Oops, I didn't realize you can get CHUD without going through the ADC. I knew it came on Developer Tools discs, but I didn't think the updates were anywere but in the ADC downloads, and it looks like I was wrong there, so... no NDA issues, my bad.
My new question is, does four processor checkboxes indicate four processors, or four cores on two dual-core processors??
Look, I haven't really read up on IBM's dual core plans, so excuse me if this is a stupid question, but... could those four checkboxes really map to four processor cores on two different processors, not four separate processors??
Does the chip do the per-core scheduling, or the OS ?
When I read about Nintendo putting WiFi into it's next generation console, all I can imagine is battery-eating bongo controllers. And maybe easy multi-console local ( and remote ) network play, I suppose... but mostly funky controllers.
Um no CHUD tools are not under NDA... it is a freely and publicly available tool from Apple's developer site.
See Apple's Performance Tool Page for the link.
Oh! That's interesting, I hadn't seen it downloadable from there, just from the ADC site. Interestingly enough, the version on the ADC site is actually quite stale, and it doesn't look like they've updated it there. Now that I think of it, CHUD does have an auto-update feature... though of course, I had figured you'd have to get it from ADC to begin with, but actually, it comes with the Developer Tools when you buy a new Macintosh, doesn't it!! My bad. All very interesting.
Thanks for the link ( which is actually to the FTP site ), even though, as you point out in your self-reply, that link is now not working.
Disney does Pixar's distribution ( at least for the movies that will be out when Blu-ray hits ), but your point is still good since Disney is also on the Blu-ray side. The Apple thing is good just because a lot of people doing HD production will be using their tools.
Like you, I'm just cheering for Blu-ray because it's the higher capacity tech. Anything that puts of the _next_ media format shift for a few more years is good...
on a first generation iPod. Ok, not this, we booted OS X ( 10.1, I think ) off of it. Still, it's funny that this is 'news', even though it's cool that IBM is giving IT admins a way to expense their iPods...
And even more amusing, I sold that laptop for $500, and bought a brand new 1.4 Celeronfor $500:) Perhaps if I keep trading up eventually I can get a nice powerbook:D
Hilarious!!! Did you buy the laptop used? Heck, I might even use an Intel laptop if it was that cheap. PIII is plenty horsepower in a laptop for running Linux, or even Win2k if you gotta play that cheezy game on the go. Heck, even I might do that. It'd depend on the specs of the machine, though. I hate the feel of low-memory configurations, waiting on hard drives is the worst.
I guess my point is plenty of folks want to have an iPod anyway, why not justify it as a business expense so you can write it off on your taxes if you can! I wouldn't mind having an iPod, but I agree it's expensive, and I get by with my MP3 CD player just fine... it's just cute that there's really a business use for an iPod.
Why do bored housewives care about what was on Paris Hilton's handheld ? Why is Michael Jackson's trial big news ? Who are Brad and Jen and why do so many people care?? How many people read US Weekly?!?
God help us, I don't know why, but reading tech rumor sites is the geek equivalent, what's so hard to understand? It beats doing actual work... I don't care what happens to hollywood celebs, and politics is just painful to watch, so reading up on my favorite tech is great entertainment. Probably a lot of the folks reading these sites are checking CNet and/. and google news as well. I know I am.
But by any standard, Apple is one of the more interesting tech companies out there, definitely one of the more unique ones, so it really shouldn't be hard for you to see why it's so popular as a rumor subject. Almost nobody is really checking rumor sites to make purchasing decisions. It's just our form of US Weekly.
is not it time for the Slashdot Apple desktop icon to be updated to reflect the current desktop line? i.e. G5.
Is that really the thing/. needs to work on the most?? I'm sure there are more important features of the site that could use some attention... but most important of all, what should the icon be? A G5 PowerMac? A Mac mini? A G5 iMac? An Xserve? I guess it should be a G5 PowerMac, but a Mac mini or G5 iMac might be the more common machine...
is the sound of Apple's laywers starting firing off letters to EverythingApple.
You have to do a click-through NDA just to get the -current- version ( 4.0.1 ) of the CHUD tools, I don't want to think about where this guy got his clearly pre-release copy of CHUD 4.1.0.
Are there sites that show off pre-release Microsoft software covered by NDAs? Where can you get the unannounced plans for Intel's next big thing? Why is it that people don't expect Apple to sue their pants off when they report this stuff ??
Don't get me wrong, I'm big on freedom of speech, press, and just about anything else, but... if it was my company whose not-publicly-announced-plans were being outed all over the internet, I'd be pissed, and probably suing, if just to find the source of the leak and fire someone.
Clearly, Apple's not going to make too big a deal out of this, since it's info in an app that anyone can download ( after creating a free account and clicking past an NDA ) , but still... I certainly wouldn't put this kind of stuff up on *my* website without a sure way to keep the lawyers at bay. On the other hand, since the noted version isn't actually available _yet_, they might sue... maybe it wasn't going to go out until after Apple announced quad-processor plans. Given Apple's recent lawsuits ( and court victories ) in this area, I'd think people would be a *little* more careful what they blog, but I guess not. Eug looks pretty annon, I don't know what you have to do to get an EverythingApple blog going, maybe he feels that Apple just can't get to him. For his sake, I hope he's right.
In any event, it'll be interesting to see how long AnythingApple can keep this page up, and I am definitely keeping my eye out for a new CHUD update...
quad G5s?? Damn, I almost forgot to drool about that !! 64-bit number-crunching goodness!!
Basically, from what I've read, you need to make something like $45 an hour ( just being on salary doesn't make you exempt ) if you're programming a computer.
Interestingly, it looks like graphics artists for computer games might not fit the definition. From that first google hit : "California law also provides a list of "disqualifiers" which will prevent an employee from achieving exempt status. Among these are trainees or entry level employees who are still learning to become proficient, as well as those who have not yet attained the skill level and expertise necessary to work independently and without close supervision. Also disqualified from exempt status under California law are those who are engaged in operation, manufacture, repair, or maintenance of computer hardware, as well as engineers, drafters, machinists or other professionals whose work includes the use of computers or computer assisted design but who are not in a computer systems analysis or programming occupation. Likewise excluded are writers of material related to computers for print or on-screen media, or who write or provide content material for computer related media, as well as employees who create imagery for effects in television and movies."
IANAL, though, and a direct reading of the law doesn't make it clear that someone working in model animation for a computer game isn't covered. I guess that's what the pending lawsuit will determine?
Adding a second hard drive would be a lot cheaper than buying an ipod.
Yes. But since the machine is a flat-panel iMac, you're talking about an external hard drive anyway. More space, but oddly enough, not all that much cheaper than an iPod, depending on the iPod and the hard drive...
I'm assuming the idea is being able to take all your work between locations where you have a computer(such as home and work), and being able to boot up linux...without needing a laptop.
That would be the idea. All theory right now, of course. I currently don't need Linux at work.
Of course thats exactly why i bought a laptop: I got sick of using computers at school that didn't have the tools I felt i needed to get actually get things done(and they disable booting off cd/floppy/usb, so laptop was the only choice).
Of course, buying an external hard drive is much cheaper than buying a laptop. Not that I wouldn't like to have a nice laptop, just nobody has offered to pay for one.
Personally, I don't see this being useful for most people. Perhaps if they were somehow able to get it to boot on either mac or x86, and keep the same/home for either. You'd be limited in what extras you could install without making sure to install it on both...but as only a small percentage have a mac both at work and home(unless they work in graphics), this might be more realistic.
I have a Mac at both work and home. I bought the Mac, in part, because we use them at work ( and I don't work in graphics, btw ). So I guess I'm not most people... but it's useful even if you just have a Mac, want to muck around with Linux, but don't want to give up OS X or run Linux under emulation. I'm pretty sure that's the target market, really. Firewire boot drive support is just an added feature to the existing product, not really that big of a deal, other than it makes it easier for someone to use OS X as their main OS and boot from an external drive for Linux. Not for most people, but then, that's the definition of YDL, isn't it?
I read it to mean that, until now, they've basically ignored the law, and _now_ they've been forced to recognize that there are laws, so they're going to bitch about how they can't possibly be expected to make money while treating their workers as professionals.
In other words "this spirit of entrepreneurialism, innovation and creativity" == you do whatever else it takes to get it done, and we won't pay you more to do it, because you have your dream job, right??
I'm currently running OS X on a G3 upgraded Powercomputing clone (thanks to Xpostfacto). at 420Mhz, it is slow compared to YDL on a Beige G3 266. So it is either OS 9 or YDL on old hardware. It is getting harder to get modern web browser features on OS 9.
My mother-in-law is using OS X on a Beige G3 PowerMac.
She knows it's slow compared to modern machines, but it's a heck of a lot more capable than the 486/66 it replaced... for her uses, it appears to be fast enough, though I can certainly see why Apple doesn't support that configuration for OS X. No built-in USB, for starters. She's stuck using 10.2, not that it's been a problem yet. Some day, we'll have to get her a Mac mini, I guess.
I suppose I'm just saying that when it comes to computers, speed is relative. OS X on a G3/266 is still faster ( not to mention better ) than Win95 on a 486/66.
Just to head off the guys saying I should have given her YDL... is it really ready for your 70-year-old mother-in-law?? Seriously, she had enough trouble with OS X...
Setting aside the "because I can" and "because it's Linux" arguments, what is the benefit of running YDL instead of OS X on one's Mac?
Setting aside those two arguments ( which are fairly compeling, but we'll set them aside since you say so ) there is only one scenario I can think of where I'd run Linux on *my* Mac, but it's entirely likely. I currently use a Mac at home. What if, next month, I get a gig programming in a Linux environment? Am I going to go out and buy a whole new machine, or am I going to install Linux on my existing hardware?
If I can install Linux on my existing hardware, I'm going to. But I'm not going to want to boot my machine that way all the time, because OS X has a good number of apps that I use ( for non-work purposes ) which don't exist ( really ) under Linux, and I'm not sure the wife and 3-year-old are ready to make the switch ot Linux.
So doing the external-hard-drive thing would be neat. And using something as tiny as an iPod to carry my entire Linux world around between home and work? Even cooler.
Instead of buying a new mobo for my outdated PC that's been sitting idle for years now, I can buy an iPod, and maybe even write it off! Super-cool.
As for the market? It's probably not huge, but does it need to be? I thought OSS was about having options, not about having the biggest install base...
Unfortunatly as i mentioned before i have a c++ in spanish
See, and here I was giving you the benefit of the doubt and thinking you were either being funny or trolling, but... well, unfortunatly you were just being dense. I hope you check your spelling in your own code better than you checked it in that last post, eh? Now I'm back to thinking you're funny again... if not intentionally.
Such literalist interpretations of scripture are far from insightful.
The resurrection could be a metaphor, and it would not make Christianity a "waste of time". It would make it what it is- a mythology designed to make you feel like you have a place and a connection in an otherwise chaotic and confusing universe.
To view the bible as anything other than a bunch of oral tradition stories transcribed by monks is to make it something more than we can know it to be.
The veracity of those stories is unrelated to their meaning. The truth in those stories and a person's ability to have faith in their truth ( and god ) has been a topic of consideration of biblical scholars well before Thomas Aquinas. If you don't have doubt, it's not likely you really have real faith- blind obedience is not the same as faith. Faith is tested constantly - if you believe despite the contrary evidence, then you have faith. If you just dismiss the contrary evidence, you haven't allowed your faith to be tested.
If Jesus were shown to be an amalgam of several prophets, and your belief in god crumbled away as a result, how strong was your faith in the first place? Does the fact of biological evolution preclude the existence of deity? Religion is not science, and should not be made to be - such faith is based on the unknowable, by definition. Science is about what we can know, by contrast.
Why are you guys talking about this in a discussion of Google's relationship to Firefox? I've heard of off-topic, but that's ridiculous.
If you look at TFA, it mentions near the end that not only do they also buy MS Office anyway ( your tax dollars at work! ), but the Justice department is also trying to get people to use IE.
Is there any research showing negative health effects of nearby cell towers, especially on children?
No- unless you're actually quite close to the tower. By quite close, I mean a hundred feet or so. There should probably be more research done, though, nobody thinks we know enough... but it's hard to say what is 'enough' when it comes to these long-term exposure safety issues, be it RF, chemical, or anything else.
If you're a block or more from the tower, or the tower is on top of a tall building, you're actually _not_ very close to it in terms of radiation.
There should be warning signs up in any areas you might want to stay out of. You should be much more worried about the cell phone, and things like your TV, or power lines, for that matter, if you're going ot be worried about RF. Most likely, it's not something to worry about... the quality of your drinking water is probably a higher priority.
We signed the petition.
If you actively work to prevent companies from putting up cell phone towers, remember - you have no right to complain about not being able to get reliable cell phone service. You're making a choice between the two. Really, if you're choosing to use a cell phone, the tower is much less of a concern than the phone...
That might be news to the folks paying them for phone service.
Please, feel free to enlighten me. I get my cable internet from Comcast, but do they provide phone service elsewhere? Is it 'real' phone service, or bundled VOIP ( not that I know the FCC makes a distinction ) ?
Comcast doesn't provide phone service in my area, if they provide it elsewhere... I don't know about Cox, either. But my point, that this fine was imposed because of voice network restrictions, not data network restrictions, is still valid, I suppose... and yea, it's a weird distinction...
Cox and Comcast aren't phone companies. My understanding is that the fine was for a phone company blocking voice traffic... not for an Internet Service Provider blocking data traffic. A ( somewhat ) fine, yet important distinction that I think is lost to many.
There is a common misconception that the origianl issues with blocked VoIP calls originated at the ISP level. Let me repeat: "It did not occur at the ISP level.". It was blocked inside the phone network of the Telco, which is entirely different on many many levels.
Thank you, thank you, thank you. Very, very informative.
The FCC is did not fine an ISP here- they fined a telephone company for what they were doing with their telephone services!! It all makes so much more sense now...
Verizon has blocked all outgoing SMTP... an my girlfriend complain to the FCC about this?
Probably not. I mean, you can always complain, but the chance of action is nil.
The FCC is only on this because it's cross-state-lines voice traffic.
They're not concerned with your girlfriend sending text via a server she's probably not supposed to be running ( by contract stipulation ) anyway. They _should_ be concerned about it, but this whole area is new and different to the FCC, and they don't really know what should be done. You're not supposed to be running a 'server' by your contract, but what the heck is a server, and is such a restriction OK? Is a VOIP client also a server, since it sends data and is always running? Is it enough that they let her send mail through their own servers, or that they offer a business-class service which ( I assume ) would let you send SMTP packets connecting to the ports they're blocking? These are all questions typical FCC staffers ( practically all lawyers, by the way ) don't even know enough to ask.
It's interesting that they're even trying to regulate ISPs, period. Interesting and a little scary. Seriously, I'm confused, I'm liking an FCC fine?!?
Slashdot Mirror
My new question is, does four processor checkboxes indicate four processors, or four cores on two dual-core processors??
Look, I haven't really read up on IBM's dual core plans, so excuse me if this is a stupid question, but... could those four checkboxes really map to four processor cores on two different processors, not four separate processors??
Does the chip do the per-core scheduling, or the OS ?
When I read about Nintendo putting WiFi into it's next generation console, all I can imagine is battery-eating bongo controllers. And maybe easy multi-console local ( and remote ) network play, I suppose... but mostly funky controllers.
Oh! That's interesting, I hadn't seen it downloadable from there, just from the ADC site. Interestingly enough, the version on the ADC site is actually quite stale, and it doesn't look like they've updated it there. Now that I think of it, CHUD does have an auto-update feature... though of course, I had figured you'd have to get it from ADC to begin with, but actually, it comes with the Developer Tools when you buy a new Macintosh, doesn't it!! My bad. All very interesting.
Thanks for the link ( which is actually to the FTP site ), even though, as you point out in your self-reply, that link is now not working.
Yeay quad G5s!!!
Like you, I'm just cheering for Blu-ray because it's the higher capacity tech. Anything that puts of the _next_ media format shift for a few more years is good...
on a first generation iPod. Ok, not this, we booted OS X ( 10.1, I think ) off of it. Still, it's funny that this is 'news', even though it's cool that IBM is giving IT admins a way to expense their iPods...
Hilarious!!! Did you buy the laptop used? Heck, I might even use an Intel laptop if it was that cheap. PIII is plenty horsepower in a laptop for running Linux, or even Win2k if you gotta play that cheezy game on the go. Heck, even I might do that. It'd depend on the specs of the machine, though. I hate the feel of low-memory configurations, waiting on hard drives is the worst.
I guess my point is plenty of folks want to have an iPod anyway, why not justify it as a business expense so you can write it off on your taxes if you can! I wouldn't mind having an iPod, but I agree it's expensive, and I get by with my MP3 CD player just fine... it's just cute that there's really a business use for an iPod.
Why do bored housewives care about what was on Paris Hilton's handheld ? Why is Michael Jackson's trial big news ? Who are Brad and Jen and why do so many people care?? How many people read US Weekly?!?
God help us, I don't know why, but reading tech rumor sites is the geek equivalent, what's so hard to understand? It beats doing actual work... I don't care what happens to hollywood celebs, and politics is just painful to watch, so reading up on my favorite tech is great entertainment. Probably a lot of the folks reading these sites are checking CNet and /. and google news as well. I know I am.
But by any standard, Apple is one of the more interesting tech companies out there, definitely one of the more unique ones, so it really shouldn't be hard for you to see why it's so popular as a rumor subject. Almost nobody is really checking rumor sites to make purchasing decisions. It's just our form of US Weekly.
is not it time for the Slashdot Apple desktop icon to be updated to reflect the current desktop line? i.e. G5.
Is that really the thing /. needs to work on the most?? I'm sure there are more important features of the site that could use some attention... but most important of all, what should the icon be? A G5 PowerMac? A Mac mini? A G5 iMac? An Xserve? I guess it should be a G5 PowerMac, but a Mac mini or G5 iMac might be the more common machine...
You have to do a click-through NDA just to get the -current- version ( 4.0.1 ) of the CHUD tools, I don't want to think about where this guy got his clearly pre-release copy of CHUD 4.1.0.
Are there sites that show off pre-release Microsoft software covered by NDAs? Where can you get the unannounced plans for Intel's next big thing? Why is it that people don't expect Apple to sue their pants off when they report this stuff ??
Don't get me wrong, I'm big on freedom of speech, press, and just about anything else, but... if it was my company whose not-publicly-announced-plans were being outed all over the internet, I'd be pissed, and probably suing, if just to find the source of the leak and fire someone.
Clearly, Apple's not going to make too big a deal out of this, since it's info in an app that anyone can download ( after creating a free account and clicking past an NDA ) , but still... I certainly wouldn't put this kind of stuff up on *my* website without a sure way to keep the lawyers at bay. On the other hand, since the noted version isn't actually available _yet_, they might sue... maybe it wasn't going to go out until after Apple announced quad-processor plans. Given Apple's recent lawsuits ( and court victories ) in this area, I'd think people would be a *little* more careful what they blog, but I guess not. Eug looks pretty annon, I don't know what you have to do to get an EverythingApple blog going, maybe he feels that Apple just can't get to him. For his sake, I hope he's right.
In any event, it'll be interesting to see how long AnythingApple can keep this page up, and I am definitely keeping my eye out for a new CHUD update...
quad G5s?? Damn, I almost forgot to drool about that !! 64-bit number-crunching goodness!!
Great. Now everyone thinks I'm crazy because I'm sitting in my office laughing my head off. Oh well.
Basically, from what I've read, you need to make something like $45 an hour ( just being on salary doesn't make you exempt ) if you're programming a computer.
Interestingly, it looks like graphics artists for computer games might not fit the definition. From that first google hit : "California law also provides a list of "disqualifiers" which will prevent an employee from achieving exempt status. Among these are trainees or entry level employees who are still learning to become proficient, as well as those who have not yet attained the skill level and expertise necessary to work independently and without close supervision. Also disqualified from exempt status under California law are those who are engaged in operation, manufacture, repair, or maintenance of computer hardware, as well as engineers, drafters, machinists or other professionals whose work includes the use of computers or computer assisted design but who are not in a computer systems analysis or programming occupation. Likewise excluded are writers of material related to computers for print or on-screen media, or who write or provide content material for computer related media, as well as employees who create imagery for effects in television and movies."
IANAL, though, and a direct reading of the law doesn't make it clear that someone working in model animation for a computer game isn't covered. I guess that's what the pending lawsuit will determine?
Yes. But since the machine is a flat-panel iMac, you're talking about an external hard drive anyway. More space, but oddly enough, not all that much cheaper than an iPod, depending on the iPod and the hard drive...
I'm assuming the idea is being able to take all your work between locations where you have a computer(such as home and work), and being able to boot up linux...without needing a laptop.
That would be the idea. All theory right now, of course. I currently don't need Linux at work.
Of course thats exactly why i bought a laptop: I got sick of using computers at school that didn't have the tools I felt i needed to get actually get things done(and they disable booting off cd/floppy/usb, so laptop was the only choice).
Of course, buying an external hard drive is much cheaper than buying a laptop. Not that I wouldn't like to have a nice laptop, just nobody has offered to pay for one.
Personally, I don't see this being useful for most people. Perhaps if they were somehow able to get it to boot on either mac or x86, and keep the same /home for either. You'd be limited in what extras you could install without making sure to install it on both...but as only a small percentage have a mac both at work and home(unless they work in graphics), this might be more realistic.
I have a Mac at both work and home. I bought the Mac, in part, because we use them at work ( and I don't work in graphics, btw ). So I guess I'm not most people... but it's useful even if you just have a Mac, want to muck around with Linux, but don't want to give up OS X or run Linux under emulation. I'm pretty sure that's the target market, really. Firewire boot drive support is just an added feature to the existing product, not really that big of a deal, other than it makes it easier for someone to use OS X as their main OS and boot from an external drive for Linux. Not for most people, but then, that's the definition of YDL, isn't it?
In other words "this spirit of entrepreneurialism, innovation and creativity" == you do whatever else it takes to get it done, and we won't pay you more to do it, because you have your dream job, right??
My mother-in-law is using OS X on a Beige G3 PowerMac.
She knows it's slow compared to modern machines, but it's a heck of a lot more capable than the 486/66 it replaced... for her uses, it appears to be fast enough, though I can certainly see why Apple doesn't support that configuration for OS X. No built-in USB, for starters. She's stuck using 10.2, not that it's been a problem yet. Some day, we'll have to get her a Mac mini, I guess.
I suppose I'm just saying that when it comes to computers, speed is relative. OS X on a G3/266 is still faster ( not to mention better ) than Win95 on a 486/66.
Just to head off the guys saying I should have given her YDL... is it really ready for your 70-year-old mother-in-law?? Seriously, she had enough trouble with OS X...
Setting aside those two arguments ( which are fairly compeling, but we'll set them aside since you say so ) there is only one scenario I can think of where I'd run Linux on *my* Mac, but it's entirely likely. I currently use a Mac at home. What if, next month, I get a gig programming in a Linux environment? Am I going to go out and buy a whole new machine, or am I going to install Linux on my existing hardware?
If I can install Linux on my existing hardware, I'm going to. But I'm not going to want to boot my machine that way all the time, because OS X has a good number of apps that I use ( for non-work purposes ) which don't exist ( really ) under Linux, and I'm not sure the wife and 3-year-old are ready to make the switch ot Linux.
So doing the external-hard-drive thing would be neat. And using something as tiny as an iPod to carry my entire Linux world around between home and work? Even cooler.
Instead of buying a new mobo for my outdated PC that's been sitting idle for years now, I can buy an iPod, and maybe even write it off! Super-cool.
As for the market? It's probably not huge, but does it need to be? I thought OSS was about having options, not about having the biggest install base...
See, and here I was giving you the benefit of the doubt and thinking you were either being funny or trolling, but... well, unfortunatly you were just being dense. I hope you check your spelling in your own code better than you checked it in that last post, eh? Now I'm back to thinking you're funny again... if not intentionally.
The resurrection could be a metaphor, and it would not make Christianity a "waste of time". It would make it what it is- a mythology designed to make you feel like you have a place and a connection in an otherwise chaotic and confusing universe.
To view the bible as anything other than a bunch of oral tradition stories transcribed by monks is to make it something more than we can know it to be.
The veracity of those stories is unrelated to their meaning. The truth in those stories and a person's ability to have faith in their truth ( and god ) has been a topic of consideration of biblical scholars well before Thomas Aquinas. If you don't have doubt, it's not likely you really have real faith- blind obedience is not the same as faith. Faith is tested constantly - if you believe despite the contrary evidence, then you have faith. If you just dismiss the contrary evidence, you haven't allowed your faith to be tested.
If Jesus were shown to be an amalgam of several prophets, and your belief in god crumbled away as a result, how strong was your faith in the first place? Does the fact of biological evolution preclude the existence of deity? Religion is not science, and should not be made to be - such faith is based on the unknowable, by definition. Science is about what we can know, by contrast.
Why are you guys talking about this in a discussion of Google's relationship to Firefox? I've heard of off-topic, but that's ridiculous.
No sanity there...
No- unless you're actually quite close to the tower. By quite close, I mean a hundred feet or so. There should probably be more research done, though, nobody thinks we know enough... but it's hard to say what is 'enough' when it comes to these long-term exposure safety issues, be it RF, chemical, or anything else.
If you're a block or more from the tower, or the tower is on top of a tall building, you're actually _not_ very close to it in terms of radiation.
There should be warning signs up in any areas you might want to stay out of. You should be much more worried about the cell phone, and things like your TV, or power lines, for that matter, if you're going ot be worried about RF. Most likely, it's not something to worry about... the quality of your drinking water is probably a higher priority.
We signed the petition.
If you actively work to prevent companies from putting up cell phone towers, remember - you have no right to complain about not being able to get reliable cell phone service. You're making a choice between the two. Really, if you're choosing to use a cell phone, the tower is much less of a concern than the phone...
Please, feel free to enlighten me. I get my cable internet from Comcast, but do they provide phone service elsewhere? Is it 'real' phone service, or bundled VOIP ( not that I know the FCC makes a distinction ) ?
Comcast doesn't provide phone service in my area, if they provide it elsewhere... I don't know about Cox, either. But my point, that this fine was imposed because of voice network restrictions, not data network restrictions, is still valid, I suppose... and yea, it's a weird distinction...
Cox and Comcast aren't phone companies. My understanding is that the fine was for a phone company blocking voice traffic... not for an Internet Service Provider blocking data traffic. A ( somewhat ) fine, yet important distinction that I think is lost to many.
Thank you, thank you, thank you. Very, very informative.
The FCC is did not fine an ISP here- they fined a telephone company for what they were doing with their telephone services!! It all makes so much more sense now...
Few contracts are truly pointless. Most contracts can result in someone being legally responsible for damages if they break it.
That doesn't mean that NDA secrets won't be leaked. It does mean that, if the leak is found, they can be prosecuted.
I understand your point, but if you end up in court because you broke a contract, it's hardly pointless...
Probably not. I mean, you can always complain, but the chance of action is nil.
The FCC is only on this because it's cross-state-lines voice traffic.
They're not concerned with your girlfriend sending text via a server she's probably not supposed to be running ( by contract stipulation ) anyway. They _should_ be concerned about it, but this whole area is new and different to the FCC, and they don't really know what should be done. You're not supposed to be running a 'server' by your contract, but what the heck is a server, and is such a restriction OK? Is a VOIP client also a server, since it sends data and is always running? Is it enough that they let her send mail through their own servers, or that they offer a business-class service which ( I assume ) would let you send SMTP packets connecting to the ports they're blocking? These are all questions typical FCC staffers ( practically all lawyers, by the way ) don't even know enough to ask.
It's interesting that they're even trying to regulate ISPs, period. Interesting and a little scary. Seriously, I'm confused, I'm liking an FCC fine?!?
No doubt. I had thought to mention multi-tasking, but there were other features and I just didn't want to get into it.