You may have no need for a media server at your house, but for heaven's sake, man, this is Slashdot. This is a place where people have racks of computers in their houses, where people go through withdrawal after five minutes away from the screen, where life without a computer would be considered cruel and unusual punishment.
You're right that for most people, "what's the point?" is a very valid question. But we're a bunch of geeks here, and the idea of turning on the TV and using the remote to start watching a movie of your choice turns us on. Especially if we don't have to get up from the sofa to do it. Especially if we don't have to pay all the evil big companies (MS, MPAA, Cable Co, etc) in order to do it. Especially if it gives us an excuse to have one more computer in the house.
While the number of planets in our galaxy is huge, the probability of a planet having a composition and climate similar to that of Earth's is extremely remote. On top of that, the probability of life forming on that planet is also very remote, and on top of that, the probability that life would have evolved along a similar timeline is also very remote.
On a different note, how powerful of a radio signal would have to originate from that planet in order for us to receive it?
Ummm....first of all, it's 32 hex digits, or 16 bytes.
Secondly, that would make a total of 2^128 different numbers, each 16 bytes long. So 16 * 2^128 = 5.44 * 10^39 bytes, or 5.1 * 10^30 GB. Good luck finding a hard drive with that capacity, let alone a web server with the bandwidth to transmit it.
Specific weapon and other item spawns are important for a few reasons. First, when you spawn and need a weapon, it's good to know where you can get one. It's no fun running around a map looking for a weapon while those who already have weapons try to snipe you. The same goes for health packs when you're hurt. Second, in many FPS games, well-placed weapon/ammo/shield/health spawns actually become a part of the strategy, particularly in deathmatch mode. I've never seen it personally, but apparently when there are multiple high-level players on the same map, they will often converge on (for example) the location of a shield pickup just as it is respawning. Third, a consistent map allows players to "get to know" it better. You learn where the good camping sites are, where a good hiding spot is, how to get from point A to point B fastest, etc. Yes, noobs won't know where everything is at first, but they'll learn quickly. That *won't* happen if the map is different every time.
Some measure of randomness in a map, as this story illustrates, can add to the dynamic nature of a game. Blocking some paths and opening others on a given map can force a different strategy on a player or team without throwing them into an entirely alien environment. In other words, it forces adaptation while maintaining familiarity.
Please forgive a question from a networking newbie. What if my ISP wishes to restrict the number of computers I connect to the internet at home? Some behind-the-times ISPs still don't allow you to use more than one machine over your connection. Currently, NAT is a very simple way to get around that restriction. Does the transition to IPv6 affect that in any way?
Of course, if an ISP is decent enough to move to IPv6, they're probably smart enough to allow multiple addresses per account.
It really makes me wonder how much pressure Verizon finds itself under. We know the public and legal pressure they face in the courts as a result of handing over that information, but to make a statement like this certainly gives the appearance of "grasping at straws," as you say. That means that there's an awful lot of pressure coming from the other side. And since handing customer information over to the government is not (in and of itself) in Verizon's own interest, there must be some serious pressure coming from somewhere.
I hate to be a conspiracy theorist, but I think there's more than meets the eye here.
You're right. However, this extends beyond the distribution of a decrypted file over the internet.
Believe it or not, there are lots of people (like me) who have no problem paying for their movies, provided they're good. The "breaking" of AACS is more than an effort to get a DRM-free copy available for everyone to download. For someone like me, it's about allowing me to do what I want with the media I bought. I want to be able to rip it, strip out all the extras, trailers, menus, and credits and store just the movie on my HTPC. I want to be able to transcode it to take on my iPod. (yeah, I don't own one, but the concept is the same) I want to be able to pull clips out of it and do my own "highlites" reel. I want to edit out the parts of the movie that aren't appropriate to show my kids.
I want to be honest and obey the law, really. But I also want my fair use rights as well.
I'm sure that somewhere, this exact string of 128 bits appears either in some compiled code, or in some image, or in a media file. Would it be illegal to say "look at offset 0xdeadbeef in [linked file]"?
When I was in High School, our choir cut a CD as a fundraiser. Our cost for producing just a few hundred CDs was about $5/disc. That included all the per-unit costs plus the production costs, including hiring a professional technician [or whatever they're called] for the recording, plus the studio time for the mastering.
Now imagine you're making thousands of copies, or hundreds of thousands, or millions. That $1/disc you're quoting (for pressing, case, liner, etc) is way overblown. I think the $0.50 is still more than the actual cost.
There's no technological or economic reason why CDs couldn't cost $5 at retail. The reason CDs are priced at $10 or $15 isn't because they cost that much to make. They cost that much because that's what people are willing to pay. If you doubt the possibility of $5-at-retail CDs, wander away from the top-40 section and take a look at some classical music. I can guarantee you that the classical takes much more time and skill to master, and you can easily get multi-disc sets for less than $5/disc.
Keep in mind that is still a prototype, and from what I've heard, the cooling apparatus in the pictures is for OEMs like HP, Gateway, etc. If you consider that once it's released to retail, the fan will move on-board, and the total card won't be all that remarkably large.
That doesn't sound like a bad idea, except that the devil's in the details. How do you handle equipment that gets picked up along the way? Also, don't forget that players learn how to effectively play their characters while they level up. If they suddenly create a new character of a different class, they won't necessarily know how to use that character, which would cause all sorts of grief for any group that player joins. How much gold does that character get? Also, different people level up different skills at different rates and/or take slightly different paths. How do you handle those as well?
Careful with the "power usage" statement. While Intel certainly has lower power consumption in their Core2Duo processors, that's only in relation to the power-hungry Prescott-based processors. Intel's PR department has made a lot of hay out of their decreased power consumption. The fact of the matter, however, is that Core 2 Duo processors at 65nm now have about the same power consumption as their Athlon 64 X2 counterparts at 90nm--about 65W.
I highly recommend taking a look at processor electrical specifications. And keep in mind that Intel's power figures are more optimistic ("typical") than AMD's ("max").
Actually, computers are just as efficient as a space heater is--100% of the energy consumed by the computer is converted into heat. Of course, a computer (or series of computers) that consumes the same 1000W as a space heater is certainly going to be much more expensive, but it's just as efficient.
Without kicking in $100-$200 against the price of the phone, Cingular can discount the service as an incentive.
Okay, everyone who thinks this will happen, raise your hand. Nobody? That's what I thought. Cell phone companies do not base the price of their service on how much it costs them to provide it (including the cost of the phone). Rather, they price their plans purely on how much people are willing to pay. As long as people are willing to pay exorbitant amounts to lock themselves into multi-year contracts, the cell phone companies will continue the practice. And if you're willing to pay $500 for the phone, chances are you'll be willing to pay full price on the plan.
Right now they're sticking to the "this is worth a lot, you're getting a lot when you buy it" mantra, which, mathematically speaking, still holds true.
The problem is that it doesn't matter if "gamers are getting a lot of machine for their money". Gamers are buying a console for the games and the graphics. What's under the hood is of secondary, if any, importance. The user experience trumps it every time. A console may have amazing hardware inside, but if the games aren't there, or if the price is too high, or if the games are uninteresting, or if it doesn't work, people aren't going to buy it.
The fact that the Wii appears to be far more popular and enjoyable (I know several people who either have a Wii or really want one, but I don't know anyone who owns/wants a PS3) despite "weaker" hardware is rather telling.
There is one more group that falls under the umbrella of those who will pay for Microsoft software, and it's a biggie. Imagine a company that does business primarily through the web, with all their stuff based on the MS stack (windows/iis/.net). It's almost certain that the cost of rewriting every piece of code from.NET to php would be greater than the cost of paying for the licenses. This applies for an impressive portion of the web.
For everyone, the cost of migration is high. The cost isn't in the price of software, but in the time spent retraining people and getting the old stuff to work on the new platform.
While the statement that "pharmaceutical companies may not be interested in funding further research if the treatment won't make them a profit" quite speculative, it does raise other questions. It's a matter of capitalism that if a company can't make a profit by performing some action, they likely won't perform that action. But the premise of that statement exposes a very interesting attribute of the name-brand pharmaceutical industry: they can't compete on even grounds.
We can't argue that drug companies invest an enormous amount on researching and developing new drugs, and patents help them ensure that research costs are (eventually) recovered with some profit. And that the drug companies also spend ridiculous amounts of money on marketing those drugs (that's a topic for another rant). What we have here, though, is a drug that has already gone through a lot of R&D (so those costs are gone), and won't require much marketing (there are LOTS of people out there who would just JUMP on the chance of a cure). The only major cost left is manufacturing. Which is minuscule. All of a sudden, all drug manufacturers are on an even playing field: No license fees, no patents, just the ability to produce lots at low cost and sell it.
If the major drug companies are unwilling to pursue this kind of drug, it means one thing: their manufacturing (and to a lesser extent, marketing) is so inefficient that they can't make a profit without having exclusive rights to produce the drug and the ability to jack up prices with impunity.
I don't know whether it's economical or not to reprocess the fuel, but in the US, the point is moot because the US has a ban on reprocessing.
The benefits of reprocessing aren't just limited to the physical amount of waste. Reprocessing also removes the actinides that are responsible for the oft-referenced 10,000-year storage. Without the actinides, the waste is safe after only about 300 years.
Ah, but you are the exception rather than the rule. I think you actually might be the only one using it for good. You don't get a kickback from the developers of those pieces of software, and the software that you pre-load is actually beneficial to the user.
Just last night, I spent about an hour on the phone (and over VNC) with my sister, cleaning all the crapplets off the computer she had just bought. And I'm still unconvinced that I got everything cleaned off. Several of the AOL uninstall routines failed, and there's no guarantee that some program didn't leave remnants behind in the registry.
A home server will have an entirely different maintenance profile than a typical desktop or laptop. Think of what creates a need for maintenance on a typical computer:
--Spyware --Viruses/worms/trojans --Cruft build-up from installing/uninstalling applications --Degradation in OS performance due to such cruft --Software Updates --Hardware failure
Except for the last item, everything on that list disappears when you take away the user and have it automatically download patches.
The NSA also works with many other businesses on the topic of computer security. This includes "critical infrastructure"--telecommunications, energy (oil, gas, coal, power generation), all that jazz. Some of these companies are making major efforts towards security. And it's not just "for the good of the country". If somebody hacks an oil platform and shuts it down, that's millions of dollars per day that the oil company loses. So the NSA and the "critical infrastructure" companies may have different goals (public good vs. profit), but the means of accomplishing it is the same.
If you manually install updates by going to windowsupdate.com, it is entirely possible (though it takes about half a dozen clicks per patch) to download the patches for later use. I've saved all the patches, service packs, and rollouts, so if I have to reinstall, I can either build an nLite image, or install all the patches without internet access.
I have only one suggestion to add to the parent's suggestions: Set up and use a non-privileged account. You'll have to do a bit of fudging user/folder permissions for some applications to work (and some brain-dead programs won't work at all unless you're admin), but for the most part, you should be ok. A locked-down account will eliminate nearly all threats (excluding unpatched wormholes and privilege-escalating flaws) from viruses, spyware, viruses, etc. Even so, I'd still follow SuiteSisterMary's suggestions
Slashdot Mirror
You may have no need for a media server at your house, but for heaven's sake, man, this is Slashdot. This is a place where people have racks of computers in their houses, where people go through withdrawal after five minutes away from the screen, where life without a computer would be considered cruel and unusual punishment.
You're right that for most people, "what's the point?" is a very valid question. But we're a bunch of geeks here, and the idea of turning on the TV and using the remote to start watching a movie of your choice turns us on. Especially if we don't have to get up from the sofa to do it. Especially if we don't have to pay all the evil big companies (MS, MPAA, Cable Co, etc) in order to do it. Especially if it gives us an excuse to have one more computer in the house.
While the number of planets in our galaxy is huge, the probability of a planet having a composition and climate similar to that of Earth's is extremely remote. On top of that, the probability of life forming on that planet is also very remote, and on top of that, the probability that life would have evolved along a similar timeline is also very remote.
On a different note, how powerful of a radio signal would have to originate from that planet in order for us to receive it?
Ummm....first of all, it's 32 hex digits, or 16 bytes.
Secondly, that would make a total of 2^128 different numbers, each 16 bytes long. So 16 * 2^128 = 5.44 * 10^39 bytes, or 5.1 * 10^30 GB. Good luck finding a hard drive with that capacity, let alone a web server with the bandwidth to transmit it.
Specific weapon and other item spawns are important for a few reasons. First, when you spawn and need a weapon, it's good to know where you can get one. It's no fun running around a map looking for a weapon while those who already have weapons try to snipe you. The same goes for health packs when you're hurt. Second, in many FPS games, well-placed weapon/ammo/shield/health spawns actually become a part of the strategy, particularly in deathmatch mode. I've never seen it personally, but apparently when there are multiple high-level players on the same map, they will often converge on (for example) the location of a shield pickup just as it is respawning. Third, a consistent map allows players to "get to know" it better. You learn where the good camping sites are, where a good hiding spot is, how to get from point A to point B fastest, etc. Yes, noobs won't know where everything is at first, but they'll learn quickly. That *won't* happen if the map is different every time.
Some measure of randomness in a map, as this story illustrates, can add to the dynamic nature of a game. Blocking some paths and opening others on a given map can force a different strategy on a player or team without throwing them into an entirely alien environment. In other words, it forces adaptation while maintaining familiarity.
Please forgive a question from a networking newbie. What if my ISP wishes to restrict the number of computers I connect to the internet at home? Some behind-the-times ISPs still don't allow you to use more than one machine over your connection. Currently, NAT is a very simple way to get around that restriction. Does the transition to IPv6 affect that in any way?
Of course, if an ISP is decent enough to move to IPv6, they're probably smart enough to allow multiple addresses per account.
It really makes me wonder how much pressure Verizon finds itself under. We know the public and legal pressure they face in the courts as a result of handing over that information, but to make a statement like this certainly gives the appearance of "grasping at straws," as you say. That means that there's an awful lot of pressure coming from the other side. And since handing customer information over to the government is not (in and of itself) in Verizon's own interest, there must be some serious pressure coming from somewhere.
I hate to be a conspiracy theorist, but I think there's more than meets the eye here.
You're right. However, this extends beyond the distribution of a decrypted file over the internet.
Believe it or not, there are lots of people (like me) who have no problem paying for their movies, provided they're good. The "breaking" of AACS is more than an effort to get a DRM-free copy available for everyone to download. For someone like me, it's about allowing me to do what I want with the media I bought. I want to be able to rip it, strip out all the extras, trailers, menus, and credits and store just the movie on my HTPC. I want to be able to transcode it to take on my iPod. (yeah, I don't own one, but the concept is the same) I want to be able to pull clips out of it and do my own "highlites" reel. I want to edit out the parts of the movie that aren't appropriate to show my kids.
I want to be honest and obey the law, really. But I also want my fair use rights as well.
I'm sure that somewhere, this exact string of 128 bits appears either in some compiled code, or in some image, or in a media file. Would it be illegal to say "look at offset 0xdeadbeef in [linked file]"?
Believe it or not, high-power CFL lamps exist. This one apparently is equivalent to a 400W incandescent (it consumes 85W).
When I was in High School, our choir cut a CD as a fundraiser. Our cost for producing just a few hundred CDs was about $5/disc. That included all the per-unit costs plus the production costs, including hiring a professional technician [or whatever they're called] for the recording, plus the studio time for the mastering.
Now imagine you're making thousands of copies, or hundreds of thousands, or millions. That $1/disc you're quoting (for pressing, case, liner, etc) is way overblown. I think the $0.50 is still more than the actual cost.
There's no technological or economic reason why CDs couldn't cost $5 at retail. The reason CDs are priced at $10 or $15 isn't because they cost that much to make. They cost that much because that's what people are willing to pay. If you doubt the possibility of $5-at-retail CDs, wander away from the top-40 section and take a look at some classical music. I can guarantee you that the classical takes much more time and skill to master, and you can easily get multi-disc sets for less than $5/disc.
Ach, of all the times NOT to have mod points. Props for even getting the rhythm correct!
Keep in mind that is still a prototype, and from what I've heard, the cooling apparatus in the pictures is for OEMs like HP, Gateway, etc. If you consider that once it's released to retail, the fan will move on-board, and the total card won't be all that remarkably large.
That doesn't sound like a bad idea, except that the devil's in the details. How do you handle equipment that gets picked up along the way? Also, don't forget that players learn how to effectively play their characters while they level up. If they suddenly create a new character of a different class, they won't necessarily know how to use that character, which would cause all sorts of grief for any group that player joins. How much gold does that character get? Also, different people level up different skills at different rates and/or take slightly different paths. How do you handle those as well?
Careful with the "power usage" statement. While Intel certainly has lower power consumption in their Core2Duo processors, that's only in relation to the power-hungry Prescott-based processors. Intel's PR department has made a lot of hay out of their decreased power consumption. The fact of the matter, however, is that Core 2 Duo processors at 65nm now have about the same power consumption as their Athlon 64 X2 counterparts at 90nm--about 65W.
I highly recommend taking a look at processor electrical specifications. And keep in mind that Intel's power figures are more optimistic ("typical") than AMD's ("max").
Actually, computers are just as efficient as a space heater is--100% of the energy consumed by the computer is converted into heat. Of course, a computer (or series of computers) that consumes the same 1000W as a space heater is certainly going to be much more expensive, but it's just as efficient.
Without kicking in $100-$200 against the price of the phone, Cingular can discount the service as an incentive.
Okay, everyone who thinks this will happen, raise your hand. Nobody? That's what I thought. Cell phone companies do not base the price of their service on how much it costs them to provide it (including the cost of the phone). Rather, they price their plans purely on how much people are willing to pay. As long as people are willing to pay exorbitant amounts to lock themselves into multi-year contracts, the cell phone companies will continue the practice. And if you're willing to pay $500 for the phone, chances are you'll be willing to pay full price on the plan.
Do you have a reference for that? I'd be interested in hearing more facts about that...
Right now they're sticking to the "this is worth a lot, you're getting a lot when you buy it" mantra, which, mathematically speaking, still holds true.
The problem is that it doesn't matter if "gamers are getting a lot of machine for their money". Gamers are buying a console for the games and the graphics. What's under the hood is of secondary, if any, importance. The user experience trumps it every time. A console may have amazing hardware inside, but if the games aren't there, or if the price is too high, or if the games are uninteresting, or if it doesn't work, people aren't going to buy it.
The fact that the Wii appears to be far more popular and enjoyable (I know several people who either have a Wii or really want one, but I don't know anyone who owns/wants a PS3) despite "weaker" hardware is rather telling.
There is one more group that falls under the umbrella of those who will pay for Microsoft software, and it's a biggie. Imagine a company that does business primarily through the web, with all their stuff based on the MS stack (windows/iis/.net). It's almost certain that the cost of rewriting every piece of code from .NET to php would be greater than the cost of paying for the licenses. This applies for an impressive portion of the web.
For everyone, the cost of migration is high. The cost isn't in the price of software, but in the time spent retraining people and getting the old stuff to work on the new platform.
While the statement that "pharmaceutical companies may not be interested in funding further research if the treatment won't make them a profit" quite speculative, it does raise other questions. It's a matter of capitalism that if a company can't make a profit by performing some action, they likely won't perform that action. But the premise of that statement exposes a very interesting attribute of the name-brand pharmaceutical industry: they can't compete on even grounds.
We can't argue that drug companies invest an enormous amount on researching and developing new drugs, and patents help them ensure that research costs are (eventually) recovered with some profit. And that the drug companies also spend ridiculous amounts of money on marketing those drugs (that's a topic for another rant). What we have here, though, is a drug that has already gone through a lot of R&D (so those costs are gone), and won't require much marketing (there are LOTS of people out there who would just JUMP on the chance of a cure). The only major cost left is manufacturing. Which is minuscule. All of a sudden, all drug manufacturers are on an even playing field: No license fees, no patents, just the ability to produce lots at low cost and sell it.
If the major drug companies are unwilling to pursue this kind of drug, it means one thing: their manufacturing (and to a lesser extent, marketing) is so inefficient that they can't make a profit without having exclusive rights to produce the drug and the ability to jack up prices with impunity.
I don't know whether it's economical or not to reprocess the fuel, but in the US, the point is moot because the US has a ban on reprocessing.
The benefits of reprocessing aren't just limited to the physical amount of waste. Reprocessing also removes the actinides that are responsible for the oft-referenced 10,000-year storage. Without the actinides, the waste is safe after only about 300 years.
Ah, but you are the exception rather than the rule. I think you actually might be the only one using it for good. You don't get a kickback from the developers of those pieces of software, and the software that you pre-load is actually beneficial to the user.
Just last night, I spent about an hour on the phone (and over VNC) with my sister, cleaning all the crapplets off the computer she had just bought. And I'm still unconvinced that I got everything cleaned off. Several of the AOL uninstall routines failed, and there's no guarantee that some program didn't leave remnants behind in the registry.
A home server will have an entirely different maintenance profile than a typical desktop or laptop. Think of what creates a need for maintenance on a typical computer:
--Spyware
--Viruses/worms/trojans
--Cruft build-up from installing/uninstalling applications
--Degradation in OS performance due to such cruft
--Software Updates
--Hardware failure
Except for the last item, everything on that list disappears when you take away the user and have it automatically download patches.
The NSA also works with many other businesses on the topic of computer security. This includes "critical infrastructure"--telecommunications, energy (oil, gas, coal, power generation), all that jazz. Some of these companies are making major efforts towards security. And it's not just "for the good of the country". If somebody hacks an oil platform and shuts it down, that's millions of dollars per day that the oil company loses. So the NSA and the "critical infrastructure" companies may have different goals (public good vs. profit), but the means of accomplishing it is the same.
If you manually install updates by going to windowsupdate.com, it is entirely possible (though it takes about half a dozen clicks per patch) to download the patches for later use. I've saved all the patches, service packs, and rollouts, so if I have to reinstall, I can either build an nLite image, or install all the patches without internet access.
I have only one suggestion to add to the parent's suggestions: Set up and use a non-privileged account. You'll have to do a bit of fudging user/folder permissions for some applications to work (and some brain-dead programs won't work at all unless you're admin), but for the most part, you should be ok. A locked-down account will eliminate nearly all threats (excluding unpatched wormholes and privilege-escalating flaws) from viruses, spyware, viruses, etc. Even so, I'd still follow SuiteSisterMary's suggestions