If you're concerned about spyware, be very careful about who's DNS server you list in your PC.
Should your service provider wish, he can capture Ethernet traffic specific to DNS inquiries and compile some interesting information without even needing you to install and use his client software.
We used this approach at my previous job (dealing with employee security and network use compliance... great job, eh? *sigh*) We had web proxy operating but had an occasional employee who bypassed the proxy and figured he could avoid detection as he surfed his favorite porn or gambling site. By tracking his DNS lookups (many of the sites had hidden references to sextracker.com which made it easy to spot), we'd take his URL of choice and map the DNS to monster.com or hotjobs.com - giving him the clue that continued use might be an opportunity to work elsewhere.
Sniffed properly, your provider will obtain an IP address and the Internet address being looked up (e.g. sextracker.com). He can insert the sniffer in line with the DNS server(s) to simplify data capture (rather than have to deal with inspection on a bigger network).
Should he limit DNS lookups on the same segment as his nameserver, you may be able to avoid this spying by operating your own DNS (e.g. on your dual-NIC Linux firewall) or by using an alternate DNS server.
I NEVER let anyone install any software on my company computers or my home computers that deal with broadband.
This approach may get you permanently relegated to the slow lane of the Internet, if that (hint: what do you think your AOL or Earthlink connection does, especially upstream? Do you think they ignore all that nifty consumer buyer profile data they see pass through web proxies and such?)
As a Cox.net consumer and manager of a regional broadband service provider (not cox - we service flyover country:-) ), I'd suggest a better alternative:
- supply a stock Wintel PC next to your cable modem/DSL/wireless DSL termination. Win2K or WinXP are probably necessary. - use the stock machine for the installer to load his garbage on - use the machine for customer support calls - let it crunch keys or run some other distributive application - replace it in the link for normal operation using your router/internet sharing device of choice (e.g. RouterOS, Linux dual-nic, Linksys firewall router, etc)
Just make sure you get the details down of how your service provider authenticates you and let you on his network - PPPoE, DHCP, MAC-based authentication, etc. and make sure your router solution is configured to do the same.
Yea, I hate spyware and won't use it on my network either...
Enjoyed it. Downloaded a few tracks via gnutella. Yup, this definitely is a group I like.
Went to Best Buy. WTF? No Funker Vogt. Went to CD Warehouse. Nope. Never even heard of them, let alone my fav Apoptygma Bezerk, VNV Nation, Front Line Assembly, etc. "Sure we have industrial..." as the salescritter points at the rap section (ugh... where do they hire these people from?).
So Ms. Rosen, how am I supposed to be a complying RIAA citizen when you won't even sell me the music?
As usual, it was off to cdnow.com, buy one of everything Funker Vogt, and wait for the UPS guy.
Conclusion:
1. I'm waiving money in your face but you won't sell product to me. 2. You can't seem to figure out how to distribute music worth a damn. 3. You keep signing a few worthless artists and pumping their music (while we still don't buy it), rather than understanding the market changed on you. 4. You and the radio broadcasters sign deals trying to limit airplay to the same crap you signed, but now the radio broadcasters can't find listeners and had to destroy Internet broadcasting before it destroyed them.
So, maybe there's another problem that explains why your sales numbers suck?
This new epidemic in California is probably just a bunch of really smart people having children together.
Have they attempted to corrolate it at all with both parents starting families later in life?
Most of my friends (the very beginning of gen-x, born in the late 60s) started their families late. Even though we were 25 when we had our son (and I thought that was late... couple of years out of college), many just got started a year or so ago.
There's a good amount of data on chromosonal damage beginning in the thirties, including a real decline in late 30s. Add that to everyone using fertility drugs (hint: you're starting too late) and people having second and third kids in their 40s, and you've got to have more problems.
I'd expect this trend to be even stronger on the west coast where being a DINK is a class statement (and often necessary requirement to get that BMW 5 series, 5,000+ sq. foot house, clothes, etc).
management has been setting its own wages without much imput from the owners (the stock holders who care about profit).
Maybe that is part of the solution... I'm the largest shareholder, and yet as CEO, I'm not the highest paid in the company. I've got some engineering folks who make more.
But then again, my equity makes my risk worth it - after all, every dollar I take in salary is a dollar less spent expanding the company. I don't even expense entertainment, lunches bought for clients, etc.
So how do you make the CEO of a Fortune 500 think this way?
*scoove*
Re:we're talking CEOs of large corporations (Re:ju
on
Expose on Insider Loans
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
why they are being given absurdly high compensation packages compared to every other country in the world.
In much of the rest of the world, bribes, rewarding cronies / friends of the king/dictator, etc. is the way of things. Wealth is even more centralized in these societies and unlike the US system, middle to lower class persons have little chance of any upward mobility.
So you may be right - CEO's in third world nations don't do as well. But the leader's buddies do even better (look at the Saudi family, for example).
It's insiderism, it's a sleazy money grab
But is this unique to corporate America? I'd argue that sleazy money grabbing people exist everywhere, as does relativism. It's a mechanism for a lesser person to rule over a greater one, obtaining more resources with less work. Whether it's done with a gun or via a guilt trip (as is more common in our society), it's still parasitism.
they know it's wrong, why else would boards of directors try to hide these compensation packages from their shareholders
Because the company is in attrition/decline phase and the shareholders were in on the game. Seriously, we reelected a worthless, deviant parasite president because "the economy was good." I've seen greed in comm company boardrooms that everyone subscribed to, ignoring that it would kill the company eventually.
But as long as the shareholders got their increasing share price (or dividends), they went along with it.
Understand the only reason people are pissed now is that the market is down, profits are down (or gone), and the wheel isn't getting greased.
Tying compensation to stock prices was supposed to fix that
Let me throw out an alternative - promote a voluntary CEO standard:
- base pay less than $350K/annual - bonus pay issued in stock grants or options - inclusion of all benefits (personal use of jet, leased auto, housing stipend, stadium box, etc.) in pay package for base pay rule - penalties that impact bonus pay for SEC violations, etc.
I'll promise you that at $350K, you're going to have some motivated CEO's in larger companies. Want that two million dollar vacation home? Get working.
Establish the CEO standard and list companies that comply with it. Put a notation next to the ticker symbol denoting complying companies. Sure, you can offer that $3 million base, but prospective investors will know you're not in compliance.
What I meant was, these companies that hire someone to come in and run the place
Very good point... they're worse in my book than Junior - people born on third base thinking they hit a triple, as the saying goes.
I've got a few VC friends (not that I'd ever touch VC money; I don't like the strings attached to it) and talk about this issue frequently. It's sort of the South Park Underwear Gnomes Business Plan (TM) (you know, 1. Steal Underwear, 2. ???, 3. Make Big Profit)
The VC equiv is 1. Insert $100 million, 2. Hire Harvard MBA's, 3. Make Big Profit.
The $100 million allows them to pretend this is a predictable $100 million stable company, theoretically a good match for Harvard MBA's. Get guys used to running a big ship to make this venture one, right?
Except they're never able to get their hands dirty, have never understood creating things, and have to hire slews of consultants (most of which are just like them).
I'd be happy to hear that they're worth every penny of the money
In this case, I have to agree - they're not. But until we put pressure on them like post dot-com has, their games don't get exposed.
Seriously, what exactly does the CEO do anyway that makes him worth so much?
I'll bite.
I'm one. Of a considerably smaller ship, but one nontheless (I provide broadband to about eight counties in a "fly over country" state and run a regional network for voice, IP and private line).
I created my company. Worked my ass off for several years living in a crappy part of town in a small house. Leveraged everything. Risked everything. Signed on the line for every loan, pledged my house, farm and income for years to come to make it happen. Worked for 12 months with no fscking paycheck (actually, you get to pay to play in this club... attorneys, accountants, routers, systems, offices all cost bucks. Guess where it comes from?)
While my geek friends were sneaking out at 4:30 on Friday to go drink and hit the hockey games, I was working till midnight and both weekend days. Vacation? 1998 was the last time I saw free time. Fund the company? Build routers? Climb towers? Carry out the trash? Whatever it took.
Meanwhile, my competition (incumbant/monopoly phone companies in small towns) was run by Junior (second or third generation or more of family-run operations). While Junior made a cushy income, drove his flashy car, golfed at the country club and enjoyed that nice $5 million company home in Vail, I froze my ass off on grain elevators and windmills at 4AM, making small town customers happy.
So now I'm taking Junior's business. Bringing broadband to his town. Making the people happy. Junior's been horrified, learning that my annoying, trivial little company is now taking his core business. He's yesterday. Obsolete. To Junior, I'm a barbarian, but to the community I'm a saint. Even Junior's senator hangs around my office for photo ops.
So why shouldn't I be paid for what I did? You want progress? Don't expect it from Junior. If you want it from me, it comes on my terms. If I get greedy (like the dot-com assholes who lost were in it only for the $10 million homes - learn about these losers and you'll see they're nothing but upper class daddy's boys anyways. They didn't earn it), then I'll join Junior and let some efficient young fsck replace me.
So, do you really want to eliminate my incentive? Sure hope you like Junior...
Why do we need to corroborate that statistic via one very expensive sample?
Because a pretty press release, Reuters copy, etc. prevails.
"Computer program using 'free time' defeats encryption" sinks into every PHB's mind. As much as you may hate them, they vote (and usually they have more influence than you do, unfortunately).
Distributed.net has a real opportunity for a PR coup. Yes, I'd also prefer to focus all my time on more worthy causes, but as long as relativism lingers, we have to allocate a few spare cycles towards keeping it in check.
Hmm... actually, many do. Have you never heard of states rights? Funny little bit of trivia; our nation fought a war over that little "ink blot."
So maybe you meant to write "no constitutional scholar who ignores history, loves tyranny and disregards that annoying scrap of paper called the constitution"?
thinks those vague amendments preclude the government from doing things like keeping a database on guns or doing more extensive background checks
Really? And where's the limit? I'll bet you're also one of those "slippery slope" paranoid delusionals against Ashcroft, taping up the aluminum foil on the walls cause the Patriot Act is the first step towards tyranny. But in the same breath, you have no problem ignoring two amendments of the Constitution and refer to them as ink blots?
you have to understand that it's a slippery slope to tread on.
I'd concur (frighting - agreeing with an ACLU defender). But why is it so easy for the ACLU folks to see conspiracies behind every military aspect, when at the same time they bury their head and ignore the same slippery slope of gun registration, gun fingerprinting, national registries for gun owners, etc.?
At risk of being redundant, we know historically that these registrations are used when a democratic government goes into a period of tyranny. It's a necessary step by tyrants to eliminate any threat of opposition.
When the ACLU types ignore these slippery slopes, they lose their credibility and come across as shills for relativist causes.
Where does it say "the right to bear arms shall not be infringed... nor any data collected on the use of these arms?"
Article IX, and references to States rights in Article X (essentially the concept of enumered powers and delegation of powers).
This is the same reason the IRS doesn't come to your home and sieze your car, home, rape your wife, shoot your kids, etc. when they have an audit.
Well hell's bells. We sure can do that. Just because the law says we're supposed to send you a letter and get your butt down to our office to be confronted while we treat you as a guilty person doesn't mean we can't do a little confiscating, raping and shooting! Where does the law say we can't do that? You think we're going to let the FBI and the BATF be the only ones to shoot weirdos we don't like? We're the IRS damnit. Don't forget... the S means shooters!
Seriously, think it through. Can you imagine writing a law (or the Constitution for that matter) that has to predict and account for every possible fact and specify it is not permitted, in order for it to be protected against?
You didn't say the government couldn't suspend the first amendment on every Friday the 13th, or for people of English ancestry that like soccer!
ACLU is also challenging the involvement of the US military in the DC sniper case...not to mention they're vigerously defending the rights of the National Man Boy Love Association to promote grown men sexually abusing young boys, supporting countless efforts to squash the exercise of religious practice (in effect, establishing a government-recognized athiest religion), etc.
As a libertarian, I find it distasteful to not permit another person to live by their choice - as long as their choices are with other consenting adults. Prostitution? Drugs? Microsoft Windows? Your choice, and your consequence.
But when anarchists wrap themselves in the constitution they actually attempt to destroy, and assault the exercise of liberty by others (while promoting deviancy in every effort), they've gone over the line.
Attacking US military involvement in the sniper case? Let's let people be slaughtered and be afraid instead. Afraid people give up liberties much more quickly.
Assaulting the Patriot Act? Not many libertarians appreciate it either (that I'm aware of), but there are greater issues to face, and looking at the state of our security infrastructure, serious efforts must be made to clean things up. How many 9/11 terrorists should have had their visas rejected, but got ushered in by an inept government entity?
Oh, and where is the ACLU on the media racial profiling of white males during the first weeks of the sniper matter? Well, white males are token representatives of the evil European dead-white males. Screw em.
And how is the ACLU defending other constitutional liberties being attacked now per the sniper matter, such as crazy new proposals on gun control (from Maryland and DC which have had most extreme gun control, only proving criminals don't obey laws, but dead disarmed sniper victims did)? silence
Anarchist & Communists Liberation Union? Certainly their right to use the word Liberty has been forfitted long ago.
Are they nuts? If it was $15.00 a month, I wouldn't bite, because the installation charge is so rediculous.
What do you do for a living? Do you work for free? Do you get $0.25 haircuts, and think a dollar is a lot for lunch? Do they let you out of the home often?
Seriously...
Gone (or soon gone) are the days where monopolies played games with pricing. Your AT&T/Ma Bell phone line was unrealistically priced. Businesses got screwed to pay for residential lines. Capacity was always limited - look at the ILECs today. Want a T1 in a small town? Hahaha... sure, it's $800/month on the books, but you can't get it. No capacity. Like rent control in NYC... cheap apartments, but none to rent.
So, you want me to put in $400 (or more) of equipment, pay someone $100 to do the work (plus have the liability insurance, truck, equipment, etc.), and you'll pay $15? Let me guess... you'll pay $100 for that new Cadillac. I'll bet you're a $0.25 tipper too at dinner./rant off/
We're in an age where cash rules. Don't got it? Be prepared to pay. I'm in a market where I have so many people willing to pay cash for it, that I have no need to provide financing for those who are hard up for the money. When you learn about financing companies, you'll learn that debt limit is a real issue in growth. For every customer I don't provide financing for, that leaves me room to expand further.
Anyways, with the low prime, don't be a parasite. Go out and finance it yourself (and save yourself the money). Ever notice thrifty people pay cash and don't make long term obligations? Or do you pay 21% for groceries and keep paying the minimum? Nothing like being a slave to a credit card company...
I listen to quite a bit of ebm and gothic/industrial, and I'd say the primary reason these are only niche music markets is that most people don't like them. They're simply not styles of music that most people like to listen to.
*sigh* Thanks for giving me a good laugh. It's a very true statement, unfortunately (but hopefully I made my point with the reference). (And hey, I like Front 242! After a bunch of Apop, it just feels nice)
EBM, Goth, Industrial, etc./are/ niche forms. I'll never forget my history of mass communications course back in school in the late 80s where we talked about the evolution of a medium from a general form to mass specialization. From Life magazine to thousands of magazines about everything you'd ever imagine.
RIAA, NAB and friends want to go back to a 1950s world where people ate what they were fed via media. They want to put the specialization genie back in the bottle. No cable. No Internet. No choices. Just think what I tell you to think. It'd work if we could just get a Stalin in our government, but unfortunately there are too many people that don't like the idea that it won't work (that's the bitch about freedom, eh?)
Honestly, any rational human would realize that the use of the radiowaves for broadcast is a mistake today. Limited airwaves are better for person to person communications or other forms - not for the broadcast of a few generalized forms.
Use other networks - digital ones (e.g. Internet) to allow people to select niche forms of entertainment.
So we'll see how it works out. It's no surprise to me that there is a good play for it in congress - between the Democratic party's hatred of individualism and the Republicans love for large corporations, RIAA would be stupid not to try to make their move before eliminated.
Seems to me if the RIAA has justification in its style of frontier justice with people that steal its property, then Internet service providers are given carte blanche to trash RIAA.
Seriously, RIAA wants to pursue DoS on my network? That's theft of my backbone and local networks, potentially disrupting other customers - all because of a "suspicion" of illicit activity without a court order, due process, etc.
So RIAA, let me give you a few pointers to bone up on. Your attorneys and advisors may have not been aware of the consequences that will be imposed upon you by those who actually run the network you're a passenger of.
1. You're a guest here, like the P2P thief. If you suspect a thief, report it. Suspicion that one traveler on the Internet does not give you authority to crash the plane. Armani suits and pretty $350/hr attorneys does not make you worthy of running my network.
2. Hostile actions against our Internet will result in you being banned, black holed, or worse. Since we know how to run these things, expect us to know how to exact a consequence you probably won't like. A terrorist is a terrorist, regardless of whatever justification you claim.
3. Service providers, unlike the P2P thief, have attorneys and sufficient documentation to demonstrate significant financial harm caused by your irresponsibility, and will nail you to the cross for it. We're really not a good enemy to pick; we're geek enough to get it, and exec enough to know how to apply it. You've had little resistance so far by picking on little people. Try screwing with a telcom industry that is already on the defensive and ready to kick back.
You entertainment types are no match for the rogue survivors of the telcom depression. Go back to your pretty little world of the west wing, Michael Jackson albums and other useless, harmless play.
thanks to RIAA, those musicians will be forgoten forever
Obscure european bands from the 70s and 80s do not produce revenues for the colluding recording industry oligopoly.
Neither do innovative niche forms, like ebm, trance, gothic/industrial, etc. Such forms require music industry executives to actually have a clue about the music and has less need for slick MTV marketing formulas.
While we've all been worrying about RIAA, the death of shoutcast, pay-per-play licensed media, etc., many of us have missed the other side of the game being nailed by RIAA - their quiet partnership with the broadcast industry.
Emerging dominant broadcasters like ClearChannel (who were given the go ahead to roll up more than the previous FCC limit of stations per market, slaughtering local staffing, and running most of the programming remote from a central location) have become a favorite partner for RIAA firms - got a new Britney tune? Write ClearChannel a check and you're guaranteed airplay and CD sales.
ClearChannel's station rollup, the death of independent broadcasters, effective Congressional lobbying (my congress critters in both parties are strong supporters of RIAA and the National Association of Broadcasters/NAB), and Copyright Office hijinks might just put an end to creative music in the US.
Then again, someone's got to buy all of these awful things piling up in the warehouses...
"Linux is not like Novell, it isn't going to run out of money--it started off bankrupt, in a way." said Microsoft CEO Steve Balmer, as he noticed he could not pull up a ticker symbol for Linux on the NASDAQ or NYSE and concluded it could not be any sort of threat.
Wow... I've heard of confused paradigms and misunderstandings leading folks down the wrong path before, but this is amazing (and I think reflects a very deep fear and circling of wagon mentality coming from the top of Microsoft).
At a minimum, Balmer's comment here reflects a complete inability to grasp that the competition this time is different. It's not another Microsoft, another software company that they can pin a name to, use the same strategy and crush it through whatever mechanisms.
I just don't get it, Bill. I know there has to be an evil Linux conspiracy organization out there, but I can't find their headquarters. How can the Microsoft Storm Troopers 2.1(TM) infiltrate an enemy we cannot find?
It's intangible. It's an infectious meme. It'd be like King Charles I dismissing the threat of Parliment because they didn't possess a throne.
Not to get too esoteric, but I'd suggest Balmer read Milton's Areopagetica quickly. He might just learn the answer to all their inherent security problems, as well as the probable long term failure of the current strategy (which he apparently will ride to the ground given present thinking). Then again, maybe he shouldn't and business students can have a good case study of why closed source is a bad idea in the long run.
Closed source doesn't permit "grappling of truth and falsehood." It hides, obscures, conceals falsehoods (such as security problems or bugs) and relies upon official persons of the Microsoft kingdom to be allowed to discuss and determine what truth/falsehood is. Recent aggression with EULAs and service packs prohibiting public exposure of such defects nearly mirrors a sort of Star Chamber - a certification from Microsoft permitting one to speak (and those that criticize are not permitted).
Given the rapidly increasing defensiveness (much of which can be attributed to antitrust, I'd guess), I don't see an ability to change until its probably too late.
And yet some broadband companies go out of their way to prevent Linux users from signing up.
Isn't that amusing? We're fortunate to have a young enough company culture (and use Linux - Redhat and Debian - inside for most of our systems except desktops, which run Win2K).
UNIX customers in general (Linux/BSD/etc) can be a real blessing, even though they occasionally consume resources like an entire school district. They represent another intelligent pair of eyes on your network looking out for potential problems - give them a good way to talk to you and you've got volunteer help!
On the other end of the spectrum...
My home broadband connection goes through a cox.net connection. As I run a Mikrotik-based VPN between home and the office (mostly so I don't have to drive in when I need to see the private network at 3AM), I have a few suggestions for other non-Windows broadband customers of larger providers:
- keep a Windows box handy next to the cable modem drop, and ready to run as the sole broadband device. This makes the installer people feel better when they come by - I had one drop by and see the 48-port patch panel, 5' rack, switches, routers, hubs, etc. and he got worried. (I told him it was an amateur radio project and he felt better)
- run your Windows box when you call in a trouble report; their people are trained to walk you through the basics (e.g. determining if your computer is turned on, if your network card is active, etc.) and even though you may know what the problem really is, you won't get to that point in their script unless you're able to work along with them in their "have to make sure the customer isn't doing something idiotic" checklist.
I once made the mistake of whispering the word "Linux" when on the phone with my provider when there was a problem.
Yea, platform bigotry is a problem - even for smarter folks like network engineers. I've had similar issues with Sprint dealing with our upstream circuits. We had a Sprint circuit bouncing every 70 seconds (even with a loopback plug in the smart jack... clue!) but when I accidentally mentioned our router was Mikrotik (with a slew of Cyclades T1 cards, a DS3 card, and misc other stuff), that immediately became the problem. It wasn't Cisco.
"That's the problem. You're set for HDLC and only Cisco does that. Your router won't work." He wouldn't listen to me tell him that Cyclades supports HDLC, nor would the loopback but still bouncing status help (and trust me, Mikrotik on a redundant P4 with this architecture kicks a Cisco 7500 - without the $100K price tag). We had to drag a Cisco back in and terminate the circuit there before Sprint would buy off that they had a problem. Oh well, it only cost them another two weeks of credit on the SLA... their money, not mine.
I'd pay $20 a month for something above 56k but below Cable/DSL, but such a thing doesn't exist, so I'll just wait until broadband is affordable.
A view from the other side of the table...
My company provides broadband to a bunch of small towns in a part of "fly-over country." Our service is $29.95 a month, and an installation of $250 (includes equipment).
Unfortunately, there is significant pressure to hike rates. Why? Customer support costs, mostly from crummy operating system software.
One out of two installs needs substantial work due to Win95/Win98/WinME configurations with years of clutter, garbage and registry hell. Dialup optimization tools messing with MTUs, mess all over (I reinstall my Win2K annually - apparently not many other people do). Customers don't understand that system maintenance is not our problem but theirs. They're like a 5'6" tall, 500 pound human who expects to run a marathon on broadband.
Then there's the monthly "I blew away my system config - help me fix it." Many calls require a great amount of support. Yet nobody wants to pay for support - "I'm paying you for service - I expect service, even if I mess up my computer." As if GM or Ford provided warrenties for stupidity, crashes, etc...
Our Linux customers are a dream. They know how to take care of their system, and understand that config screwups, system maintenance, etc. are their issue.
High prices for broadband unfortunately appear to be a Microsoft tax. Maybe we need to approach broadband the same way:
Linux, *BSD, & Mac: $29.95/month unlimited (Mac users are slow to upgrade their OS though... half of them we run into have ancient versions.. 6.?)
Windows95/ME: Upgrade (we already tell them that today)
Win98/NT/2K/XP: add $20/month for StupidOS tax unless you sign the "Surf at your own risk" disclaimer.
We also signed up for digital cable when Cox began offering and promoting it. We have Cox phone and cable Internet, so digital seemed like a nice thing to upgrade to.
That was until we saw the actual bill. Like the extra $8.00 phone line that actually cost $16.73 a month, digital cable came brought our combined bill to $205 per month (little things like unit rentals, taxes, fees, etc. add up). When we realized we never watched the dozen HBO channels (Sopranos looks the same on the basic HBO), only needed to see Groundhog Day once per day, digital PayPerView had the same annoying feature of starting the same movie at the same time across a half-dozen channels, we figured the only thing that was unique to digital cable was the music, and that wasn't worth an additional $100/month.
and my PCMCIA 802.11b card sniffs not only the free WAP at the cafe proper
Which should be fine as long as the owner of the property consents to this use (which it appears is the case), and the other owners of what you're using also consent.
Is the upstream Internet connection aware and consenting to this use? If they're not, you're no more than a thief.
The problem with free Internet that people can't seem to get around is that you've got some things that aren't free, such as:
- the engineers that run the networks you're travelling - the fiber, cable, submarine cables, etc. that someone put in and maintains - the switches, routers, servers, etc. needed to run service provider networks (last time I looked, Cisco wasn't giving their stock away for free)
I work my ass off and have taken one hell of a pay cut to bring cheap broadband to small towns. I'll be damned if some freeloader steals from my communities. Let him build his own damn network and pay for his DS3.
evolution from shitstream teevee/radio corporate fuckfest
Oh, you mean like the radiofrequency givaway both parties have sponsored in the US? Or the rule bending for corporate buddies like Clear Channel (psst... donate to our parties and we'll let you own all the radio stations in every market so you can fire the local people and pump canned crap sent via satellite)? Funny how the RIAA loves this - course, they have artist promo deals with Clear Channel too. No wonder radio broadcasting is so vanilla...
In order to fight institutional theft, you've got to recognize property rights and oppose all theft - what belongs to someone else ain't yours! Pay for it or get your own. Otherwise you're just another thief (on the losing side of the battle, as they've got better guns).
the economics of utilities... were worked out in the 1880s by marxists and other utopianists with an alternate agenda. Can you imagine Thomas Edison, Rockefeller, Hoffa or anyone else arguing that they should be smaller?
Of course they'll find an economist who will say allowing them to run an industry is the most efficient way to do things. Funny thing though how Standard Oil was broken up even though they were the most efficient producer...
An amusing anacdote is that this same agenda had been used by Microsoft to justify its "self-normalizing monopoly" claim. E.g. operating system costs spread over all PCs are lower with a monopoly, and there are no compatibility issues. In a sense, you can see the argument if this economic cost/unit objective is the only criteria you use.
However, there are other consequences, political, economic, behavioral, etc. Monopolies have a slight problem with ending up unaccountable. Fantasies of government regulation aside, the regulators quickly normalize to either being in the monopoly's pay, or get replaced by pro-monopoly officials. Or you'll have scenarios where the regulators control the power and grow their monopoly through special deals with select associates, kickbacks, etc.
Look at the status of both US political parties - both are nearly identical in that they're run by large organizations pursuing dominance in their industry/sector. It doesn't matter if its a union, a fortune 1000, or an industry association, the motivation is the same (and so is the corrution). Enron, RIAA, AFL-CIO, Global Crossing, NAB, etc.
As any honest German will tell you, efficiency shouldn't be your only objective.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're concerned about spyware, be very careful about who's DNS server you list in your PC.
Should your service provider wish, he can capture Ethernet traffic specific to DNS inquiries and compile some interesting information without even needing you to install and use his client software.
We used this approach at my previous job (dealing with employee security and network use compliance... great job, eh? *sigh*) We had web proxy operating but had an occasional employee who bypassed the proxy and figured he could avoid detection as he surfed his favorite porn or gambling site. By tracking his DNS lookups (many of the sites had hidden references to sextracker.com which made it easy to spot), we'd take his URL of choice and map the DNS to monster.com or hotjobs.com - giving him the clue that continued use might be an opportunity to work elsewhere.
Sniffed properly, your provider will obtain an IP address and the Internet address being looked up (e.g. sextracker.com). He can insert the sniffer in line with the DNS server(s) to simplify data capture (rather than have to deal with inspection on a bigger network).
Should he limit DNS lookups on the same segment as his nameserver, you may be able to avoid this spying by operating your own DNS (e.g. on your dual-NIC Linux firewall) or by using an alternate DNS server.
*scoove*
I NEVER let anyone install any software on my company computers or my home computers that deal with broadband.
This approach may get you permanently relegated to the slow lane of the Internet, if that (hint: what do you think your AOL or Earthlink connection does, especially upstream? Do you think they ignore all that nifty consumer buyer profile data they see pass through web proxies and such?)
As a Cox.net consumer and manager of a regional broadband service provider (not cox - we service flyover country:-) ), I'd suggest a better alternative:
- supply a stock Wintel PC next to your cable modem/DSL/wireless DSL termination. Win2K or WinXP are probably necessary.
- use the stock machine for the installer to load his garbage on
- use the machine for customer support calls
- let it crunch keys or run some other distributive application
- replace it in the link for normal operation using your router/internet sharing device of choice (e.g. RouterOS, Linux dual-nic, Linksys firewall router, etc)
Just make sure you get the details down of how your service provider authenticates you and let you on his network - PPPoE, DHCP, MAC-based authentication, etc. and make sure your router solution is configured to do the same.
Yea, I hate spyware and won't use it on my network either...
*scoove*
Keep you hand up if you buy more music because of it"
Hmmm... heard Funker Vogt on shoutcast a few weeks ago.
Enjoyed it. Downloaded a few tracks via gnutella. Yup, this definitely is a group I like.
Went to Best Buy. WTF? No Funker Vogt. Went to CD Warehouse. Nope. Never even heard of them, let alone my fav Apoptygma Bezerk, VNV Nation, Front Line Assembly, etc. "Sure we have industrial..." as the salescritter points at the rap section (ugh... where do they hire these people from?).
So Ms. Rosen, how am I supposed to be a complying RIAA citizen when you won't even sell me the music?
As usual, it was off to cdnow.com, buy one of everything Funker Vogt, and wait for the UPS guy.
Conclusion:
1. I'm waiving money in your face but you won't sell product to me.
2. You can't seem to figure out how to distribute music worth a damn.
3. You keep signing a few worthless artists and pumping their music (while we still don't buy it), rather than understanding the market changed on you.
4. You and the radio broadcasters sign deals trying to limit airplay to the same crap you signed, but now the radio broadcasters can't find listeners and had to destroy Internet broadcasting before it destroyed them.
So, maybe there's another problem that explains why your sales numbers suck?
*scoove*
This new epidemic in California is probably just a bunch of really smart people having children together.
Have they attempted to corrolate it at all with both parents starting families later in life?
Most of my friends (the very beginning of gen-x, born in the late 60s) started their families late. Even though we were 25 when we had our son (and I thought that was late... couple of years out of college), many just got started a year or so ago.
There's a good amount of data on chromosonal damage beginning in the thirties, including a real decline in late 30s. Add that to everyone using fertility drugs (hint: you're starting too late) and people having second and third kids in their 40s, and you've got to have more problems.
I'd expect this trend to be even stronger on the west coast where being a DINK is a class statement (and often necessary requirement to get that BMW 5 series, 5,000+ sq. foot house, clothes, etc).
*scoove*
management has been setting its own wages without much imput from the owners (the stock holders who care about profit).
Maybe that is part of the solution... I'm the largest shareholder, and yet as CEO, I'm not the highest paid in the company. I've got some engineering folks who make more.
But then again, my equity makes my risk worth it - after all, every dollar I take in salary is a dollar less spent expanding the company. I don't even expense entertainment, lunches bought for clients, etc.
So how do you make the CEO of a Fortune 500 think this way?
*scoove*
why they are being given absurdly high compensation packages compared to every other country in the world.
In much of the rest of the world, bribes, rewarding cronies / friends of the king/dictator, etc. is the way of things. Wealth is even more centralized in these societies and unlike the US system, middle to lower class persons have little chance of any upward mobility.
So you may be right - CEO's in third world nations don't do as well. But the leader's buddies do even better (look at the Saudi family, for example).
It's insiderism, it's a sleazy money grab
But is this unique to corporate America? I'd argue that sleazy money grabbing people exist everywhere, as does relativism. It's a mechanism for a lesser person to rule over a greater one, obtaining more resources with less work. Whether it's done with a gun or via a guilt trip (as is more common in our society), it's still parasitism.
they know it's wrong, why else would boards of directors try to hide these compensation packages from their shareholders
Because the company is in attrition/decline phase and the shareholders were in on the game. Seriously, we reelected a worthless, deviant parasite president because "the economy was good." I've seen greed in comm company boardrooms that everyone subscribed to, ignoring that it would kill the company eventually.
But as long as the shareholders got their increasing share price (or dividends), they went along with it.
Understand the only reason people are pissed now is that the market is down, profits are down (or gone), and the wheel isn't getting greased.
Tying compensation to stock prices was supposed to fix that
Let me throw out an alternative - promote a voluntary CEO standard:
- base pay less than $350K/annual
- bonus pay issued in stock grants or options
- inclusion of all benefits (personal use of jet, leased auto, housing stipend, stadium box, etc.) in pay package for base pay rule
- penalties that impact bonus pay for SEC violations, etc.
I'll promise you that at $350K, you're going to have some motivated CEO's in larger companies. Want that two million dollar vacation home? Get working.
Establish the CEO standard and list companies that comply with it. Put a notation next to the ticker symbol denoting complying companies. Sure, you can offer that $3 million base, but prospective investors will know you're not in compliance.
Thoughts?
*scoove*
What I meant was, these companies that hire someone to come in and run the place
Very good point... they're worse in my book than Junior - people born on third base thinking they hit a triple, as the saying goes.
I've got a few VC friends (not that I'd ever touch VC money; I don't like the strings attached to it) and talk about this issue frequently. It's sort of the South Park Underwear Gnomes Business Plan (TM) (you know, 1. Steal Underwear, 2. ???, 3. Make Big Profit)
The VC equiv is 1. Insert $100 million, 2. Hire Harvard MBA's, 3. Make Big Profit.
The $100 million allows them to pretend this is a predictable $100 million stable company, theoretically a good match for Harvard MBA's. Get guys used to running a big ship to make this venture one, right?
Except they're never able to get their hands dirty, have never understood creating things, and have to hire slews of consultants (most of which are just like them).
I'd be happy to hear that they're worth every penny of the money
In this case, I have to agree - they're not. But until we put pressure on them like post dot-com has, their games don't get exposed.
*scoove*
Seriously, what exactly does the CEO do anyway that makes him worth so much?
I'll bite.
I'm one. Of a considerably smaller ship, but one nontheless (I provide broadband to about eight counties in a "fly over country" state and run a regional network for voice, IP and private line).
I created my company. Worked my ass off for several years living in a crappy part of town in a small house. Leveraged everything. Risked everything. Signed on the line for every loan, pledged my house, farm and income for years to come to make it happen. Worked for 12 months with no fscking paycheck (actually, you get to pay to play in this club... attorneys, accountants, routers, systems, offices all cost bucks. Guess where it comes from?)
While my geek friends were sneaking out at 4:30 on Friday to go drink and hit the hockey games, I was working till midnight and both weekend days. Vacation? 1998 was the last time I saw free time. Fund the company? Build routers? Climb towers? Carry out the trash? Whatever it took.
Meanwhile, my competition (incumbant/monopoly phone companies in small towns) was run by Junior (second or third generation or more of family-run operations). While Junior made a cushy income, drove his flashy car, golfed at the country club and enjoyed that nice $5 million company home in Vail, I froze my ass off on grain elevators and windmills at 4AM, making small town customers happy.
So now I'm taking Junior's business. Bringing broadband to his town. Making the people happy. Junior's been horrified, learning that my annoying, trivial little company is now taking his core business. He's yesterday. Obsolete. To Junior, I'm a barbarian, but to the community I'm a saint. Even Junior's senator hangs around my office for photo ops.
So why shouldn't I be paid for what I did? You want progress? Don't expect it from Junior. If you want it from me, it comes on my terms. If I get greedy (like the dot-com assholes who lost were in it only for the $10 million homes - learn about these losers and you'll see they're nothing but upper class daddy's boys anyways. They didn't earn it), then I'll join Junior and let some efficient young fsck replace me.
So, do you really want to eliminate my incentive? Sure hope you like Junior...
*scoove*
Why do we need to corroborate that statistic via one very expensive sample?
Because a pretty press release, Reuters copy, etc. prevails.
"Computer program using 'free time' defeats encryption" sinks into every PHB's mind. As much as you may hate them, they vote (and usually they have more influence than you do, unfortunately).
Distributed.net has a real opportunity for a PR coup. Yes, I'd also prefer to focus all my time on more worthy causes, but as long as relativism lingers, we have to allocate a few spare cycles towards keeping it in check.
*scoove*
No constitutional scholar
Hmm... actually, many do. Have you never heard of states rights? Funny little bit of trivia; our nation fought a war over that little "ink blot."
So maybe you meant to write "no constitutional scholar who ignores history, loves tyranny and disregards that annoying scrap of paper called the constitution"?
thinks those vague amendments preclude the government from doing things like keeping a database on guns or doing more extensive background checks
Really? And where's the limit? I'll bet you're also one of those "slippery slope" paranoid delusionals against Ashcroft, taping up the aluminum foil on the walls cause the Patriot Act is the first step towards tyranny. But in the same breath, you have no problem ignoring two amendments of the Constitution and refer to them as ink blots?
Amazing. People like you are born for the Gulag.
*scoove*
you have to understand that it's a slippery slope to tread on.
I'd concur (frighting - agreeing with an ACLU defender). But why is it so easy for the ACLU folks to see conspiracies behind every military aspect, when at the same time they bury their head and ignore the same slippery slope of gun registration, gun fingerprinting, national registries for gun owners, etc.?
At risk of being redundant, we know historically that these registrations are used when a democratic government goes into a period of tyranny. It's a necessary step by tyrants to eliminate any threat of opposition.
When the ACLU types ignore these slippery slopes, they lose their credibility and come across as shills for relativist causes.
*scoove*
Where does it say "the right to bear arms shall not be infringed... nor any data collected on the use of these arms?"
Article IX, and references to States rights in Article X (essentially the concept of enumered powers and delegation of powers).
This is the same reason the IRS doesn't come to your home and sieze your car, home, rape your wife, shoot your kids, etc. when they have an audit.
Well hell's bells. We sure can do that. Just because the law says we're supposed to send you a letter and get your butt down to our office to be confronted while we treat you as a guilty person doesn't mean we can't do a little confiscating, raping and shooting! Where does the law say we can't do that? You think we're going to let the FBI and the BATF be the only ones to shoot weirdos we don't like? We're the IRS damnit. Don't forget... the S means shooters!
Seriously, think it through. Can you imagine writing a law (or the Constitution for that matter) that has to predict and account for every possible fact and specify it is not permitted, in order for it to be protected against?
You didn't say the government couldn't suspend the first amendment on every Friday the 13th, or for people of English ancestry that like soccer!
Read the Constitution sometime... you might find it interesting.
*scoove*
ACLU is also challenging the involvement of the US military in the DC sniper case ...not to mention they're vigerously defending the rights of the National Man Boy Love Association to promote grown men sexually abusing young boys, supporting countless efforts to squash the exercise of religious practice (in effect, establishing a government-recognized athiest religion), etc.
As a libertarian, I find it distasteful to not permit another person to live by their choice - as long as their choices are with other consenting adults. Prostitution? Drugs? Microsoft Windows? Your choice, and your consequence.
But when anarchists wrap themselves in the constitution they actually attempt to destroy, and assault the exercise of liberty by others (while promoting deviancy in every effort), they've gone over the line.
Attacking US military involvement in the sniper case? Let's let people be slaughtered and be afraid instead. Afraid people give up liberties much more quickly.
Assaulting the Patriot Act? Not many libertarians appreciate it either (that I'm aware of), but there are greater issues to face, and looking at the state of our security infrastructure, serious efforts must be made to clean things up. How many 9/11 terrorists should have had their visas rejected, but got ushered in by an inept government entity?
Oh, and where is the ACLU on the media racial profiling of white males during the first weeks of the sniper matter? Well, white males are token representatives of the evil European dead-white males. Screw em.
And how is the ACLU defending other constitutional liberties being attacked now per the sniper matter, such as crazy new proposals on gun control (from Maryland and DC which have had most extreme gun control, only proving criminals don't obey laws, but dead disarmed sniper victims did)? silence
Anarchist & Communists Liberation Union? Certainly their right to use the word Liberty has been forfitted long ago.
*scoove*
what can I use my spare cycles for, besides SETI?
Distributed.net Break encryption and teach the government a lesson on the value of strong encryption at the same time.
That's where my spare cycles go...
*scoove*
Are they nuts? If it was $15.00 a month, I wouldn't bite, because the installation charge is so rediculous.
/rant off/
What do you do for a living? Do you work for free? Do you get $0.25 haircuts, and think a dollar is a lot for lunch? Do they let you out of the home often?
Seriously...
Gone (or soon gone) are the days where monopolies played games with pricing. Your AT&T/Ma Bell phone line was unrealistically priced. Businesses got screwed to pay for residential lines. Capacity was always limited - look at the ILECs today. Want a T1 in a small town? Hahaha... sure, it's $800/month on the books, but you can't get it. No capacity. Like rent control in NYC... cheap apartments, but none to rent.
So, you want me to put in $400 (or more) of equipment, pay someone $100 to do the work (plus have the liability insurance, truck, equipment, etc.), and you'll pay $15? Let me guess... you'll pay $100 for that new Cadillac. I'll bet you're a $0.25 tipper too at dinner.
We're in an age where cash rules. Don't got it? Be prepared to pay. I'm in a market where I have so many people willing to pay cash for it, that I have no need to provide financing for those who are hard up for the money. When you learn about financing companies, you'll learn that debt limit is a real issue in growth. For every customer I don't provide financing for, that leaves me room to expand further.
Anyways, with the low prime, don't be a parasite. Go out and finance it yourself (and save yourself the money). Ever notice thrifty people pay cash and don't make long term obligations? Or do you pay 21% for groceries and keep paying the minimum? Nothing like being a slave to a credit card company...
Pay cash, or wait in line... and keep waiting.
*scoove*
I listen to quite a bit of ebm and gothic/industrial, and I'd say the primary reason these are only niche music markets is that most people don't like them. They're simply not styles of music that most people like to listen to.
/are/ niche forms. I'll never forget my history of mass communications course back in school in the late 80s where we talked about the evolution of a medium from a general form to mass specialization. From Life magazine to thousands of magazines about everything you'd ever imagine.
*sigh* Thanks for giving me a good laugh. It's a very true statement, unfortunately (but hopefully I made my point with the reference). (And hey, I like Front 242! After a bunch of Apop, it just feels nice)
EBM, Goth, Industrial, etc.
RIAA, NAB and friends want to go back to a 1950s world where people ate what they were fed via media. They want to put the specialization genie back in the bottle. No cable. No Internet. No choices. Just think what I tell you to think. It'd work if we could just get a Stalin in our government, but unfortunately there are too many people that don't like the idea that it won't work (that's the bitch about freedom, eh?)
Honestly, any rational human would realize that the use of the radiowaves for broadcast is a mistake today. Limited airwaves are better for person to person communications or other forms - not for the broadcast of a few generalized forms.
Use other networks - digital ones (e.g. Internet) to allow people to select niche forms of entertainment.
So we'll see how it works out. It's no surprise to me that there is a good play for it in congress - between the Democratic party's hatred of individualism and the Republicans love for large corporations, RIAA would be stupid not to try to make their move before eliminated.
*scoove*
Who controls the RIAA's interdiction efforts?
Seems to me if the RIAA has justification in its style of frontier justice with people that steal its property, then Internet service providers are given carte blanche to trash RIAA.
Seriously, RIAA wants to pursue DoS on my network? That's theft of my backbone and local networks, potentially disrupting other customers - all because of a "suspicion" of illicit activity without a court order, due process, etc.
So RIAA, let me give you a few pointers to bone up on. Your attorneys and advisors may have not been aware of the consequences that will be imposed upon you by those who actually run the network you're a passenger of.
1. You're a guest here, like the P2P thief. If you suspect a thief, report it. Suspicion that one traveler on the Internet does not give you authority to crash the plane. Armani suits and pretty $350/hr attorneys does not make you worthy of running my network.
2. Hostile actions against our Internet will result in you being banned, black holed, or worse. Since we know how to run these things, expect us to know how to exact a consequence you probably won't like. A terrorist is a terrorist, regardless of whatever justification you claim.
3. Service providers, unlike the P2P thief, have attorneys and sufficient documentation to demonstrate significant financial harm caused by your irresponsibility, and will nail you to the cross for it. We're really not a good enemy to pick; we're geek enough to get it, and exec enough to know how to apply it. You've had little resistance so far by picking on little people. Try screwing with a telcom industry that is already on the defensive and ready to kick back.
You entertainment types are no match for the rogue survivors of the telcom depression. Go back to your pretty little world of the west wing, Michael Jackson albums and other useless, harmless play.
Don't tread on my network!
*scoove*
thanks to RIAA, those musicians will be forgoten forever
Obscure european bands from the 70s and 80s do not produce revenues for the colluding recording industry oligopoly.
Neither do innovative niche forms, like ebm, trance, gothic/industrial, etc. Such forms require music industry executives to actually have a clue about the music and has less need for slick MTV marketing formulas.
While we've all been worrying about RIAA, the death of shoutcast, pay-per-play licensed media, etc., many of us have missed the other side of the game being nailed by RIAA - their quiet partnership with the broadcast industry.
Emerging dominant broadcasters like ClearChannel (who were given the go ahead to roll up more than the previous FCC limit of stations per market, slaughtering local staffing, and running most of the programming remote from a central location) have become a favorite partner for RIAA firms - got a new Britney tune? Write ClearChannel a check and you're guaranteed airplay and CD sales.
ClearChannel's station rollup, the death of independent broadcasters, effective Congressional lobbying (my congress critters in both parties are strong supporters of RIAA and the National Association of Broadcasters/NAB), and Copyright Office hijinks might just put an end to creative music in the US.
Then again, someone's got to buy all of these awful things piling up in the warehouses...
*scoove*
"Linux is not like Novell, it isn't going to run out of money--it started off bankrupt, in a way." said Microsoft CEO Steve Balmer, as he noticed he could not pull up a ticker symbol for Linux on the NASDAQ or NYSE and concluded it could not be any sort of threat.
Wow... I've heard of confused paradigms and misunderstandings leading folks down the wrong path before, but this is amazing (and I think reflects a very deep fear and circling of wagon mentality coming from the top of Microsoft).
At a minimum, Balmer's comment here reflects a complete inability to grasp that the competition this time is different. It's not another Microsoft, another software company that they can pin a name to, use the same strategy and crush it through whatever mechanisms.
I just don't get it, Bill. I know there has to be an evil Linux conspiracy organization out there, but I can't find their headquarters. How can the Microsoft Storm Troopers 2.1(TM) infiltrate an enemy we cannot find?
It's intangible. It's an infectious meme. It'd be like King Charles I dismissing the threat of Parliment because they didn't possess a throne.
Not to get too esoteric, but I'd suggest Balmer read Milton's Areopagetica quickly. He might just learn the answer to all their inherent security problems, as well as the probable long term failure of the current strategy (which he apparently will ride to the ground given present thinking). Then again, maybe he shouldn't and business students can have a good case study of why closed source is a bad idea in the long run.
Closed source doesn't permit "grappling of truth and falsehood." It hides, obscures, conceals falsehoods (such as security problems or bugs) and relies upon official persons of the Microsoft kingdom to be allowed to discuss and determine what truth/falsehood is. Recent aggression with EULAs and service packs prohibiting public exposure of such defects nearly mirrors a sort of Star Chamber - a certification from Microsoft permitting one to speak (and those that criticize are not permitted).
Given the rapidly increasing defensiveness (much of which can be attributed to antitrust, I'd guess), I don't see an ability to change until its probably too late.
MILLIONS will be spent by vendors, contractors, etc. in training and otherwise getting up to speed on said Microsoft platforms
Isn't it interesting that in an era of budget cutbacks, lack of funds, etc., the DoI has millions to blow buying new toys?
Oh wait a second, here's a few spare billion lying around in a DoI file cabinet. Might as well spend it - hell, as Bruce Babbit would say, you give it back to the indians and they'll just blow it on booze.
*sigh*
scoove
And yet some broadband companies go out of their way to prevent Linux users from signing up.
Isn't that amusing? We're fortunate to have a young enough company culture (and use Linux - Redhat and Debian - inside for most of our systems except desktops, which run Win2K).
UNIX customers in general (Linux/BSD/etc) can be a real blessing, even though they occasionally consume resources like an entire school district. They represent another intelligent pair of eyes on your network looking out for potential problems - give them a good way to talk to you and you've got volunteer help!
On the other end of the spectrum...
My home broadband connection goes through a cox.net connection. As I run a Mikrotik-based VPN between home and the office (mostly so I don't have to drive in when I need to see the private network at 3AM), I have a few suggestions for other non-Windows broadband customers of larger providers:
- keep a Windows box handy next to the cable modem drop, and ready to run as the sole broadband device. This makes the installer people feel better when they come by - I had one drop by and see the 48-port patch panel, 5' rack, switches, routers, hubs, etc. and he got worried. (I told him it was an amateur radio project and he felt better)
- run your Windows box when you call in a trouble report; their people are trained to walk you through the basics (e.g. determining if your computer is turned on, if your network card is active, etc.) and even though you may know what the problem really is, you won't get to that point in their script unless you're able to work along with them in their "have to make sure the customer isn't doing something idiotic" checklist.
I once made the mistake of whispering the word "Linux" when on the phone with my provider when there was a problem.
Yea, platform bigotry is a problem - even for smarter folks like network engineers. I've had similar issues with Sprint dealing with our upstream circuits. We had a Sprint circuit bouncing every 70 seconds (even with a loopback plug in the smart jack... clue!) but when I accidentally mentioned our router was Mikrotik (with a slew of Cyclades T1 cards, a DS3 card, and misc other stuff), that immediately became the problem. It wasn't Cisco.
"That's the problem. You're set for HDLC and only Cisco does that. Your router won't work." He wouldn't listen to me tell him that Cyclades supports HDLC, nor would the loopback but still bouncing status help (and trust me, Mikrotik on a redundant P4 with this architecture kicks a Cisco 7500 - without the $100K price tag). We had to drag a Cisco back in and terminate the circuit there before Sprint would buy off that they had a problem. Oh well, it only cost them another two weeks of credit on the SLA... their money, not mine.
*scoove*
I'd pay $20 a month for something above 56k but below Cable/DSL, but such a thing doesn't exist, so I'll just wait until broadband is affordable.
A view from the other side of the table...
My company provides broadband to a bunch of small towns in a part of "fly-over country." Our service is $29.95 a month, and an installation of $250 (includes equipment).
Unfortunately, there is significant pressure to hike rates. Why? Customer support costs, mostly from crummy operating system software.
One out of two installs needs substantial work due to Win95/Win98/WinME configurations with years of clutter, garbage and registry hell. Dialup optimization tools messing with MTUs, mess all over (I reinstall my Win2K annually - apparently not many other people do). Customers don't understand that system maintenance is not our problem but theirs. They're like a 5'6" tall, 500 pound human who expects to run a marathon on broadband.
Then there's the monthly "I blew away my system config - help me fix it." Many calls require a great amount of support. Yet nobody wants to pay for support - "I'm paying you for service - I expect service, even if I mess up my computer." As if GM or Ford provided warrenties for stupidity, crashes, etc...
Our Linux customers are a dream. They know how to take care of their system, and understand that config screwups, system maintenance, etc. are their issue.
High prices for broadband unfortunately appear to be a Microsoft tax. Maybe we need to approach broadband the same way:
Linux, *BSD, & Mac: $29.95/month unlimited (Mac users are slow to upgrade their OS though... half of them we run into have ancient versions.. 6.?)
Windows95/ME: Upgrade (we already tell them that today)
Win98/NT/2K/XP: add $20/month for StupidOS tax unless you sign the "Surf at your own risk" disclaimer.
*scoove*
We also signed up for digital cable when Cox began offering and promoting it. We have Cox phone and cable Internet, so digital seemed like a nice thing to upgrade to.
That was until we saw the actual bill. Like the extra $8.00 phone line that actually cost $16.73 a month, digital cable came brought our combined bill to $205 per month (little things like unit rentals, taxes, fees, etc. add up). When we realized we never watched the dozen HBO channels (Sopranos looks the same on the basic HBO), only needed to see Groundhog Day once per day, digital PayPerView had the same annoying feature of starting the same movie at the same time across a half-dozen channels, we figured the only thing that was unique to digital cable was the music, and that wasn't worth an additional $100/month.
So we dropped it too.
*scoove*
and my PCMCIA 802.11b card sniffs not only the free WAP at the cafe proper
Which should be fine as long as the owner of the property consents to this use (which it appears is the case), and the other owners of what you're using also consent.
Is the upstream Internet connection aware and consenting to this use? If they're not, you're no more than a thief.
The problem with free Internet that people can't seem to get around is that you've got some things that aren't free, such as:
- the engineers that run the networks you're travelling
- the fiber, cable, submarine cables, etc. that someone put in and maintains
- the switches, routers, servers, etc. needed to run service provider networks (last time I looked, Cisco wasn't giving their stock away for free)
I work my ass off and have taken one hell of a pay cut to bring cheap broadband to small towns. I'll be damned if some freeloader steals from my communities. Let him build his own damn network and pay for his DS3.
evolution from shitstream teevee/radio corporate fuckfest
Oh, you mean like the radiofrequency givaway both parties have sponsored in the US? Or the rule bending for corporate buddies like Clear Channel (psst... donate to our parties and we'll let you own all the radio stations in every market so you can fire the local people and pump canned crap sent via satellite)? Funny how the RIAA loves this - course, they have artist promo deals with Clear Channel too. No wonder radio broadcasting is so vanilla...
In order to fight institutional theft, you've got to recognize property rights and oppose all theft - what belongs to someone else ain't yours! Pay for it or get your own. Otherwise you're just another thief (on the losing side of the battle, as they've got better guns).
*scoove*
the economics of utilities ... were worked out in the 1880s by marxists and other utopianists with an alternate agenda. Can you imagine Thomas Edison, Rockefeller, Hoffa or anyone else arguing that they should be smaller?
Of course they'll find an economist who will say allowing them to run an industry is the most efficient way to do things. Funny thing though how Standard Oil was broken up even though they were the most efficient producer...
An amusing anacdote is that this same agenda had been used by Microsoft to justify its "self-normalizing monopoly" claim. E.g. operating system costs spread over all PCs are lower with a monopoly, and there are no compatibility issues. In a sense, you can see the argument if this economic cost/unit objective is the only criteria you use.
However, there are other consequences, political, economic, behavioral, etc. Monopolies have a slight problem with ending up unaccountable. Fantasies of government regulation aside, the regulators quickly normalize to either being in the monopoly's pay, or get replaced by pro-monopoly officials. Or you'll have scenarios where the regulators control the power and grow their monopoly through special deals with select associates, kickbacks, etc.
Look at the status of both US political parties - both are nearly identical in that they're run by large organizations pursuing dominance in their industry/sector. It doesn't matter if its a union, a fortune 1000, or an industry association, the motivation is the same (and so is the corrution). Enron, RIAA, AFL-CIO, Global Crossing, NAB, etc.
As any honest German will tell you, efficiency shouldn't be your only objective.
*scoove*