The issue of the competitors was mentioned by another poster that replied to my OP. His wireless company was ignored when they government did a survey of ISPs in the area. I suppose he replied in response to my original question asking why the ISPs in the article weren't offering wireless service in an urban area, where it would likely be profitable.
To be sure, I think the ban just clutters the legal landscape more, and the article doesn't mention whether or not a majority of the taxpayers even want the wireless service payed in taxes. But the article doesn't discuss last-mile solutions, it's talking about wireless access offered by the city in public places downtown.
The article is talking about areas where there is already coverage, that's why the ISPs are complaining. Plus, I don't understand why the poor could foot the bill in taxes, but not to a private company.
"Remove potential income"? Do you work for the RIAA? Potential income can't be "removed" because it doesn't exist. And there's not a single thing in the world the government (or anyone) could do that could not be defined by someone else as "removing" their potential income.
This isn't the same as the illegally copying and distribution of music. There are already ISPs selling services in the area, and Internet access is a commodity. The potential sales aren't imaginary. If you read up and down this thread, you see that we do indeed have someone who works for an ISP which does provide wireless access. They were not counted on the government's survey. There is a market for it, but instead the cost of wireless access will be buried in everyone's tax bill, where the consumer cannot decide which level of service he wants, what is a fair price, or when to terminate it.
How's this: I don't agree with the idea that private industry should be using its disposition (and probably deep tax breaks and overpriced contracts with government organizations) to remove potential services from the public. Now do you see what's wrong with your statement?
I don't see what's wrong with my original statement. It is based on the fact that I work for the government, and I know what kind of municipal discounts are given. Also, I don't mind corporate tax cuts, as those lower consumer prices. I do, however, oppose corporate welfare.
That's stretching the argument a bit. With the particular situation surrounding the article, there are potential competitors offering the same commodity where the government is stepping in. That's wholly different from water service, where a competitor would have to negotiate with every single business and homeowner to get his pipes into the buildings. Also, the Post Office isn't entirely government-funded.
But you'll notice I also addressed the other side of the issue when I asked why ISPs weren't already offering the wireless access. As it turns out, another poster does, and mentioned that the government study completely ignored his business in their study.
The technique works by "exploiting small, microscopic deviations in device hardware: clock skews." In practice, Kohno's paper says, his techniques "exploit the fact that most modern TCP stacks implement the TCP timestamps option from RFC 1323 whereby, for performance purposes, each party in a TCP flow includes information about its perception of time in each outgoing packet.
Does this still work if you turn off TCP timestamps? How about if you're behind a routing device that rewrites them (is there such a thing)? From what I've read, it's fairly trivial to toggle TCP timestamps (and other RFC 1323 options) in all the major OSes (I haven't tested MacOS 10). If fact, I just did it for the heck of it with my Linux box.
Also, depending on how the host clock keeps time, wouldn't this be subject to local fluctuations in power? This wouldn't show up in their LAN test, but if those machines are moved to another location with different conditions, wouldn't it?
Why should taxpayers fund Public Libraries when there's perfectly good bookstores around to sell them books and magazines, eh?
I asked my local Barnes & Noble for the annual Connecticut Legislative Record, an issue of Consumer Reports from five years ago, volume 'S' of an encyclopedia, and the one-time printing of a book on the history of my town, but they didn't have any of those. They wouldn't let me borrow their videos, either.
I see your point, but in this particular case, the bandwidth is a commodity, where the library and the book store aren't offering identical products/services. I don't agree that the government should be using their disposition (and probably deep municipal bandwidth discounts) to remove potential income from private industry. But at the same time I'm thinking, "Why aren't the ISPs offering wireless access?" Something's terribly wrong when the government is on the cutting edge of technology.
Ohhhkay. So, let's get this straight. Allowing corporate legal offices to patent mathematical algorithms and therby gain enforcement of their control through the courts would actually open up the markets and make things fair for everybody, especially the little guy. Is that right?
No, that's not what I meant. I suggested removing from the government the power to regulate patents. That comes down to "no patents", or no officially sanctioned ones, anyway. If that's too hard to swallow, then let's start with "no software patents". Those hypothetical corporations wouldn't gain enforcement in the courts, because the courts, an arm of the government, wouldn't be granted power to do anything about patents.
And there's no spin there. We would not have this topic to discuss today unless the EU had the power to create patent regulation, or at least an unelected arm of the EU attempting a big power grab. A patent is not a naturally-occurring aspect of the marketplace. Patent law is created and enforced by governments, which are supposed to be disinterested third parties. It's not working out that way, though, is it?
You'll not find a higher concentration of villains, hypocrites and scoundrels than in the "power centre" of the EU.
Why did I think of Alec Guiness when I read this? It is worth noting, though, that this should be a lesson to those who propose the solution to everything is a government fix. There is something very, very wrong with consolidating that much power in the hands of the few. You can argue that corporate interests should be curtailed, but it's a hell of a lot worse when the government is granted power to curtail. As you can clearly see, the two may end up on the same side.
One bomb in Brussels would end far more problems than the current campaigns in Iraq
I seriously doubt it. The positions will be filled in short order, and the chicanery will continue unabated. I propose that the people strip their governments of the power to regulate patents. There is a strong argument in favor: In effect, patent restricitions are government regulation, and if the EU member nations are looking to create economic growth, the last thing they need is more regulation. Or perhaps they're only looking for economic growth in their own wallets.
When you can't compete on price or performance, just block your competitors from shipping their products to manufacturers. I guess if this is a valid way to do business, we can rent some jersey barriers and place them all around a particular site in Redmond.
Sounds pretty reasonable for most movies; I guess they'd need 2 hard drives for movies longer than that, which I guess wouldn't add all that much to the cost of distribution since a 100 Gb hard drive is what, 50 bucks?
152 MB/s is way outside the sustained throughput that a cheap ATA drive could do, aside from the fact that those drives have poor reliability on the whole. That's even beyond the best case scenario for a transfer from cache on a SATA drive.
It has to be some custom hardware, and if it's a disc drive, the rotational speed would have to be very high, or the data density very high. I'd pay the ticket price just to see how this system works, to hell with the stupid movie.
Yeesh, how negative. Wouldn't this have already happened when there was that mistranslated and/or misunderstood discovery of "canali" on Mars's surface? I don't think discovery of life on Mars would be the catalyst for a new Dark Age. In fact, I think most people would say, "hey, now that's neat." The radical fundamentalists will always find a reason to kill the non-believer, so it really depends very little on the novelty of that reason.
...while troubleshooting various proposed reasons for the "stutter bug" in Half-Life 2, I found that a typical HL2 level used only 50-60 MB of memory for textures. Now I'm not trying to pooh-pooh the 512MB cards, sure I'll take the extra memory, but it seems to me that the games would benefit more from the increased memory speed or anything that would allow faster application of pixel shaders.
There's no question that the increased memory will be handy at some point, but if you look at Valve's user hardware stats, for example, you can see that the typical gamer is a couple of GPU generations behind. I feel that ATI / Nvidia should concentrate more on getting their current generation of cards into users' PCs, and that means more sub-$200 cards that perform well on the current crop of DX9 games.
Hey, it was the OP's opinion that scientists have "no idea" what it is, whereas TFA gives no mention. In fact they have some idea, so it's not just guessing. Dark matter's primary characteristics are 1) that is does not shed radiation in the spectrum visible to humans, and 2) it has mass, evidenced by its gravity / rotational speed -- just like visible matter. I guess that makes it both "dark", and "matter".
Plus, if he RTFA, he'd note that it was actually detected by radiotelescope, so there is no question about its existence. So, yeah, it was a really lame attempt to troll.
Why is it suspicious? Maybe they're just as unhappy with ICANN as some of us are.
Also: Cure my ignorance. Show me their track record. I don't want to search for it myself, I want you to show me the specific evidence you viewed that swayed your opinion.
I think the point is that they current oversight of domain registration does the same thing. Isn't that the whole basis behind ICANN complaints? Also, there's a lot more to phone service than agreeing on a signal voltage.
I don't believe the OFF program's fall from grace was mandated by UN policy, nor do I believe for a minute that those on the take had broad approval from their government to participate in the scandal. So be careful how far you try to stretch that argument.
Second, the main candidate is the ITU, which has a pretty damn good track record of making communications systems interoperable between a whole host of countries. I think your argument surrounding China is alarmist and silly. The ITU isn't going to force filtering policy on other countries. Jesus, that's not even relevant, since we're specifically on the topic of domain registration. Anyway, any attempt to inject foreign law into the ITU's policy is just going to be scoffed at. Our own law wouldn't even allow us to enter into such an agreement, since that filtering would be unconstitutional.
I know the average US citizen has been turned against them by the media portrayal, but this is a bit too much.
So you're saying that the bilking of the Food for Oil program only looks bad because of the way it was worded in the news? What would be the accurate portrayal then? "Workers benefit as Saddam, UN create new economic opportunities in the racketeering job sector."
p.s. I have no idea about the "arrogance" thing either.
Thank you for pointing this out. The ITU would be the most appropriate international body. They're certainly up to snuff. I'm definitely not a fan of the UN, but we're talking about a competent third-party with expertise in communication infrastructure -- *large* international infrastructure -- not about the UN attempting to fix civil unrest (which I feel is entirely out of context here).
I don't think anyone is arguing that the ink is the expensive part. The expensive parts are the molded plastic case, the circuit board, the printhead, and the IC. If you don't like it, you can either buy a printer that isn't priced at a loss, so that you aren't making up for it with consumables, or you can buy a printer with separate printheads and ink reservoir. But, you probably won't when you see the price tag. Yeah, those cartridges are expensive, but the printers are dirt cheap.
NAV is the most overpriced, under-performing piece of garbage out there. I used to laugh at McAfee, but at least they didn't have to nerve to charge what Symantec charges. Shame on your client's IT staff, they should have done an evaluation like I did. In our case, Grisoft's AVG won out, not only on price, but on detection and removal, network services, and the ability to find and kill certain types of persistent spyware.
ClamAV is okay, but it's more of an early detection tool. Be sure you've got version 0.80 or better, since there was a memory leak in earlier versions. I have it on my Samba servers, using the dazuko module (so I can do on-access scanning). While ClamAV cannot repair any files, it's detection is pretty good, and using dazuko, it blocks access to infected files. This means that shared-file folders are no longer a virus vector on my network. If users follow my policy and put their files on the server home directory space, it also prevents the accidental mass-emailing of an infected document (ha ha MS Office).
That's hardly what my comment "boils down to". If that's what I meant to say, I would have said, "it's not popular because users are too stupid to learn how to use it." The problem, and I'm fairly certain I made this crystal clear, is that there is a different expectation that applies to desktop users. My problem is with ignorance, not stupidity.
Not really. You can easily spot all the hooks in the IE registry entries. If you're too confused by the registry, get "HijackThis". There are only four places an autostart entry could be (just repeated in the user half of the registry), probably two less places in an XP system. Fake drivers load in one of two places, as do fake DLLs. I'd say use system file checker too, but it's too stupid to realize the difference between a corrupted file and a legitimately patched one.
It's not rocket science, but what makes it a tremendous pain is Microsoft's lack of useful command line utilities. I'm not talking about how they left out utilities for importing DS objects or copying files with rights intact, I mean registry editing tools. What MS needs is a utility to make a boot disk that's *NOT* DOS based (doesn't run in real mode), and has NTFS support....Plus a command-line registry editor, or maybe something like the EDIT.COM command.
Right on. If you haven't checked every bit in storage yourself (impossible), then consider the machine tainted. Check/backup your data, then reinstall.
Slashdot Mirror
The issue of the competitors was mentioned by another poster that replied to my OP. His wireless company was ignored when they government did a survey of ISPs in the area. I suppose he replied in response to my original question asking why the ISPs in the article weren't offering wireless service in an urban area, where it would likely be profitable.
To be sure, I think the ban just clutters the legal landscape more, and the article doesn't mention whether or not a majority of the taxpayers even want the wireless service payed in taxes. But the article doesn't discuss last-mile solutions, it's talking about wireless access offered by the city in public places downtown.
The article is talking about areas where there is already coverage, that's why the ISPs are complaining. Plus, I don't understand why the poor could foot the bill in taxes, but not to a private company.
I don't see what's wrong with my original statement. It is based on the fact that I work for the government, and I know what kind of municipal discounts are given. Also, I don't mind corporate tax cuts, as those lower consumer prices. I do, however, oppose corporate welfare.
That's stretching the argument a bit. With the particular situation surrounding the article, there are potential competitors offering the same commodity where the government is stepping in. That's wholly different from water service, where a competitor would have to negotiate with every single business and homeowner to get his pipes into the buildings. Also, the Post Office isn't entirely government-funded.
But you'll notice I also addressed the other side of the issue when I asked why ISPs weren't already offering the wireless access. As it turns out, another poster does, and mentioned that the government study completely ignored his business in their study.
Also, depending on how the host clock keeps time, wouldn't this be subject to local fluctuations in power? This wouldn't show up in their LAN test, but if those machines are moved to another location with different conditions, wouldn't it?
I see your point, but in this particular case, the bandwidth is a commodity, where the library and the book store aren't offering identical products/services. I don't agree that the government should be using their disposition (and probably deep municipal bandwidth discounts) to remove potential income from private industry. But at the same time I'm thinking, "Why aren't the ISPs offering wireless access?" Something's terribly wrong when the government is on the cutting edge of technology.
No, that's not what I meant. I suggested removing from the government the power to regulate patents. That comes down to "no patents", or no officially sanctioned ones, anyway. If that's too hard to swallow, then let's start with "no software patents". Those hypothetical corporations wouldn't gain enforcement in the courts, because the courts, an arm of the government, wouldn't be granted power to do anything about patents.
And there's no spin there. We would not have this topic to discuss today unless the EU had the power to create patent regulation, or at least an unelected arm of the EU attempting a big power grab. A patent is not a naturally-occurring aspect of the marketplace. Patent law is created and enforced by governments, which are supposed to be disinterested third parties. It's not working out that way, though, is it?
I seriously doubt it. The positions will be filled in short order, and the chicanery will continue unabated. I propose that the people strip their governments of the power to regulate patents. There is a strong argument in favor: In effect, patent restricitions are government regulation, and if the EU member nations are looking to create economic growth, the last thing they need is more regulation. Or perhaps they're only looking for economic growth in their own wallets.
When you can't compete on price or performance, just block your competitors from shipping their products to manufacturers. I guess if this is a valid way to do business, we can rent some jersey barriers and place them all around a particular site in Redmond.
Sorry, I guess I should have RTFC before I posted, since I just echoed your thoughts.
152 MB/s is way outside the sustained throughput that a cheap ATA drive could do, aside from the fact that those drives have poor reliability on the whole. That's even beyond the best case scenario for a transfer from cache on a SATA drive.
It has to be some custom hardware, and if it's a disc drive, the rotational speed would have to be very high, or the data density very high. I'd pay the ticket price just to see how this system works, to hell with the stupid movie.
It attacks things that are different. The differenter the better.
This thread has me confused now. Are we still talking about radical fundamentalists?
Yeesh, how negative. Wouldn't this have already happened when there was that mistranslated and/or misunderstood discovery of "canali" on Mars's surface? I don't think discovery of life on Mars would be the catalyst for a new Dark Age. In fact, I think most people would say, "hey, now that's neat." The radical fundamentalists will always find a reason to kill the non-believer, so it really depends very little on the novelty of that reason.
...while troubleshooting various proposed reasons for the "stutter bug" in Half-Life 2, I found that a typical HL2 level used only 50-60 MB of memory for textures. Now I'm not trying to pooh-pooh the 512MB cards, sure I'll take the extra memory, but it seems to me that the games would benefit more from the increased memory speed or anything that would allow faster application of pixel shaders.
There's no question that the increased memory will be handy at some point, but if you look at Valve's user hardware stats, for example, you can see that the typical gamer is a couple of GPU generations behind. I feel that ATI / Nvidia should concentrate more on getting their current generation of cards into users' PCs, and that means more sub-$200 cards that perform well on the current crop of DX9 games.
Hey, it was the OP's opinion that scientists have "no idea" what it is, whereas TFA gives no mention. In fact they have some idea, so it's not just guessing. Dark matter's primary characteristics are 1) that is does not shed radiation in the spectrum visible to humans, and 2) it has mass, evidenced by its gravity / rotational speed -- just like visible matter. I guess that makes it both "dark", and "matter".
Plus, if he RTFA, he'd note that it was actually detected by radiotelescope, so there is no question about its existence. So, yeah, it was a really lame attempt to troll.
Why is it suspicious? Maybe they're just as unhappy with ICANN as some of us are.
Also: Cure my ignorance. Show me their track record. I don't want to search for it myself, I want you to show me the specific evidence you viewed that swayed your opinion.
I think the point is that they current oversight of domain registration does the same thing. Isn't that the whole basis behind ICANN complaints? Also, there's a lot more to phone service than agreeing on a signal voltage.
Just a couple counterpoints...
I don't believe the OFF program's fall from grace was mandated by UN policy, nor do I believe for a minute that those on the take had broad approval from their government to participate in the scandal. So be careful how far you try to stretch that argument.
Second, the main candidate is the ITU, which has a pretty damn good track record of making communications systems interoperable between a whole host of countries. I think your argument surrounding China is alarmist and silly. The ITU isn't going to force filtering policy on other countries. Jesus, that's not even relevant, since we're specifically on the topic of domain registration. Anyway, any attempt to inject foreign law into the ITU's policy is just going to be scoffed at. Our own law wouldn't even allow us to enter into such an agreement, since that filtering would be unconstitutional.
I know the average US citizen has been turned against them by the media portrayal, but this is a bit too much.
So you're saying that the bilking of the Food for Oil program only looks bad because of the way it was worded in the news? What would be the accurate portrayal then? "Workers benefit as Saddam, UN create new economic opportunities in the racketeering job sector."
p.s. I have no idea about the "arrogance" thing either.
Thank you for pointing this out. The ITU would be the most appropriate international body. They're certainly up to snuff. I'm definitely not a fan of the UN, but we're talking about a competent third-party with expertise in communication infrastructure -- *large* international infrastructure -- not about the UN attempting to fix civil unrest (which I feel is entirely out of context here).
I don't think anyone is arguing that the ink is the expensive part. The expensive parts are the molded plastic case, the circuit board, the printhead, and the IC. If you don't like it, you can either buy a printer that isn't priced at a loss, so that you aren't making up for it with consumables, or you can buy a printer with separate printheads and ink reservoir. But, you probably won't when you see the price tag. Yeah, those cartridges are expensive, but the printers are dirt cheap.
NAV is the most overpriced, under-performing piece of garbage out there. I used to laugh at McAfee, but at least they didn't have to nerve to charge what Symantec charges. Shame on your client's IT staff, they should have done an evaluation like I did. In our case, Grisoft's AVG won out, not only on price, but on detection and removal, network services, and the ability to find and kill certain types of persistent spyware.
ClamAV is okay, but it's more of an early detection tool. Be sure you've got version 0.80 or better, since there was a memory leak in earlier versions. I have it on my Samba servers, using the dazuko module (so I can do on-access scanning). While ClamAV cannot repair any files, it's detection is pretty good, and using dazuko, it blocks access to infected files. This means that shared-file folders are no longer a virus vector on my network. If users follow my policy and put their files on the server home directory space, it also prevents the accidental mass-emailing of an infected document (ha ha MS Office).
That's hardly what my comment "boils down to". If that's what I meant to say, I would have said, "it's not popular because users are too stupid to learn how to use it." The problem, and I'm fairly certain I made this crystal clear, is that there is a different expectation that applies to desktop users. My problem is with ignorance, not stupidity.
Not really. You can easily spot all the hooks in the IE registry entries. If you're too confused by the registry, get "HijackThis". There are only four places an autostart entry could be (just repeated in the user half of the registry), probably two less places in an XP system. Fake drivers load in one of two places, as do fake DLLs. I'd say use system file checker too, but it's too stupid to realize the difference between a corrupted file and a legitimately patched one.
...Plus a command-line registry editor, or maybe something like the EDIT.COM command.
It's not rocket science, but what makes it a tremendous pain is Microsoft's lack of useful command line utilities. I'm not talking about how they left out utilities for importing DS objects or copying files with rights intact, I mean registry editing tools. What MS needs is a utility to make a boot disk that's *NOT* DOS based (doesn't run in real mode), and has NTFS support.
Right on. If you haven't checked every bit in storage yourself (impossible), then consider the machine tainted. Check/backup your data, then reinstall.