Cable modems are shared with fewer users than a typical cell site. In addition, cable companies have the option of allocating more channels on the cable plant for data and/or splitting the node so it's shared with fewer customers.
The one advantage that 3G technology has over satellite Internet comes from the "cell" in cellular: more towers mean more capacity.
Right, except that putting up more towers is an expensive and time consuming undertaking. The cable company can split it's node without offending local community groups and needing to obtain permission to build towers. There also comes a point with wireless technology wherein neighboring cells and devices will start to interfere with each other. This is reduced with modern digital technology but not eliminated -- see the near-far problem with CDMA for an example.
True. I understand the point of caps, but some providers use surprisingly low caps as a crutch to avoid having to invest in their networks after a shift in usage habits.
Verizon Wireless actually never intended to use their data network for consumers. They built it out intending to market it to business types looking for remote connectivity for VPN purposes. Such users typically need low latency more than they need sustained bandwidth. The smartphone/mobile data revolution came as a bit of a surprise to them and they deem the caps necessary to ensure a decent quality of service for their business customers.
One can argue that they should have planned better or that competition should result in larger caps but I think that ship has sailed for the 3G network. It will be interesting to see how they handle the 4G rollout. I would imagine they'll still need caps but I don't think they'll be able to justify such absurdity low ones any longer. Sooner or later one of the carriers will realize this and use it as a club to beat their competitors over the head with. They do actually compete with each other an extent -- a few years ago unlimited calling and SMS plans would have been unthinkable -- it just takes a long time for them to do it. I blame that more on the bureaucracy of a large corporation than a master design to collude and keep prices high/caps low.
I write "Check ID" on the signature field of my credit/debit cards
I hope you realize that by doing that you've voided your credit card. Read the little blurb under the signature panel, it says "Authorized signature, not valid unless signed."
If you handed that card to me in my days behind the register I would have refused to use it. Read the Visa/MC merchant agreements -- merchants who follow them aren't allowed to accept such a card.
Comparing a signature is pointless. It only takes a few minutes to learn to forge something that's passable to untrained eyes.
What makes you think your typical teenage brat/criminal punk who stole a credit card is this sophisticated? I've caught stolen credit cards in my days behind the register -- they never even made an attempt to match the signatures. In fact they seemed surprised that I bothered to check them. My employer was one of the few who was smart enough to follow his merchant agreement to the letter -- consequently we never had any chargebacks in the time that I worked there.
Does anyone really have a problem with pulling out an ID when making a purchase? You're already pulling out one card. Is it really too much trouble to show a second?
Yes, I do. The merchant agreement they sign doesn't give them the right to ask for ID, unless your card is unsigned or the signatures don't match up. I refuse to show ID as a matter of principle. If they push the matter I'll file a complaint with Visa and/or Mastercard.
Except that in certain cases the merchant is the one responsible for the loss. For instance, they are supposed to compare your signature on the charge slip to the signature on the back of the card. This simple step would stop a large number of illicit transactions using stolen credit cards but most merchants can't be bothered -- even though the agreement they signed to accept credit cards says this is part of the process.
Mind you, that wouldn't help with ID theft, but I don't think it's fair to ask the bank to eat the loss in an instance where due diligence on the part of the merchant could have prevented it.
Find a bank that isn't run by assholes. The girls at my local community bank know who I am, never ask me for ID and never give me any issues cashing a check. Do business with an outfit that sees you as a person rather than someone who is looking to rip them off.
If you steal someone's identity and scam a bank out of $1,000, then there is more than one victim: namely, the person whose identity you stole, and the bank (or broadly, its shareholders)
If the ID theft involved a credit card account then you can add the merchant(s) to your list of victims. When a credit card charge is disrupted it's the merchant who winds up taking the hit.
Ford's Pinto comes to mind as does the recent Toyota situation
The "Toyota situation" has been blown completely out of proportion. Whatever problems may exist with Toyota automobiles have long since been buried under sensationalist "OMG, if you own a Toyota you are going to die!!!" media headlines and politicians looking to build "I'm tough on big business" street cred. It's been alleged that 37 people have died due to problems with Toyota's in the last ten years. That's a drop in the bucket compared to the number of people who have died in old fashioned automobile accidents. Even if you accept that all of those were due to a design flaw (which hasn't been proven yet) it hardly seems worth all of this FUD.
I don't own a Toyota but if I did I wouldn't be afraid to drive it. I'd be more worried about getting killed because of the stupidity of a fellow driver than I would be about being killed by a design flaw in my own automobile.
The fact that they "have" to use it doesn't change the underlying limitations of the technology. Wireless is a shared medium -- a handful of bandwidth hogs will ruin the service for everyone else. The only way to address this is to add more channels to your wireless data services -- but the cellular providers only have so much spectrum and it costs billions of dollars to purchase more.
Now we can argue about the 5GB cap and whether or not they really need such a low cap to ensure quality service -- but the fact remains that there's no feasible way with existing wireless technology to provide unlimited service and a decent level of service at the same time.
It's also handy for keeping track of your beer cans and half smoked bowls of weed too;)
What's the difference between a stoned driver and a drunk driver? A drunk driver blows through the stop sign without even slowing down. The stoned driver stops at the stop sign and waits for it to turn green.
I moved two months ago, from an apartment with 100/100Mb to this one, where I can only get 30/30Mb. Now it takes minutes to download the latest 24/Caprica/In Plain Sight/Criminal Minds etc.
Where are you downloading those TV episodes from that you can peg a 30mbit connection, let alone a 100mbit connection? I've never been able to peg my 15mbit connection with torrents for such content (though I can peg it with well seeded torrents for Linux distros and the like) and most of the legal sources of such content that I'm aware of use steaming rather than downloading.
With the way the airline industry is progressing these days, I have this image in my mind of a cabin depressurization. Instead of oxygen masks dropping from the ceiling you would see a credit card reader. "Please swipe your credit card to receive 15 minutes of oxygen."
Of course passengers in first class would get complementary oxygen......
I said to myself 'there is no way this dud is a counselor or care-giver at a social service agency.'
No, the counselors are even more cynical than I am.
Your resentment has an interesting way of surfacing.
Resentment? Yes, I resent the fact that some lowlife who offers her child up for sexual services is allowed to breathe the same air that I do. As far as I'm concerned such a person is a waste of resources and it would be a public service to put them out of our collective misery.
But please, go on condemning me for having the audacity to call out that kind of behavior for what it is.
There are those in the social strata above you who would hold YOU 'accountable (which is a euphemism for 'live up to my standards or else') for your choices.
Let them. I've never made a choice that placed someone in my care in harms way for my own selfish ends. I will stand in front of any of my fellow citizens and justify the choices I've made in my life.
sounds like you hate your job. why are you working there, loser?
No, I love my job, I just hate the people it brings me into contact with.
a lot of times the people who do those things figure they've got no choice
No choice? There's always a choice. You are seriously going to tell me that somebody who burns his kids with cigarettes or prostitutes them out to cover drug debts had no choice? Give me a fucking break. Put away your ideology and review the behaviors that you are defending.
Contrary to what you might believe, New York State is a pretty conservative place
Bullshit. I've lived here (Broome/Chenango County area) all my life. Upstate has some elements of fiscal conservatism but not much cultural conservatism. Why do you think that the Republicans who've won statewide office invariably turn out to be anti-gun and pro-choice?
Oddly enough, the conservative areas depend on a handout from the liberal City to pay its bills.
And the "liberal City" depends on the "conservative areas" for it's water supply. I'll make you a deal -- NYC can stop paying state income taxes once it relinquishes the watershed areas in the Catskills.
You confuse cynicism with a lack of passion. I care greatly for the clients that we service. I just think that the people who fucked them up badly enough to require our services aren't deserving of any further consideration from civilized society.
Also, fuck you. I'll work wherever the hell I feel like, thank you very much.
No, that would probably rise to the level of deadly force:
"Deadly physical force" means physical force which, under the circumstances in which it is used, is readily capable of causing death or other serious physical injury.
Stop being so selfish, and let someone called to this line of work have your position.
I didn't say I was direct care. I'm the IT person at my particular agency. You couldn't pay me enough to work in a direct care role. If I did work in such a role I would have been arrested a long time ago for beating the shit out of some "parent" that abused one of my clients.
Slashdot Mirror
Cable modems are also a shared medium
Cable modems are shared with fewer users than a typical cell site. In addition, cable companies have the option of allocating more channels on the cable plant for data and/or splitting the node so it's shared with fewer customers.
The one advantage that 3G technology has over satellite Internet comes from the "cell" in cellular: more towers mean more capacity.
Right, except that putting up more towers is an expensive and time consuming undertaking. The cable company can split it's node without offending local community groups and needing to obtain permission to build towers. There also comes a point with wireless technology wherein neighboring cells and devices will start to interfere with each other. This is reduced with modern digital technology but not eliminated -- see the near-far problem with CDMA for an example.
True. I understand the point of caps, but some providers use surprisingly low caps as a crutch to avoid having to invest in their networks after a shift in usage habits.
Verizon Wireless actually never intended to use their data network for consumers. They built it out intending to market it to business types looking for remote connectivity for VPN purposes. Such users typically need low latency more than they need sustained bandwidth. The smartphone/mobile data revolution came as a bit of a surprise to them and they deem the caps necessary to ensure a decent quality of service for their business customers.
One can argue that they should have planned better or that competition should result in larger caps but I think that ship has sailed for the 3G network. It will be interesting to see how they handle the 4G rollout. I would imagine they'll still need caps but I don't think they'll be able to justify such absurdity low ones any longer. Sooner or later one of the carriers will realize this and use it as a club to beat their competitors over the head with. They do actually compete with each other an extent -- a few years ago unlimited calling and SMS plans would have been unthinkable -- it just takes a long time for them to do it. I blame that more on the bureaucracy of a large corporation than a master design to collude and keep prices high/caps low.
I write "Check ID" on the signature field of my credit/debit cards
I hope you realize that by doing that you've voided your credit card. Read the little blurb under the signature panel, it says "Authorized signature, not valid unless signed."
If you handed that card to me in my days behind the register I would have refused to use it. Read the Visa/MC merchant agreements -- merchants who follow them aren't allowed to accept such a card.
Comparing a signature is pointless. It only takes a few minutes to learn to forge something that's passable to untrained eyes.
What makes you think your typical teenage brat/criminal punk who stole a credit card is this sophisticated? I've caught stolen credit cards in my days behind the register -- they never even made an attempt to match the signatures. In fact they seemed surprised that I bothered to check them. My employer was one of the few who was smart enough to follow his merchant agreement to the letter -- consequently we never had any chargebacks in the time that I worked there.
Does anyone really have a problem with pulling out an ID when making a purchase? You're already pulling out one card. Is it really too much trouble to show a second?
Yes, I do. The merchant agreement they sign doesn't give them the right to ask for ID, unless your card is unsigned or the signatures don't match up. I refuse to show ID as a matter of principle. If they push the matter I'll file a complaint with Visa and/or Mastercard.
Except that in certain cases the merchant is the one responsible for the loss. For instance, they are supposed to compare your signature on the charge slip to the signature on the back of the card. This simple step would stop a large number of illicit transactions using stolen credit cards but most merchants can't be bothered -- even though the agreement they signed to accept credit cards says this is part of the process.
Mind you, that wouldn't help with ID theft, but I don't think it's fair to ask the bank to eat the loss in an instance where due diligence on the part of the merchant could have prevented it.
Find a bank that isn't run by assholes. The girls at my local community bank know who I am, never ask me for ID and never give me any issues cashing a check. Do business with an outfit that sees you as a person rather than someone who is looking to rip them off.
If you steal someone's identity and scam a bank out of $1,000, then there is more than one victim: namely, the person whose identity you stole, and the bank (or broadly, its shareholders)
If the ID theft involved a credit card account then you can add the merchant(s) to your list of victims. When a credit card charge is disrupted it's the merchant who winds up taking the hit.
Ford's Pinto comes to mind as does the recent Toyota situation
The "Toyota situation" has been blown completely out of proportion. Whatever problems may exist with Toyota automobiles have long since been buried under sensationalist "OMG, if you own a Toyota you are going to die!!!" media headlines and politicians looking to build "I'm tough on big business" street cred. It's been alleged that 37 people have died due to problems with Toyota's in the last ten years. That's a drop in the bucket compared to the number of people who have died in old fashioned automobile accidents. Even if you accept that all of those were due to a design flaw (which hasn't been proven yet) it hardly seems worth all of this FUD.
I don't own a Toyota but if I did I wouldn't be afraid to drive it. I'd be more worried about getting killed because of the stupidity of a fellow driver than I would be about being killed by a design flaw in my own automobile.
Also, self-deprecating is not a way to get ahead in politics.
Says who? Were you paying attention from 2000 to 2008?
The fact that they "have" to use it doesn't change the underlying limitations of the technology. Wireless is a shared medium -- a handful of bandwidth hogs will ruin the service for everyone else. The only way to address this is to add more channels to your wireless data services -- but the cellular providers only have so much spectrum and it costs billions of dollars to purchase more.
Now we can argue about the 5GB cap and whether or not they really need such a low cap to ensure quality service -- but the fact remains that there's no feasible way with existing wireless technology to provide unlimited service and a decent level of service at the same time.
You could just tailgate one with an unsecured network ;)
It's also handy for keeping track of your beer cans and half smoked bowls of weed too ;)
What's the difference between a stoned driver and a drunk driver? A drunk driver blows through the stop sign without even slowing down. The stoned driver stops at the stop sign and waits for it to turn green.
I moved two months ago, from an apartment with 100/100Mb to this one, where I can only get 30/30Mb. Now it takes minutes to download the latest 24/Caprica/In Plain Sight/Criminal Minds etc.
Where are you downloading those TV episodes from that you can peg a 30mbit connection, let alone a 100mbit connection? I've never been able to peg my 15mbit connection with torrents for such content (though I can peg it with well seeded torrents for Linux distros and the like) and most of the legal sources of such content that I'm aware of use steaming rather than downloading.
Actually, now that I look at it, even in the fine print do they not disclose any kind of cap on transfer.
RTFA. He is talking about their wireless data plans, not their wireline data plans.
That's too bad, because nothing goes better with sushi than a nice glass of sapporo....
With the way the airline industry is progressing these days, I have this image in my mind of a cabin depressurization. Instead of oxygen masks dropping from the ceiling you would see a credit card reader. "Please swipe your credit card to receive 15 minutes of oxygen."
Of course passengers in first class would get complementary oxygen......
I said to myself 'there is no way this dud is a counselor or care-giver at a social service agency.'
No, the counselors are even more cynical than I am.
Your resentment has an interesting way of surfacing.
Resentment? Yes, I resent the fact that some lowlife who offers her child up for sexual services is allowed to breathe the same air that I do. As far as I'm concerned such a person is a waste of resources and it would be a public service to put them out of our collective misery.
But please, go on condemning me for having the audacity to call out that kind of behavior for what it is.
I'm reasonably certain that electrocution poses the risk of serious physical injury and/or death.
There are those in the social strata above you who would hold YOU 'accountable (which is a euphemism for 'live up to my standards or else') for your choices.
Let them. I've never made a choice that placed someone in my care in harms way for my own selfish ends. I will stand in front of any of my fellow citizens and justify the choices I've made in my life.
sounds like you hate your job. why are you working there, loser?
No, I love my job, I just hate the people it brings me into contact with.
a lot of times the people who do those things figure they've got no choice
No choice? There's always a choice. You are seriously going to tell me that somebody who burns his kids with cigarettes or prostitutes them out to cover drug debts had no choice? Give me a fucking break. Put away your ideology and review the behaviors that you are defending.
but you DON'T EVEN WORK WITH THEM DIRECTLY AND LIKELY MAY NOT KNOW ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Put away your bleeding heart. There are no circumstances that justify the abuse of children under your charge.
Contrary to what you might believe, New York State is a pretty conservative place
Bullshit. I've lived here (Broome/Chenango County area) all my life. Upstate has some elements of fiscal conservatism but not much cultural conservatism. Why do you think that the Republicans who've won statewide office invariably turn out to be anti-gun and pro-choice?
Oddly enough, the conservative areas depend on a handout from the liberal City to pay its bills.
And the "liberal City" depends on the "conservative areas" for it's water supply. I'll make you a deal -- NYC can stop paying state income taxes once it relinquishes the watershed areas in the Catskills.
Who said I'm not happy and successful?
You confuse cynicism with a lack of passion. I care greatly for the clients that we service. I just think that the people who fucked them up badly enough to require our services aren't deserving of any further consideration from civilized society.
Also, fuck you. I'll work wherever the hell I feel like, thank you very much.
No, that would probably rise to the level of deadly force:
"Deadly physical force" means physical force which, under the circumstances in which it is used, is readily capable of causing death or other serious physical injury.
Stop being so selfish, and let someone called to this line of work have your position.
I didn't say I was direct care. I'm the IT person at my particular agency. You couldn't pay me enough to work in a direct care role. If I did work in such a role I would have been arrested a long time ago for beating the shit out of some "parent" that abused one of my clients.