I think the idea is 15mph over the limit for a very short time (i.e. just long enough to overtake a truck), then you get back in the proper lane and slow down.
Now if you have to STAY 15mph over to remain ahead of the truck, then you probably shouldn't have been passing said truck in the first place.
You pretty much summed up what I said by having a fallback of either unicast (i.e. the way it's done now) or multicast rebroadcasting.
Initially a full multicast transmission of the file would be done, and after that, the tracker could look and see which parts of the file were missing at the greatest number of clients. The tracker would then have the clients which DO have that file retransmit the parts that most clients need with another round of multicast broadcast. Once less than a certain percentage of connected clients (say, 5%) actually need a particular piece, the tracker would then have those pieces sent in the old (unicast) way to the clients that still need it.
While it would probably be more efficient to use direct solar light instead, in theory one could create an artificially lighted algae farm that could be used to produce biodiesel. Almost surely, it would be better to simply collect solar energy directly from an algae farm though.
Multicast is at a lower layer than UDP and TCP, but due to the nature of multicast, it will not actually work with TCP, only with connectionless protocols such as UDP.
You're correct in that dropped packets would cause a problem for BT, since everyone needs the entire file. That said, if a client even received only 50% of a file via multicast, that would be 50% less that would eventually need to be handled via unicast, or via another multicast transmission. In reality, probably most clients would get 80% or more of the data in the first multicast go-around, and probably could get close to 95% or so after two full rounds of multicast. Eventually a unicast fallback or multicast rebroadcasts would be needed, but even with quite a bit of fallback to unicast or multicast rebroadcasting, far less data would need to be transmitted overall.
For example, suppose 100 clients downloaded a file. Those 100 clients only maintain a share ratio of 0.1:1. With multicast, the system would still perform extremely well, as even with 50% packet loss, each client would receive on average 5 complete copies of the data. (Of course, there is a nonzero probability that someone would still have a few holes, but those holes would be quite small.) In the current system with unicast, even if the clients maintain a 1:1 share ratio (counting retransmissions due to losses towards the client's upload), each client would wind up receiving less than a full copy - a share ratio higher than 1:1 is required for the system not to break.
Imagine what would happen if ISPs started supporting IP multicast. It would allow media content to be distributed MUCH more easily. I recall someone claiming that BitTorrent was now consisting of 25-50% of Internet backbone traffic - Imagine how much that could be reduced if multicast were used, given that probably 90% of that 25-50% are duplicate packets, if not more.
Unfortunately, we may not ever see IP multicast in its present form on the backbone. It requires too much additional memory in routers, and I have yet to see ANY information on how to find a free multicast address and reserve it for use. It's simply too hard for the average programmer/user to use.
I saw a couple of links to a Japanese multicast project known as Xcast, which would simply put multiple destination IP addresses in a packet, while it isn't as scalable as IP multicast, it's a hell of a lot easier to use. Unfortunately, since it isn't quite standardized yet, it's basically only supported on a handful of test networks, and I wouldn't be surprised if it stays that way.
In this day and age of mass media distribution, some form of multicast, even a limited one that only allows 8-16 destinations per packet, is desperately needed - so why the hell is there still no viable solution?
I wonder if Nielsen will start monitoring BitTorrent trackers (not to bust people, but simply to measure popularity.)
I remember at one point, between the top two torrents of LOST, there were 5,000-10,000 seeders, 10-15k completes, and 20-30k people leeching within the first 12-24 hours.
Server side buddy lists for AIM were added quite a long time ago, but they haven't always been there.
Now that ICQ uses the same protocol, it does too, but AOL has basically killed ICQ off in favor of AIM. No marketing, a HORRENDOUS website that is impossible to navigate, and no real advantages over AIM now that they use a common protocol. Of who knows how many friends I know of that used to use ICQ, only a handful do now.
Yes, T1 circuits are expensive in the U.S. Business DSL lines can easily give you far more for your money if you're looking for data service only. (And VOIP's requirements are only for data service.)
Even comparing data T1s to voice T1s - Even though the price he quoted was $50/month higher for the data line, don't forget that it's much easier to have mixed voice and data if you're using VOiP. (And yes, I know that it is possible to have a T1 dynamically reallocate its channels between voice and data, but it's just easier to have it all configured for data and use QoS to make sure that VoIP packets have priority.)
Most likely because unlike Vonage, Speakeasy's VOIP is basically tied to their DSL service.
Since DSL is offered over the copper phone lines, Speakeasy probably already has numerous agreements in place with local telcos regarding information about the telephone infrastructure.
Any new phone sold in the past 2-3 years has been required to be E911-capable. (Yes, to have proper E911 support, changes needed to be made to the phone. Specifically, GPS receivers were added to all cell phones sold after a certain date. Note that the receivers in question cannot obtain a location fix by themselves, they send the pseudorange data they obtain to the tower for processing into a navigation fix.)
I believe the specific E911 requirement for cell phones was positioning to within 100 meters or 100 feet, I can't recall which.
Plenty of people already do error correction at line speed on gigabit communications links with low power costs. To someone developing coding schemes, storage devices can just be modeled as another communications channel.
Yeah, for general purpose code, the cores aren't too hot.
For signal processing applications, and stuff that's compiled with an intelligent compiler, the cores are pretty powerful. For desktop apps the CPUs will suck, but for 3D rendering and video encoding/decoding (oh yeah, audio processing too), the 360s triple-core CPU is going to be pretty amazing, especially for things that can be split into multiple threads easily.
The 360 will definately eat the Mac Mini for lunch in numerous applications, and is probably even with the Mini in other areas.
Do you think ANY car manufacturer is going to sell a vehicle with as many limitations as an SVO vehicle?
This article isn't talking about small-scale single-vehicle uses. This is talking about people with the goal of replacement of diesel with an alternative in mass quantities. SVO-capable vehicles don't fall anywhere close to this category. Standard diesel engines already have enough trouble with market acceptance in the U.S. due to perceived issues with reliable starting in cold weather, let alone vehicles that have MORE trouble with cold-weather operation.
The point of this article is that they seem to have found a replacement for those aforementioned nasty chemicals, although the article only extolls their low cost, and doesn't say anything about their toxicity. (I'm actually a bit surprised about this, considering that from what I recall, the chemicals needed to convert VO to biodiesel weren't that expensive, at least compared to the price of nonwaste veggie oil itself.) I would love to know if these new catalysts might also have reduced toxicity. Given the fact that most of the cost of biodiesel is the feedstock and not the catalysts, reduced toxicity would be the bigger news.
Also, regarding your comment about particulate emissions, that link is talking about normal diesel. If I recall correctly, one of the numerous advantages to biodiesel is a significant reduction of particulate emissions. The main disadvantages of biodiesel over diesel were higher NOx emissions and a higher gel point. (i.e. biodiesel performs worse in cold temperatures). Despite the higher NOx emissions, biodiesel is much cleaner burning than dino diesel. Another poster mentioned the possibility that in a B100 world (i.e. 100% biodiesel), it may be possible to use catalytic converters on diesel engines, fixing the NOx problem.
Laptops are the primary domain of the "big" system vendors, many of whom are locked in to Intel by Intel's anticompetitive policies. i.e. AMD isn't cleaning up in the laptop arena for the exact same reason Dell isn't selling systems with AMD CPUs.
Hell, I would love to have an AMD-based laptop, but unfortunately, I care about quality, and while AMD's CPUs themselves have proven themselves in the quality arena (one of the reasons I have only put AMD CPUs in my desktop machines for many years, and the only exceptions to that in the near future are going to be VIA-based Mini-ITX systems), none of the manufacturers that sell AMD-based laptops have. (They're all tiny no-namers that for the most part are selling junky cheapo laptops.)
Damn the karma cap. (I forget, what was the name of the guy that racked up 250-300+ karma and then went on a +1 trolling spree with it, causing Taco to put in the karma cap as a response?)
And speaking of the good old days, I miss b0redatwork. He was a great poster, haven't seen him in years.:(
"Oh, and the bit about real products not needing advertising: Don't be silly. If I make a widget that does x better than everyone else but I tell no one about it, how is that widget going to gain popularity?"
Ever heard of word-of-mouth? Yes, it IS a form of advertising, but not one that the company itself participates in. (Usually, sometimes companies like Microsoft use astroturf campaigns, Google has not so far.)
Hell, Google gets basically free product placement on some TV shows and in some movies, although others go to pretty decent lengths to avoid giving Google free advertising (such as the nonexistent hotdig.info site used on CSI: Miami).
The auto-adding is not done on currently logged in accounts, it happens at login time.
Don't know about what happens with a login from a second machine when one is already connected. Definately if an account is logged into and there are no existing logins, the message and contact add will happen.
"Run an ethernet cable (yours perhaps) next to a space heater/box fan/large electric motor of your choice. Periodicaly turn that motor on and off. Instant link loss due to a spike on the line."
While this might BRIEFLY cause the NIC's link detection to fail (not likely), it will have little to no effect on data transfer through the line.
10/100/1000BaseT uses differential signaling for a reason.
As others mentioned, pretty much any Linux-based DVD player will treat an InterActual disc like any other DVD if the player is set up properly.
I agree with the other posters that seem to think you haven't installed a CSS library.
In addition to the previously mentioned players, xine is my personal favorite.
It's no wonder their website doesn't mention Linux at all, considering there is only one 100% legal Linux DVD player, and you can only obtain it with one of two no-name commercial distros. (I forget which two...) That said, while libdvdcss isn't technically legal in the U.S., everyone uses it.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the idea is 15mph over the limit for a very short time (i.e. just long enough to overtake a truck), then you get back in the proper lane and slow down.
Now if you have to STAY 15mph over to remain ahead of the truck, then you probably shouldn't have been passing said truck in the first place.
The GPS unit is required to know what the speed limit for that particular road is in the first place.
If anything that would make the car's radar cross section larger. :)
You pretty much summed up what I said by having a fallback of either unicast (i.e. the way it's done now) or multicast rebroadcasting.
Initially a full multicast transmission of the file would be done, and after that, the tracker could look and see which parts of the file were missing at the greatest number of clients. The tracker would then have the clients which DO have that file retransmit the parts that most clients need with another round of multicast broadcast. Once less than a certain percentage of connected clients (say, 5%) actually need a particular piece, the tracker would then have those pieces sent in the old (unicast) way to the clients that still need it.
Others have noted grammatical errors highly unlikely in a diplomatic letter.
Even without those errors - Where is the proof that this is real?
While it would probably be more efficient to use direct solar light instead, in theory one could create an artificially lighted algae farm that could be used to produce biodiesel. Almost surely, it would be better to simply collect solar energy directly from an algae farm though.
Multicast is at a lower layer than UDP and TCP, but due to the nature of multicast, it will not actually work with TCP, only with connectionless protocols such as UDP.
You're correct in that dropped packets would cause a problem for BT, since everyone needs the entire file. That said, if a client even received only 50% of a file via multicast, that would be 50% less that would eventually need to be handled via unicast, or via another multicast transmission. In reality, probably most clients would get 80% or more of the data in the first multicast go-around, and probably could get close to 95% or so after two full rounds of multicast. Eventually a unicast fallback or multicast rebroadcasts would be needed, but even with quite a bit of fallback to unicast or multicast rebroadcasting, far less data would need to be transmitted overall.
For example, suppose 100 clients downloaded a file. Those 100 clients only maintain a share ratio of 0.1:1. With multicast, the system would still perform extremely well, as even with 50% packet loss, each client would receive on average 5 complete copies of the data. (Of course, there is a nonzero probability that someone would still have a few holes, but those holes would be quite small.) In the current system with unicast, even if the clients maintain a 1:1 share ratio (counting retransmissions due to losses towards the client's upload), each client would wind up receiving less than a full copy - a share ratio higher than 1:1 is required for the system not to break.
Imagine what would happen if ISPs started supporting IP multicast. It would allow media content to be distributed MUCH more easily. I recall someone claiming that BitTorrent was now consisting of 25-50% of Internet backbone traffic - Imagine how much that could be reduced if multicast were used, given that probably 90% of that 25-50% are duplicate packets, if not more.
Unfortunately, we may not ever see IP multicast in its present form on the backbone. It requires too much additional memory in routers, and I have yet to see ANY information on how to find a free multicast address and reserve it for use. It's simply too hard for the average programmer/user to use.
I saw a couple of links to a Japanese multicast project known as Xcast, which would simply put multiple destination IP addresses in a packet, while it isn't as scalable as IP multicast, it's a hell of a lot easier to use. Unfortunately, since it isn't quite standardized yet, it's basically only supported on a handful of test networks, and I wouldn't be surprised if it stays that way.
In this day and age of mass media distribution, some form of multicast, even a limited one that only allows 8-16 destinations per packet, is desperately needed - so why the hell is there still no viable solution?
I wonder if Nielsen will start monitoring BitTorrent trackers (not to bust people, but simply to measure popularity.)
I remember at one point, between the top two torrents of LOST, there were 5,000-10,000 seeders, 10-15k completes, and 20-30k people leeching within the first 12-24 hours.
Server side buddy lists for AIM were added quite a long time ago, but they haven't always been there.
Now that ICQ uses the same protocol, it does too, but AOL has basically killed ICQ off in favor of AIM. No marketing, a HORRENDOUS website that is impossible to navigate, and no real advantages over AIM now that they use a common protocol. Of who knows how many friends I know of that used to use ICQ, only a handful do now.
Yes, T1 circuits are expensive in the U.S. Business DSL lines can easily give you far more for your money if you're looking for data service only. (And VOIP's requirements are only for data service.)
Even comparing data T1s to voice T1s - Even though the price he quoted was $50/month higher for the data line, don't forget that it's much easier to have mixed voice and data if you're using VOiP. (And yes, I know that it is possible to have a T1 dynamically reallocate its channels between voice and data, but it's just easier to have it all configured for data and use QoS to make sure that VoIP packets have priority.)
Most likely because unlike Vonage, Speakeasy's VOIP is basically tied to their DSL service.
Since DSL is offered over the copper phone lines, Speakeasy probably already has numerous agreements in place with local telcos regarding information about the telephone infrastructure.
Any new phone sold in the past 2-3 years has been required to be E911-capable. (Yes, to have proper E911 support, changes needed to be made to the phone. Specifically, GPS receivers were added to all cell phones sold after a certain date. Note that the receivers in question cannot obtain a location fix by themselves, they send the pseudorange data they obtain to the tower for processing into a navigation fix.)
I believe the specific E911 requirement for cell phones was positioning to within 100 meters or 100 feet, I can't recall which.
Plenty of people already do error correction at line speed on gigabit communications links with low power costs. To someone developing coding schemes, storage devices can just be modeled as another communications channel.
Yeah, for general purpose code, the cores aren't too hot.
For signal processing applications, and stuff that's compiled with an intelligent compiler, the cores are pretty powerful. For desktop apps the CPUs will suck, but for 3D rendering and video encoding/decoding (oh yeah, audio processing too), the 360s triple-core CPU is going to be pretty amazing, especially for things that can be split into multiple threads easily.
The 360 will definately eat the Mac Mini for lunch in numerous applications, and is probably even with the Mini in other areas.
Does it have a triple core CPU capable of running two threads on each core?
Do you think ANY car manufacturer is going to sell a vehicle with as many limitations as an SVO vehicle?
This article isn't talking about small-scale single-vehicle uses. This is talking about people with the goal of replacement of diesel with an alternative in mass quantities. SVO-capable vehicles don't fall anywhere close to this category. Standard diesel engines already have enough trouble with market acceptance in the U.S. due to perceived issues with reliable starting in cold weather, let alone vehicles that have MORE trouble with cold-weather operation.
The point of this article is that they seem to have found a replacement for those aforementioned nasty chemicals, although the article only extolls their low cost, and doesn't say anything about their toxicity. (I'm actually a bit surprised about this, considering that from what I recall, the chemicals needed to convert VO to biodiesel weren't that expensive, at least compared to the price of nonwaste veggie oil itself.) I would love to know if these new catalysts might also have reduced toxicity. Given the fact that most of the cost of biodiesel is the feedstock and not the catalysts, reduced toxicity would be the bigger news.
Also, regarding your comment about particulate emissions, that link is talking about normal diesel. If I recall correctly, one of the numerous advantages to biodiesel is a significant reduction of particulate emissions. The main disadvantages of biodiesel over diesel were higher NOx emissions and a higher gel point. (i.e. biodiesel performs worse in cold temperatures). Despite the higher NOx emissions, biodiesel is much cleaner burning than dino diesel. Another poster mentioned the possibility that in a B100 world (i.e. 100% biodiesel), it may be possible to use catalytic converters on diesel engines, fixing the NOx problem.
Laptops are the primary domain of the "big" system vendors, many of whom are locked in to Intel by Intel's anticompetitive policies. i.e. AMD isn't cleaning up in the laptop arena for the exact same reason Dell isn't selling systems with AMD CPUs.
Hell, I would love to have an AMD-based laptop, but unfortunately, I care about quality, and while AMD's CPUs themselves have proven themselves in the quality arena (one of the reasons I have only put AMD CPUs in my desktop machines for many years, and the only exceptions to that in the near future are going to be VIA-based Mini-ITX systems), none of the manufacturers that sell AMD-based laptops have. (They're all tiny no-namers that for the most part are selling junky cheapo laptops.)
Dude, his UID is obscenely high! :)
:(
Damn the karma cap. (I forget, what was the name of the guy that racked up 250-300+ karma and then went on a +1 trolling spree with it, causing Taco to put in the karma cap as a response?)
And speaking of the good old days, I miss b0redatwork. He was a great poster, haven't seen him in years.
"Oh, and the bit about real products not needing advertising: Don't be silly. If I make a widget that does x better than everyone else but I tell no one about it, how is that widget going to gain popularity?"
Ever heard of word-of-mouth? Yes, it IS a form of advertising, but not one that the company itself participates in. (Usually, sometimes companies like Microsoft use astroturf campaigns, Google has not so far.)
Hell, Google gets basically free product placement on some TV shows and in some movies, although others go to pretty decent lengths to avoid giving Google free advertising (such as the nonexistent hotdig.info site used on CSI: Miami).
The auto-adding is not done on currently logged in accounts, it happens at login time.
Don't know about what happens with a login from a second machine when one is already connected. Definately if an account is logged into and there are no existing logins, the message and contact add will happen.
"Run an ethernet cable (yours perhaps) next to a space heater/box fan/large electric motor of your choice. Periodicaly turn that motor on and off. Instant link loss due to a spike on the line."
While this might BRIEFLY cause the NIC's link detection to fail (not likely), it will have little to no effect on data transfer through the line.
10/100/1000BaseT uses differential signaling for a reason.
As others mentioned, pretty much any Linux-based DVD player will treat an InterActual disc like any other DVD if the player is set up properly.
:)
I agree with the other posters that seem to think you haven't installed a CSS library.
In addition to the previously mentioned players, xine is my personal favorite.
It's no wonder their website doesn't mention Linux at all, considering there is only one 100% legal Linux DVD player, and you can only obtain it with one of two no-name commercial distros. (I forget which two...) That said, while libdvdcss isn't technically legal in the U.S., everyone uses it.
BTW, thank you DVD Jon!
"I'm not sure why the fluid was corrosive"
Electrolytic capacitors, by definition, have an electrolyte in them.
Electrolytes are corrosive.