minus an exact duplication of the packaging.
If you think the packaging is worth it, then by all means purchase the originals. I, for instance, have purchased every single season of StarGate SG-1 released so far, even though I watched 90% of the episodes on SciFi. Would I download and copy those DVD's if someone else ripped them? Probably not. I don't mind giving up the money because I like the shows. I know that 90% of that money doesn't make it to the right channels, but some of it does.
On a similar topic, I'd love to see the a la carte cable channels proposal by the FCC go forward. I'd have no problem giving up 5$ per month just for the SciFi channel.
WPA is better because it uses a chaning key. The actual encryption is still WEP (WPA1 is AES), but the keys change on a regular basis, so they can't be easily guessed. You don't start out with a known key either, you either use 802.1x authentication or a pre-shared key (PSK). PSK's are designated for "home" networks and are not recommended for enterprise networks.
IANAL, but I don't believe the Authors Guild has a standing for such a suit unless they themselves have the copyright on some of the works. You can't sue someone for someone else. If you are a single author who's rights were allegedly violated you could sue and seek class action for the rest of the authors whos rights were allegedly violated. However, since I'm not an author I couldn't sue Google on their behalf, and neither should the Author's Guild be able to. I do believe there was a similar case that was discussed in the recent Roberts confirmation hearings. While everyone may agree that the alleged activity was against the law and should be punished, only the people agrieved have the standing to push the case. (Specifically in the Roberts case, some wacko environmentalist tried to sue for mercury levels in streams, while they were not the agrieved parties. The actions of the companies that released the mercury may have been illegal, but you have to have standing to file suit [or at least to win such a suit without being dismissed]. That's not to say the environmentalist could not or should not have funded such a lawsuit by those actually agrieved).
Now, TFA says that the individual plantiffs are Herbert Mitgang, Betty Miles, and Daniel Hoffman. So, to be accurate, the Author's Guild isn't really suing anyone, they are publicizing the fact that three of their supposed members are suing Google. They may even be providing for the legal fees in the action, although TFA doesn't say anything about that I could find. But is the Actor's Guild itself suing Google? It can't because it doesn't have standing. However, remember that IANAFL.
Implications, yes, but I'm looking for some feedback from some crypto experts that know what they are talking about as to whether they think this will result in yet another RFC that changes the recommendations. I already said I'm not a crypto expert, so I have no idea if there is a better attack on MD5 or not. I do, however, implement some IPsec systems, so I'd like to hear some feedback as to what to go forward with in the meantime, SHA1 or MD5.
But thanks for your comments! (If you want to be accurate, IPsec is a protocol that utilizes many different algorithms, but isn't an algorithm itself)
I wonder how this will effect RFC 4109 in that it depreciates MD5 in favor of SHA1. Does this mean that SHA1, at 2^63 is less secure than MD5 at a brute-force 2^64? I'm not a crypto expert or anything, just asking the question; will this effect the proposed standard for the HASH algorithm used in IPsec?
That would be changing it four times a year. You'd have to set it back manually the three weeks before the current start of DST. Then, you'd have to set it again when the device changed the time on it's own, on the existing DST date. Then you'd need to do the opposite towards the end. You'd need to reset it back when the device changed it on the existing date, then set it forward on the new DST date.
Statistically people with higher grades get in fewer accidents. It's pure mathematics that cause the insurance companies to set their rates. They charge the most for the people who get in the most accidents, and the least for those who do not. It would not make sense for them to charge less for someone who causes them to shell out more money. Now, you could say that they still over-charge certain groups of people, but it would not make sense to try and get away with this for the highest-charged people. Rather, it would make more sense for them to charge everyone the same rate, thereby over-charging the girls, older people, and people with good grades (responsibility).
If I recall, wasn't Adobe responsible for some DMCA silliness a while back? Seems that things have come around and bit them. Be wary of what you wish for...
I can see the charge for their other publications, but I believe they should allow free public access to their standards. They allow it for some of their 802 standards now. Publications, such as journals, etc, are a different matter entirely, and I could even see charging for access to pre-standard documents. However, once something is accepted as a IEEE standard it should be made public.
Last I checked the goddammed SUVS didn't run on electricity, so staying off nuclear would not do anything about them. A move from fossil fuels to nuclear however, might just incent people to produce more electric cars, and may get rid of the goddammed fossil fuel using SUVS.
Wasn't everything you mention other than Java aquired through the purchase of another company? Star/OpenOffice certainly, Netbeans? iPlanet? Would Sun have ported these to other systems if they developed them internally? Somehow I doubt it.
A decade, or a century, is nowhere near a long enough time to estimate climate changes. The environmentalists looked at the trees instead of the forest, and you give an example of a part of a leaf.
2) If it's a natural cycle then there's no need to move anywhere. Enjoy the warmer temperature for a while. People 1000 years from now will certainly be wishing for it, when they go through another cooling trend.
3) I'll stay right where I am, thank you much. Nothing is going to happen other than increased air conditioning costs and decreased heating costs. (Oh, I think I just figured it out, those french people don't have air conditioning, that's why they are loosing their mind).
4) "Survive?" I think you're blowing it way out of proportion.
Re:I don't see what is so special here.
on
Defining Google
·
· Score: 1
It's generally standard for employees to pay 1/2 salary in other "benefits" per employee. So if you had a $50K/yr job your employer was probably paying around $25K in additional benefits and other costs. A lot of the "extra" cost is just how insurance works. You may be generally healthy and not require a lot of medical / dental / vision costs in a typical year. However, it's the few employees that have the cronic disease or get in some type of accident that costs half a million or more to pay for that makes the benefits that employers pay so "much" ($25K per year).
Count yourself lucky that you haven't had an accident or caught some expensive disease so that you don't have to pay way in excess of $18K per year.
I have to make a big assumption here, but it sounds to me like you work for a proprietary software company and not on an open source project. That is a totally different situation, and I can see your point in those circumstances. However, with open source projects the whole concept changes, and your concerns do not hold up to reality.
Slashdot Mirror
Does anyone responding to this thread really understand VoIP and the 150ms delay requirement? It has nothing to do with the delay you may hear on a "long" analog phone call. The 150ms restriction is due to the algorithm used in VoIP. One of the phone sets in a VoIP call encodes the voice into a data stream. It's UDP, so there is no packet reordering a-la TCP. If there is a delay more than a specific amount of time, that packet is dropped by the receiving station, even if it gets there entact. The packet data would be too late to use in reconstructing the voice stream. So if there is significant delay, or jitter, in a VoIP call it's not like someone says "Hello" at one end and at the other you hear "Hello" 1-2 seconds later. That's just not the way it works. Instead, you'd possibly hear something like "he..o" where part of the voice stream is just dropped. It has nothing to do with how much delay you are willing to put up with on a phone conversation, rather it's how much of a jumbled and broken conversation you are willing to put up with. I'd have to think that most people would answer that with little at all or none.
150ms is not fictional, but it certainly appears to be misunderstood...
Like the artists who get paid several millions of dollars for a few months work on a film? Yea, right.
O.K., how about this: VS 8 Performance makes it unuseable? I'm not sure it falls directly on your request for links to issues with .Net, but it may be involved. .Net 2.0 is a lot different than .Net 1.0/1.1. Are the VS 2005 (VS 8) IDE's written in .Net 2.0? It could be a prime example of one of Microsoft's own applications having performance issues due to the new version of .Net.
You're talking about a future product. Vaproware at this point. I guess we can feel good that Microsoft Windows will finally catch up to the functionality of Linux desktops at some point in the future.
I'd have to agree. Windows XP still has this stupid behavior. Particularly frustrating is Microsoft applications not making themselves modal for certain dialog boxes, or the modal feature not working like it should. I've had to change my password on at least one occasion because a password dialog that should have been modal was not, or the modal feature didn't work correctly, resulting in my googling for my password. I'm not paranoid, but I'd assume that search keys are stored somewhere easily accessible. Thank God that E*Trade has a SecureID token!
No you don't. No one gets 54Mbps throughput on 802.11a/b/g wireless. That may be the advertized rate, but it's not your typical or even maximum bandwidth.
Still, you are correct that even 802.11b at low speeds is good enought for VoIP as far as throughput. It's more SNR and the (lack of real) QoS that are the problems areas.
That's not how QoS works, or what video and/or voice communications require. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the technology to want to charge for bandwidth. Voice and video take a comparatively small amount of bandwidth when measured against the size of the pipe that broadband customers have. Voice takes so little that you could run it on a dial-up line. It's more the queuing, latency and jitter that affects such traffic. That requires that voice and video be put at a higher priority than normal data (FTP/HTTP) traffic.
No, you're looking for a LiquidMetal case.
The difference is all of these past technologies came nowhere near the quality of the product from the studios themselves. Current technology (CD's and DVD's) exactly duplicate what you'd get if you purchased it from the studios, minus an exact duplication of the packaging.
If you think the packaging is worth it, then by all means purchase the originals. I, for instance, have purchased every single season of StarGate SG-1 released so far, even though I watched 90% of the episodes on SciFi. Would I download and copy those DVD's if someone else ripped them? Probably not. I don't mind giving up the money because I like the shows. I know that 90% of that money doesn't make it to the right channels, but some of it does.
On a similar topic, I'd love to see the a la carte cable channels proposal by the FCC go forward. I'd have no problem giving up 5$ per month just for the SciFi channel.
That's WPA2 uses AES. So much for previewing comments...
WPA is better because it uses a chaning key. The actual encryption is still WEP (WPA1 is AES), but the keys change on a regular basis, so they can't be easily guessed. You don't start out with a known key either, you either use 802.1x authentication or a pre-shared key (PSK). PSK's are designated for "home" networks and are not recommended for enterprise networks.
IANAL, but I don't believe the Authors Guild has a standing for such a suit unless they themselves have the copyright on some of the works. You can't sue someone for someone else. If you are a single author who's rights were allegedly violated you could sue and seek class action for the rest of the authors whos rights were allegedly violated. However, since I'm not an author I couldn't sue Google on their behalf, and neither should the Author's Guild be able to. I do believe there was a similar case that was discussed in the recent Roberts confirmation hearings. While everyone may agree that the alleged activity was against the law and should be punished, only the people agrieved have the standing to push the case. (Specifically in the Roberts case, some wacko environmentalist tried to sue for mercury levels in streams, while they were not the agrieved parties. The actions of the companies that released the mercury may have been illegal, but you have to have standing to file suit [or at least to win such a suit without being dismissed]. That's not to say the environmentalist could not or should not have funded such a lawsuit by those actually agrieved).
Now, TFA says that the individual plantiffs are Herbert Mitgang, Betty Miles, and Daniel Hoffman. So, to be accurate, the Author's Guild isn't really suing anyone, they are publicizing the fact that three of their supposed members are suing Google. They may even be providing for the legal fees in the action, although TFA doesn't say anything about that I could find. But is the Actor's Guild itself suing Google? It can't because it doesn't have standing. However, remember that IANAFL.
Yes, TFA said that there are faster inkjet printers. This is a laser printer, and there are a lot of differences.
Implications, yes, but I'm looking for some feedback from some crypto experts that know what they are talking about as to whether they think this will result in yet another RFC that changes the recommendations. I already said I'm not a crypto expert, so I have no idea if there is a better attack on MD5 or not. I do, however, implement some IPsec systems, so I'd like to hear some feedback as to what to go forward with in the meantime, SHA1 or MD5.
But thanks for your comments! (If you want to be accurate, IPsec is a protocol that utilizes many different algorithms, but isn't an algorithm itself)
I wonder how this will effect RFC 4109 in that it depreciates MD5 in favor of SHA1. Does this mean that SHA1, at 2^63 is less secure than MD5 at a brute-force 2^64? I'm not a crypto expert or anything, just asking the question; will this effect the proposed standard for the HASH algorithm used in IPsec?
That would be changing it four times a year. You'd have to set it back manually the three weeks before the current start of DST. Then, you'd have to set it again when the device changed the time on it's own, on the existing DST date. Then you'd need to do the opposite towards the end. You'd need to reset it back when the device changed it on the existing date, then set it forward on the new DST date.
Statistically people with higher grades get in fewer accidents. It's pure mathematics that cause the insurance companies to set their rates. They charge the most for the people who get in the most accidents, and the least for those who do not. It would not make sense for them to charge less for someone who causes them to shell out more money. Now, you could say that they still over-charge certain groups of people, but it would not make sense to try and get away with this for the highest-charged people. Rather, it would make more sense for them to charge everyone the same rate, thereby over-charging the girls, older people, and people with good grades (responsibility).
If I recall, wasn't Adobe responsible for some DMCA silliness a while back? Seems that things have come around and bit them. Be wary of what you wish for...
I can see the charge for their other publications, but I believe they should allow free public access to their standards. They allow it for some of their 802 standards now. Publications, such as journals, etc, are a different matter entirely, and I could even see charging for access to pre-standard documents. However, once something is accepted as a IEEE standard it should be made public.
Last I checked the goddammed SUVS didn't run on electricity, so staying off nuclear would not do anything about them. A move from fossil fuels to nuclear however, might just incent people to produce more electric cars, and may get rid of the goddammed fossil fuel using SUVS.
Wasn't everything you mention other than Java aquired through the purchase of another company? Star/OpenOffice certainly, Netbeans? iPlanet? Would Sun have ported these to other systems if they developed them internally? Somehow I doubt it.
Itanic is EPIC. Explicitly parallel. You don't get much performance out of it with single threaded programs, which is why it sucks for most things.
1) Yes, here's a google cache:
o J: www.co2science.org/edit/v7/v7n4edit.htm+temperatur e+history&hl=en&client=firefox-a
http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:isPMGHt27_
A decade, or a century, is nowhere near a long enough time to estimate climate changes. The environmentalists looked at the trees instead of the forest, and you give an example of a part of a leaf.
2) If it's a natural cycle then there's no need to move anywhere. Enjoy the warmer temperature for a while. People 1000 years from now will certainly be wishing for it, when they go through another cooling trend.
3) I'll stay right where I am, thank you much. Nothing is going to happen other than increased air conditioning costs and decreased heating costs. (Oh, I think I just figured it out, those french people don't have air conditioning, that's why they are loosing their mind).
4) "Survive?" I think you're blowing it way out of proportion.
It's generally standard for employees to pay 1/2 salary in other "benefits" per employee. So if you had a $50K/yr job your employer was probably paying around $25K in additional benefits and other costs. A lot of the "extra" cost is just how insurance works. You may be generally healthy and not require a lot of medical / dental / vision costs in a typical year. However, it's the few employees that have the cronic disease or get in some type of accident that costs half a million or more to pay for that makes the benefits that employers pay so "much" ($25K per year).
Count yourself lucky that you haven't had an accident or caught some expensive disease so that you don't have to pay way in excess of $18K per year.
I have to make a big assumption here, but it sounds to me like you work for a proprietary software company and not on an open source project. That is a totally different situation, and I can see your point in those circumstances. However, with open source projects the whole concept changes, and your concerns do not hold up to reality.