The flash video player works very well and is the ideal solution for a site like YouTube. WindowsMedia/Real/Quicktime embedded videos are slow to load and tend to not work correctly. The flash videos work every time and are very fast. MP4 won't work until a plugin capable of loading the videos quickly and easily exists (quicktime is not even close).
You are mistaken to say that there is no agreement beyond that the Earth is actually warming. The dissenting opinions are as I said earlier, a small minority of scientists. Wikipedia maintains a list of scientists with dissenting opinions on global warming. The news source that you linked to is extremely conservative slanted, and I find it peculiar that somebody who seems so concerned with having both sides of the story heard like yourself would be reading such blatant propoganda. The doubt being cast over the cause for global warming is not legitimate. Something like this should not even be a political issue, the scientific community (which has strongly concluded mankind is responsible for global warming) has nothing to gain for reporting their findings. The new conservative political movement to discredit and confuse the issue of global warming seems to be favoriting the term "alarmism" to send a message that people are overreacting about something that's not even likely an issue. This is our planet at stake here, and it's not like we're just going to have to take our pool covers off a bit earlier in the season. The best (and nearly everybody else) in the field have predicted serious consequences for the kind of climate change predicted, and irreparable damage as soon as 30 years from now.
Documentaries are not limited to films created by national geographic, they can be (and hundreds are) political.
There are not two sides to scientific fact. Even a minor amount of research on your part will reveal that there is no myth or debate over global warming occuring, and/very/ little over the cause of it. Scientists have since moved on to discuss what to do about it, and the world would benefit from people actually researching the facts instead of spewing baseless doubt over the conclusions they've drawn.
Free market will not help when companies start degrading the service of their competitors because in many areas of the country the telco has a monopoly, in others there are few (most of them have only 2) telcos and both of them are going to be doing it. New companies will not emerge because of extremely high costs to enter the market. Content on the Internet is not dominated by companies. This will hurt anybody who gives their content away.
The proposed amendment would have allowed telcos to limit traffic by type but not by destination. If Verizon wanted to block Vonage's VoIP traffic for their customers, they would need to block their own (and all other VoIP traffic) too. Same goes for different packet queueing. The address Senator Stevens made was wrong in ways not limited to jargon. Other readers and myself touched on some of them in comments made under that news story.
You and Senator Stevens are falling for one of the lies the telcos are pushing: that there actually is a capacity problem. The telcos would like everybody to believe that they don't have enough bandwidth at the last mile to allow for widespread use of VoIP and video, but this simply isn't true. Using modern compression techniques VoIP traffic is very small, and for video there are numerous streaming media protocols that successfully send at rates exceeding real time over today's broadband lines. The proposed amendment would have resolved the only legitimate concern I can think of, which would be network jitter (variable delay between packet arrival).
To more directly address your concern, it's important to remember that the people who would be charged money aren't actually even customers to these telcos. Google and Amazon would end up paying people who aren't even their upstream carriers. In fact they would need to spend presumably very large sums of money to each of the telcos just to reach their customers at a reasonable speed (or at all, it would be entirely up to the telco). While this is quite bad for the big guy, it completely shuts out the little guy. A website like YouTube would not be capable of paying the money for this access like Google can for their video services. And I believe YouTube is a good example of how popularity can be won even in a crowded market just by putting in the work to make your service better. Disrupting the ability for anyone but large corporations to innovate real-time applications would in my opinion be very costly for a society that is in reality still new to this technology.
Unlike SubVirt, Blue Pill does not require a reboot before it becomes active and does not alter the MBR. That motherboard setting will not be an effective mitigation strategy.
I was talking about protecting the public from criminals. Liberties that do not result in harming another person's liberty should probably not be restricted by government. The rest of your post was so asinine I'm not sure how to respond, it's all in the typical internet "HaHa i am smarter than everyone!" language. In response to your "lessons" (oh thank you for being able to teach me, smart internet person!) 1. The police force was established to protect the public from criminals, I don't know what part of my extremely short post made you believe that I'm terrified of people hurting me. 2. Where the hell did this even come from? No part of my post came even close to implying that I believe society will fail if I were to die.
The government must allow for "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". While I see that interpretations in Washington vary, I don't believe I'm provided liberty if my safety isn't protected.
And does catching this enemy justify perversion of American values like privacy? I think the problem America has in figuring out how to deal with terrorism is that the potential damage is very high, yet the probability is incredibly low. It's like 0 and infinity, how do you compromise that? I for one would prefer the small probability of danger to losing fundamental civil rights. Besides it's not like the government doesn't already have the ability to get this information, the only difference is that they used to need to go through an established balance of power (the judiciary in this case) to get it. FISA made it very easy to get the warrants, and even in a court that's entirely closed to the public. I don't believe there is any good reason for the NSA to no longer need to follow through this established balance of power. An executive with unchecked access to public records has, historically speaking, caused a lot of trouble in the past. If we make a mistake now, there will be no fixing it later. You will not resume any rights that you sacrifice for the extremely faint probability of danger.
Reverse engineer? 802.11i is an open standard, and it seems like Intel was defending that in the face of what would have been a proprietary standard that China would stand to benefit from.
Colin Powell spoke with Chinese trade officials a while back and got them to halt a program that would have required WiFi equipment being sold in China to support WAPI. The program also would have required foreign companies to partner with a Chinese firm before entering the market.
FTA: "The U.S. government has also weighed in on the issue. U.S. Secretary of Commerce Donald Evans, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick, sent a letter to senior Chinese government officials in March expressing concern over the implementation of China's WLAN standard and that the move created a dangerous precedent for using standards as a barrier to international trade."
It's pretty obvious actually, Google is run by nerds. The founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin are University dreamers and not cut-throat businessmen. Everybody touts that Google, like any other major corporation, must be vicious. I don't entirely disagree, I'm sure that Google will defend its bottom line. At the moment however the company is quite profitable, and is producing some great products.
I realize that the PC-BSD folks are trying to make the install simple for people who aren't computer enthusiasts, but for our crowd BSD is remarkably simple and quick to install. I build out BSD installs pretty frequently and it takes less than 5 minutes to create a working base install that will allow me to ssh into it.
Most of the problems mentioned in the article are overcome by using "Reply to All" -- which is how e-mail collaboration has always worked in my experience. The only one I see it not solving are the security concerns, which can be overcome with authenticated SMTP and IMAP.
Would you prefer Bush or Gore? Most 3rd party voters would have voted Gore, and if they had he would be President right now. The two large parties already get messages when they make opinion polls, voting for a candidate you know is going to lose doesn't do anything except make the Republicans happy you didn't vote for the Dems. Your views are too out of line with that of their base to make any change. At best they'll just avoid subjects made hotly debated by a 3rd party.
I love it when I've googled a topic for days and explain that on IRC and instead of them saying "I don't know" I'm told "You obviously suck at Google". Really warms the heart.
My Thinkpad weighs less than 4 pounds so I don't know where the "heavy" part is coming in. I've always know IBM laptops to be lighter than their competitors. The less features is probably because they don't whore almost meaningless specs to get sales. They just don't use cheap parts, plain and simple. While other companies will cut corners and give you a laptop that's heavy, runs hot, and has a powerbrick large enough to kill a man, IBM truly gives you a good product. I do like Powerbooks, but they wear much more easily than a ThinkPad. I also disagree that the ThinkPad is ugly, its look has grown on me quite a bit.
When I bought my Thinkpad I did so because of their reputation and was not disappointed. IBM's support is great. A friend's hard drive recently failed and he didn't need to go through the usual process of sending his stuff back to IBM for them to verify the problem, they just overnighted him a new one. Despite that he had called that evening, early morning the next day the new hard drive was at his door. I asked some Lenovo reps at CES if they were planning any major changes to the ThinkPad and they said no, but for something as expensive as a laptop I'm going to wait and see what other customers have to say. That said if I were in the market for a laptop right now I'd heavily consider Lenovo because Dell, HP, Sony, Toshiba, et al have all already proven themselves to be inferior products. I might even buy a powerbook.
Bandwidth has always been measured like this (ie before it was turned into a product). The mathematics behind it translate immediately into bits. Also you'd be mistaken to assume all computer word sizes are 8 bits long.
While I would call that very repressive. But maybe that's because I'm from the US where I don't need to opt-out to be given freedom of speech/expression.
Slashdot Mirror
The flash video player works very well and is the ideal solution for a site like YouTube. WindowsMedia/Real/Quicktime embedded videos are slow to load and tend to not work correctly. The flash videos work every time and are very fast. MP4 won't work until a plugin capable of loading the videos quickly and easily exists (quicktime is not even close).
You are mistaken to say that there is no agreement beyond that the Earth is actually warming. The dissenting opinions are as I said earlier, a small minority of scientists. Wikipedia maintains a list of scientists with dissenting opinions on global warming. The news source that you linked to is extremely conservative slanted, and I find it peculiar that somebody who seems so concerned with having both sides of the story heard like yourself would be reading such blatant propoganda. The doubt being cast over the cause for global warming is not legitimate. Something like this should not even be a political issue, the scientific community (which has strongly concluded mankind is responsible for global warming) has nothing to gain for reporting their findings. The new conservative political movement to discredit and confuse the issue of global warming seems to be favoriting the term "alarmism" to send a message that people are overreacting about something that's not even likely an issue. This is our planet at stake here, and it's not like we're just going to have to take our pool covers off a bit earlier in the season. The best (and nearly everybody else) in the field have predicted serious consequences for the kind of climate change predicted, and irreparable damage as soon as 30 years from now.
e lated&search=
This video shows that the climate change is not part of the natural variations in temperature: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rD1dnP_k8Yc&mode=r
Documentaries are not limited to films created by national geographic, they can be (and hundreds are) political.
/very/ little over the cause of it. Scientists have since moved on to discuss what to do about it, and the world would benefit from people actually researching the facts instead of spewing baseless doubt over the conclusions they've drawn.
There are not two sides to scientific fact. Even a minor amount of research on your part will reveal that there is no myth or debate over global warming occuring, and
Free market will not help when companies start degrading the service of their competitors because in many areas of the country the telco has a monopoly, in others there are few (most of them have only 2) telcos and both of them are going to be doing it. New companies will not emerge because of extremely high costs to enter the market. Content on the Internet is not dominated by companies. This will hurt anybody who gives their content away.
The proposed amendment would have allowed telcos to limit traffic by type but not by destination. If Verizon wanted to block Vonage's VoIP traffic for their customers, they would need to block their own (and all other VoIP traffic) too. Same goes for different packet queueing. The address Senator Stevens made was wrong in ways not limited to jargon. Other readers and myself touched on some of them in comments made under that news story.
You and Senator Stevens are falling for one of the lies the telcos are pushing: that there actually is a capacity problem. The telcos would like everybody to believe that they don't have enough bandwidth at the last mile to allow for widespread use of VoIP and video, but this simply isn't true. Using modern compression techniques VoIP traffic is very small, and for video there are numerous streaming media protocols that successfully send at rates exceeding real time over today's broadband lines. The proposed amendment would have resolved the only legitimate concern I can think of, which would be network jitter (variable delay between packet arrival). To more directly address your concern, it's important to remember that the people who would be charged money aren't actually even customers to these telcos. Google and Amazon would end up paying people who aren't even their upstream carriers. In fact they would need to spend presumably very large sums of money to each of the telcos just to reach their customers at a reasonable speed (or at all, it would be entirely up to the telco). While this is quite bad for the big guy, it completely shuts out the little guy. A website like YouTube would not be capable of paying the money for this access like Google can for their video services. And I believe YouTube is a good example of how popularity can be won even in a crowded market just by putting in the work to make your service better. Disrupting the ability for anyone but large corporations to innovate real-time applications would in my opinion be very costly for a society that is in reality still new to this technology.
Unlike SubVirt, Blue Pill does not require a reboot before it becomes active and does not alter the MBR. That motherboard setting will not be an effective mitigation strategy.
I was talking about protecting the public from criminals. Liberties that do not result in harming another person's liberty should probably not be restricted by government. The rest of your post was so asinine I'm not sure how to respond, it's all in the typical internet "HaHa i am smarter than everyone!" language. In response to your "lessons" (oh thank you for being able to teach me, smart internet person!) 1. The police force was established to protect the public from criminals, I don't know what part of my extremely short post made you believe that I'm terrified of people hurting me. 2. Where the hell did this even come from? No part of my post came even close to implying that I believe society will fail if I were to die.
The government must allow for "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". While I see that interpretations in Washington vary, I don't believe I'm provided liberty if my safety isn't protected.
And does catching this enemy justify perversion of American values like privacy? I think the problem America has in figuring out how to deal with terrorism is that the potential damage is very high, yet the probability is incredibly low. It's like 0 and infinity, how do you compromise that? I for one would prefer the small probability of danger to losing fundamental civil rights. Besides it's not like the government doesn't already have the ability to get this information, the only difference is that they used to need to go through an established balance of power (the judiciary in this case) to get it. FISA made it very easy to get the warrants, and even in a court that's entirely closed to the public. I don't believe there is any good reason for the NSA to no longer need to follow through this established balance of power. An executive with unchecked access to public records has, historically speaking, caused a lot of trouble in the past. If we make a mistake now, there will be no fixing it later. You will not resume any rights that you sacrifice for the extremely faint probability of danger.
Reverse engineer? 802.11i is an open standard, and it seems like Intel was defending that in the face of what would have been a proprietary standard that China would stand to benefit from.
Colin Powell spoke with Chinese trade officials a while back and got them to halt a program that would have required WiFi equipment being sold in China to support WAPI. The program also would have required foreign companies to partner with a Chinese firm before entering the market.
t tochina_1.html?source=rss&url=http://www.infoworld .com/article/04/04/05/HNbarrettochina_1.html
http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/04/05/HNbarre
FTA: "The U.S. government has also weighed in on the issue. U.S. Secretary of Commerce Donald Evans, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick, sent a letter to senior Chinese government officials in March expressing concern over the implementation of China's WLAN standard and that the move created a dangerous precedent for using standards as a barrier to international trade."
Pretty good, actually.
It's pretty obvious actually, Google is run by nerds. The founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin are University dreamers and not cut-throat businessmen. Everybody touts that Google, like any other major corporation, must be vicious. I don't entirely disagree, I'm sure that Google will defend its bottom line. At the moment however the company is quite profitable, and is producing some great products.
I realize that the PC-BSD folks are trying to make the install simple for people who aren't computer enthusiasts, but for our crowd BSD is remarkably simple and quick to install. I build out BSD installs pretty frequently and it takes less than 5 minutes to create a working base install that will allow me to ssh into it.
Most of the problems mentioned in the article are overcome by using "Reply to All" -- which is how e-mail collaboration has always worked in my experience. The only one I see it not solving are the security concerns, which can be overcome with authenticated SMTP and IMAP.
Would you prefer Bush or Gore? Most 3rd party voters would have voted Gore, and if they had he would be President right now. The two large parties already get messages when they make opinion polls, voting for a candidate you know is going to lose doesn't do anything except make the Republicans happy you didn't vote for the Dems. Your views are too out of line with that of their base to make any change. At best they'll just avoid subjects made hotly debated by a 3rd party.
I'd hate to be a developer that had to work without out-of-order execution. Past 20 years of OO design be damned!
I love it when I've googled a topic for days and explain that on IRC and instead of them saying "I don't know" I'm told "You obviously suck at Google". Really warms the heart.
Inside the ThinkPad configuration program you can easily set the Windows shortcut key to the right alt key.
My Thinkpad weighs less than 4 pounds so I don't know where the "heavy" part is coming in. I've always know IBM laptops to be lighter than their competitors. The less features is probably because they don't whore almost meaningless specs to get sales. They just don't use cheap parts, plain and simple. While other companies will cut corners and give you a laptop that's heavy, runs hot, and has a powerbrick large enough to kill a man, IBM truly gives you a good product. I do like Powerbooks, but they wear much more easily than a ThinkPad. I also disagree that the ThinkPad is ugly, its look has grown on me quite a bit.
When I bought my Thinkpad I did so because of their reputation and was not disappointed. IBM's support is great. A friend's hard drive recently failed and he didn't need to go through the usual process of sending his stuff back to IBM for them to verify the problem, they just overnighted him a new one. Despite that he had called that evening, early morning the next day the new hard drive was at his door. I asked some Lenovo reps at CES if they were planning any major changes to the ThinkPad and they said no, but for something as expensive as a laptop I'm going to wait and see what other customers have to say. That said if I were in the market for a laptop right now I'd heavily consider Lenovo because Dell, HP, Sony, Toshiba, et al have all already proven themselves to be inferior products. I might even buy a powerbook.
The surprise is because of how difficult it is to do.
Bandwidth has always been measured like this (ie before it was turned into a product). The mathematics behind it translate immediately into bits. Also you'd be mistaken to assume all computer word sizes are 8 bits long.
While I would call that very repressive. But maybe that's because I'm from the US where I don't need to opt-out to be given freedom of speech/expression.