Yep, but that doesn't explain why other countries that are even more decentralized are kicking America's ass. There is no appreciable statistical correlation. Plus, even if there were a correlation, the excuse that America is diffuse is a pretty weak excuse for the technological and economic backwardness we're exhibiting with broadband.
I had both broadband from cable and DSL here at one time or other and now am on dial-up. Why? mainly because there is nothing worth the cost of broadband. I'll list just a few...
1.) Why do you need to pay for broadband if all you do is a handful of websites and email? Answer, you don't.
2.) The cost of broadband far outstrips the cost of dial-up.
3.) There are at most only 6 providers of broadband in the US. That is far to few to realistically say they are competitive especially when the telcos / cable are granted monopoly powers in any given community. Most small communities only have two broadband providers (usually cable and DSL through their telco). Some more rural ones don't even have that.
4.) It is far to easy with broadband to be tempted to do something illegal and wind up on the MAFIAA hit list. Add to that the wider target you present to hackers by having an "alway on" connection and it is little wonder that the botnet situation is way out of control.
In summary, broadband was a fad I went through and find no longer worth the effort and expense and risk.
You aren't entirely correct. The westward expansion and breakup of "the square states" is due mostly to the homestead act. The land was divided based on that act. The railroad and farther west the stage coach way stations are where you find centers of population. Mining interests played a big part in the settlement as well.
It goes far beyond that. Remember, these kids not only have a criminal record but by law they must register as sex offenders and be tracked the rest of their lives. Publicly humiliated by having that tracking posted to the Internet and never get a job because of it especially if that job is anywhere near other kids...
It does raise an interesting quandary though. Now that they are sex offenders, does that mean they are restricted from going to school?
Open Source provides alternatives to everyone, but OSS is tailored to the way the software programmers want things to be. Proprietary software is written to meet the end user demands in the open market. Choice lets users decided when to use the best software for you.
The problem with your little theory here is that the proprietary world is gaming your little system. Things like patents, copyright term extensions, monopolistic abuse of OEMs, hardware vendor lock-in, and file format lock-in all play their part in destroying your "free market" idea. How free are you when you are forced to accept a proprietary file format that requires a proprietary program to open? How free are you when programmers can't get the specs for hardware to make them work no matter the OS? How free are you when you get slapped with a law suit for simply sharing? There comes a time when one has to say enough is enough and stand up for their values. So you can either fight for your freedom or lie down and have it eroded. I prefer to fight!
Umm....You are confusing me with the guy who went into "web development"...
I have my degrees both in math and CS. My argument is the death of CS at least in my University was the math requirement. I plodded on through the math BECAUSE it was a requirement for what I wanted. You still don't address the high attrition rate this program has. I find that telling...
"Who woulda thunk that "computer" science would have something to do with math."
Computer science does have a lot to do with math but is it reasonable to expect 24 hours of math when 36 hours gets you a degree in math? That is exactly what my CS program required. Most (if not all) CS majors here were dual majors because of this.
It got so bad that my college has since dropped the entire program because of the high drop rate. To put it bluntly, they were taking in 30-40 students a semester and graduating 5-7! Hell of an attrition rate there. And of the 5-7 that graduated ALL had to leave the state to get jobs.
So yes, math is a big part of CS but there has got to be better ways to handle it.
I recently tried to contact Rockwell Collins about manufacturing a part, however I ran into their spam blocker. Apparently, anyone who does not own their own netblock gets marked as a spammer. This means that small businesses, like mine, have problems contacting companies like this.
There is a marvelous technology called a telephone. You might want to consider it...
Spam has become so pervasive that some companies are completely paranoid about that. As for Rockwell Collins, I can understand them not wanting to get a visus that compromised a sensitive project on their network. But this brings up the crux of the problem: should companies assume that any IP in a dynamic range is a spammer email?
The answer is yes. This is a result of the zombies that are sending out trillions of spam a day. You stated your fix yourself, use you ISP's legitimate server. The choice from a receiving point of view is a no brainer....Block hosts that aren't supposed to be sending email or get snowed under by the zombies....
I like plain text or html files much better, they are far more efficient, reliable and compatible.
Plain text and HTML are far from "compatible". You lose formatting, layout, and readibility not to mention that those formats don't print very well. Another thing that you lose is the permanence of it. I can scan a signed document into PDF and be assured it will stay the same. The only wat to achieve that is to use HTML (a 50% reduction in your choices right off the bat) and scan it as an image.
... it demonstrates that open standards and open source strategies are really becoming a mainstream concept in the software industry.
I see nothing of that. When they open source Photoshop then we will know they support open source strategies. Until then, they are simply taking the path of least resistance.
"This decision at least allows some competition, which in theory should encourage Comcast to come out with a better box. Of coarse, what would really be useful would be for them to allow the sale of standalone cablecard readers that could be installed in any home theater pc, but they're much to obsessed with content control for that to happen."
Actually, from what I can see, this ruling would benefit the maker of just such a device. Content control is only an excuse much like the same they make about any other recording device.
"How about a software subscription service where you own the server and the data stays on your hard drive, but the software is on a network filesystem?"
It still won't work for many reasons. First, it requires an "always on" broadband network connection that far too many people don't have and feel they don't need. Second, the security risk is too high. Too many of these companies will sell whatever isn't nailed down especially your data. Even though you may retain a copy of your data locally, nothing is stopping these companies from also keeping a copy on their server. Third, people don't like to rent what they feel they should own. Ownership is a big part of human behavior that can't be ignored. Just ask the **AA about it. Lastly, it has been tried many times in the past with disastrous results. If this guy can't learn from the past, he is doomed to repeat the same mistakes.
"It's very, VERY distracting. Pair that with the need to crank up the volume when it goes to commercial. Ugh. Drives me batty. I get to the point that I mute the TV when it goes to commercial."
That's because the FCC authorized the average volume of advertising can equal the peak volume of any given show (up to a max predetermined level). The louder the show, the louder the advertising. It is a constant race.
Phillips made a TV that "auto-mutes" advertising (SmartMute(TM) it is called). My neighbor has one and I saw it in action. Pretty slick if you ask me.
I won't go into the Groklaw pro/anti FUD mill but I will address a few things you said here...
What makes it a good idea? Read what IBM had to say about it. Or Goldman Sachs. It's about interoperability - something Novell built a reputation on starting with the very earliest versions of NetWare. I've worked in IT, and without exception, knowing that I had to deal with Microsoft components in the infrastructure at some point, it was absolutely frustrating beyond belief knowing that I *had* to have them (because people decided MS technology was necessary and refused to look at anything else) and to know that Microsoft was going to make it as difficult as possible for me to use anything in addition to their technology. I fought for *years* to get people to look at better technologies than the stuff MS puts out in order to get the job done in a better way.
Why is it that whenever some talks "interoperability" it is always the Open Standards following people that have to bow to proprietary ones? ODF is an open standard that Microsoft can (and should) implement easily and freely but they choose to close it up. Novell is OK with that according to their agreement. Why should proponents of open standards be forced, yes I said forced, to bow to a company that only wants to lock people into one product be it Novell's or Microsoft's?
I look at the agreement as an opportunity. Is there a possibility of badness? Absolutely, there always is when competitors try to cooperate, especially when one of them is notorious for being a bad partner, and who has burned Novell in the past.
No, the "opportunity" Novell missed here was to take a stand AGAINST software patents. Instead, they chose to perpetuate the fraud known as "method patents" and worse, made a deal with a company known for back stabbing their "partners".
There are 2 old sayings that I think apply here....
1) Burn me once, shame on you. Burn me twice, shame on me!
2) Don't piss down my back and tell me it is raining!
... they make the assumption that all of the developers who work for Novell suddenly gave up their OSS scruples and are going to "inject trojan code" into the projects they work on. What message does *that* send about the OSS community - that their principles are for sale?
It is the nature of patents. Code that Novell (or anyone else for that matter) submits to OOo Should be scrutinized to the Nth degree. After all, Novell made a covenant with Microsoft to use their "IP" (whatever the hell that is). I'm not saying Novell's developers would purposely inject bad code, but unless you are willing to get your employer to implement a verifiable "clean-room" implementation for code you are submitting, I for one would err on the side of caution. The cost of defending against patent infringement are too high not to.
"You'd think that Novell could have filed this lawsuit a year or three ago instead of waiting till right before SCO vs IBM goes to trial (in a few months)."
You'd think....
"Why try to kill the lawsuit at this point? It's already imploding under the weight of SCO's garbage."
It doesn't kill the IBM lawsuit only the SCO claims. The more you can chisel the claims down, the better. IBM still has the counter-claims. Even if the judge grants this PSJ, there is still the IBM CCs to deal with.
"Thieves don't need to steal the packaging, just what's in it. They just slash the packaging open with a razor."
And the noise it creates as well as the obviously cut up package they leave behind makes it far easier to catch them than if it was not in the packaging.
It's my understanding that IE has a privileged role because it is used to render HTML in other places in the OS - help files and whatnot if I'm not completely mistaken. This seems like a fairly logical reuse of existing code, and I recall that it was due to engineering reasons that IE was bundled in the first place. I do think it was a mistake, but it's harder to remember why now. All operating systems include browsers now - offering any kind of OS without some sort of web browser would be fairly ridiculous now (aside from server OS I suppose).
Although it has bitten them in the ass, IE wasn't incorporated for its rendering engine. There were several reasons to include it into the OS one being to win the browser wars (more on this later).
First, browser integration into the OS is a necessary first step to their "OS as a service" business model they have been trying to push. If you could make the OS indistinguishable from the Internet, people are more likely to accept this model.
Second, it provides a "common interface" for both local and remote operations supposedly making development easier. Whether this is true or not I can't say but it is often given as a reason.
Lastly, they were late to the Internet party and had competitors to deal with (namely Netscape). Microsoft executives go into convulsions if something technical becomes successful and they don't have a hand in the pie.
True. However, I would like to point out that the Netscape vs IE thing was at least partially Netscape's fault. I didn't stop using Netscape way back when because IE was included with windows - I stopped using it because IE was better. I know it's hard to believe, but IE was actually the best browser at one point. Heck, IE being bundled with windows certainly isn't stopping me from using Firefox now, and I will continue to use Firefox until something better comes around, which will surely happen at some point.
Part of the reason Netscape had problems on the Windows platform was because of the browser wars. Microsoft routinely hides API calls from competitors that they are using to make the appearance that competing software is inferior. Netscape wasn't the only competitor in the browser wars but they were the biggest. There was also Mozilla that is still fighting the fight although their Firefox (as you point out) is gaining huge ground.
Although you may not use IE, it still leaves you with a huge security risk that you can't get rid of. The integration into the OS makes it a hiding tiger waiting to bite you in the backside when you aren't looking.
I can't speak to OS X in particular but I know it depends on the browser you are using. For example, Mozilla uses the Gecko engine while Konqueror uses KHTML. For an incomplete list see:
"I don't know if the intent is to be clever with packaging, prevent theft, but it's gotten so bad I have started factoring in how much pain the packaging looks to promise vs. how much I want the product. Sounds silly, but after a few plastic cuts for a couple of two-buck knick knacks..."
There are reasons to use these plastic gimmicks;
1) It is easy to package and can be done mechanically. 2) It is difficult for a thief to nick it. 3) It is bulky so if the thief stuffs it in their pocket, it is easily identifiable. 4) Items in it stay where they were put when encased. This prevents damage when shipping as well as makes display uniform.
and lastly... 5) Nobody really has taken corporate management to task for this so reasons 1-4 outweigh 5.
The only question I got is does the plastic really need to be that thick?
To play Devil's advocate (hey, I'm in Gentoo) You are talking about servers versus single user systems. Linux isn't in the same class target wise as Windows simply because it isn't the OS of choice for Joe Sixpack. When that happens, I feel you will see just as many stupidly successful attacks as you see today in Windows. Why? Because the targets will be those same people that use "password" or "12345" for their security. Remember, rootkits existed for *nix long before they existed for Windows. The security of any system, be it Linux, Unix, Windows, OS X, etc... Is solely dependent on the one at the keyboard and unfortunately all too often that person is an idiot.
Many of the comments here aren't focusing on the real root...Bureaucracies...
Schools are bureaucracies and as such process large amounts of average people. When presented with problems, bureaucracies tend to come to a screeching halt. "Special needs" kids just like "gifted" kids are round pegs in a square holed bureaucracy. There isn't enough of either group to justify their own school in a community and you can't just ignore them and let them drop through the cracks of society. I don't buy the notion that there is nothing that should be done to identify the correct level of a child and assign them appropriate work for that level. One solution that has never been explored to my knowledge is the elimination of the classical grade levels you have in schools and place children in classes according to their educational ability. Education should be a tailored experience to each student. If a student is good at math but poor in English, it makes little sense to hold them back in math because they are poor in English. That is what established grade levels do.
This is why. Sit there for a moment and consider just what exactly is "Total Cost of Ownership"? In a nutshell it is hardware+software+training+support. You will always have the same formula be it Windows or Linux. So let's break it down...
Windows: Hardware: $$$$ (As needed to support new OS) Software: $$$$ (Yearly license fees) Training: $$$$ (As you add new people. If you are going to save it may be here since Microsoft's dominant position in the market make it feasible that employees already know the system) Support: $$$$ (Yearly or on an "as needed" basis)
Linux: Hardware: $$$$ (As needed to support OS but older hardware will work and in fact may work better than newer hardware) Software: ---- (No cost at all if you stay solely FOSS) Training: $$$$ (As you add new people. Here is where the cost may go up) Support: $$$$ (Yearly for the first few years then "As needed" basis. Cost can be high here to start but should go down as you progress)
So you see, right from the start you have a savings in Linux. The only way to save with Microsoft is if they "cheat" and undercut on their license fees. The assumption (often wrong) that is made in the Windows TCO studies is that training costs will be low since "everyone is likely to know Windows" already. It would be interesting to follow a large organization as they deploy Vista. By that I mean follow the TCO from day one. That will give you a huge clue on the true TCO.
B.
Re:1% by number of pages, 99% by bandwidth consume
on
Internet Only 1% Porn
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Add to that the different avenues to pr0n (P2P, Usenet, IRC, etc) that this study didn't even consider that is likely to raise that 1% some. All-in-all, I still think (right or wrong) that pr0n is a big motivator for Internet access especially broadband.
Slashdot Mirror
I had both broadband from cable and DSL here at one time or other and now am on dial-up. Why? mainly because there is nothing worth the cost of broadband. I'll list just a few...
1.) Why do you need to pay for broadband if all you do is a handful of websites and email? Answer, you don't.
2.) The cost of broadband far outstrips the cost of dial-up.
3.) There are at most only 6 providers of broadband in the US. That is far to few to realistically say they are competitive especially when the telcos / cable are granted monopoly powers in any given community. Most small communities only have two broadband providers (usually cable and DSL through their telco). Some more rural ones don't even have that.
4.) It is far to easy with broadband to be tempted to do something illegal and wind up on the MAFIAA hit list. Add to that the wider target you present to hackers by having an "alway on" connection and it is little wonder that the botnet situation is way out of control.
In summary, broadband was a fad I went through and find no longer worth the effort and expense and risk.
B.
You aren't entirely correct. The westward expansion and breakup of "the square states" is due mostly to the homestead act. The land was divided based on that act. The railroad and farther west the stage coach way stations are where you find centers of population. Mining interests played a big part in the settlement as well.
B.
It goes far beyond that. Remember, these kids not only have a criminal record but by law they must register as sex offenders and be tracked the rest of their lives. Publicly humiliated by having that tracking posted to the Internet and never get a job because of it especially if that job is anywhere near other kids...
It does raise an interesting quandary though. Now that they are sex offenders, does that mean they are restricted from going to school?
B.
B.
Umm....You are confusing me with the guy who went into "web development"...
I have my degrees both in math and CS. My argument is the death of CS at least in my University was the math requirement. I plodded on through the math BECAUSE it was a requirement for what I wanted. You still don't address the high attrition rate this program has. I find that telling...
B.
"Who woulda thunk that "computer" science would have something to do with math."
Computer science does have a lot to do with math but is it reasonable to expect 24 hours of math when 36 hours gets you a degree in math? That is exactly what my CS program required. Most (if not all) CS majors here were dual majors because of this.
It got so bad that my college has since dropped the entire program because of the high drop rate. To put it bluntly, they were taking in 30-40 students a semester and graduating 5-7! Hell of an attrition rate there. And of the 5-7 that graduated ALL had to leave the state to get jobs.
So yes, math is a big part of CS but there has got to be better ways to handle it.
B.
B.
B.
B.
"This decision at least allows some competition, which in theory should encourage Comcast to come out with a better box. Of coarse, what would really be useful would be for them to allow the sale of standalone cablecard readers that could be installed in any home theater pc, but they're much to obsessed with content control for that to happen."
Actually, from what I can see, this ruling would benefit the maker of just such a device. Content control is only an excuse much like the same they make about any other recording device.
B.
For a newbie?!?!?! Are you stoned!
Then again, no better way to learn Linux than from the ground up....;-)
B.
Disclaimer:
Proud Gentoo user since 2004
Linux version 2.6.18-gentoo-r5 (gcc version 4.1.1 (Gentoo 4.1.1-r1)) #1 SMP Thu Dec 15 21:24:08 EST 2006
"How about a software subscription service where you own the server and the data stays on your hard drive, but the software is on a network filesystem?"
It still won't work for many reasons. First, it requires an "always on" broadband network connection that far too many people don't have and feel they don't need. Second, the security risk is too high. Too many of these companies will sell whatever isn't nailed down especially your data. Even though you may retain a copy of your data locally, nothing is stopping these companies from also keeping a copy on their server. Third, people don't like to rent what they feel they should own. Ownership is a big part of human behavior that can't be ignored. Just ask the **AA about it. Lastly, it has been tried many times in the past with disastrous results. If this guy can't learn from the past, he is doomed to repeat the same mistakes.
B.
"It's very, VERY distracting. Pair that with the need to crank up the volume when it goes to commercial. Ugh. Drives me batty. I get to the point that I mute the TV when it goes to commercial."
That's because the FCC authorized the average volume of advertising can equal the peak volume of any given show (up to a max predetermined level). The louder the show, the louder the advertising. It is a constant race.
Phillips made a TV that "auto-mutes" advertising (SmartMute(TM) it is called). My neighbor has one and I saw it in action. Pretty slick if you ask me.
B.
Why is it that whenever some talks "interoperability" it is always the Open Standards following people that have to bow to proprietary ones? ODF is an open standard that Microsoft can (and should) implement easily and freely but they choose to close it up. Novell is OK with that according to their agreement. Why should proponents of open standards be forced, yes I said forced, to bow to a company that only wants to lock people into one product be it Novell's or Microsoft's?
No, the "opportunity" Novell missed here was to take a stand AGAINST software patents. Instead, they chose to perpetuate the fraud known as "method patents" and worse, made a deal with a company known for back stabbing their "partners".
There are 2 old sayings that I think apply here....
1) Burn me once, shame on you. Burn me twice, shame on me!
2) Don't piss down my back and tell me it is raining!
It is the nature of patents. Code that Novell (or anyone else for that matter) submits to OOo Should be scrutinized to the Nth degree. After all, Novell made a covenant with Microsoft to use their "IP" (whatever the hell that is). I'm not saying Novell's developers would purposely inject bad code, but unless you are willing to get your employer to implement a verifiable "clean-room" implementation for code you are submitting, I for one would err on the side of caution. The cost of defending against patent infringement are too high not to.
B.
"But is this something that IBM even wants?"
In a word....Yes! (See below)...
"You'd think that Novell could have filed this lawsuit a year or three ago instead of waiting till right before SCO vs IBM goes to trial (in a few months)."
You'd think....
"Why try to kill the lawsuit at this point?
It's already imploding under the weight of SCO's garbage."
It doesn't kill the IBM lawsuit only the SCO claims. The more you can chisel the claims down, the better. IBM still has the counter-claims. Even if the judge grants this PSJ, there is still the IBM CCs to deal with.
B.
"Thieves don't need to steal the packaging, just what's in it. They just slash the packaging open with a razor."
And the noise it creates as well as the obviously cut up package they leave behind makes it far easier to catch them than if it was not in the packaging.
B.
Although it has bitten them in the ass, IE wasn't incorporated for its rendering engine. There were several reasons to include it into the OS one being to win the browser wars (more on this later).
First, browser integration into the OS is a necessary first step to their "OS as a service" business model they have been trying to push. If you could make the OS indistinguishable from the Internet, people are more likely to accept this model.
Second, it provides a "common interface" for both local and remote operations supposedly making development easier. Whether this is true or not I can't say but it is often given as a reason.
Lastly, they were late to the Internet party and had competitors to deal with (namely Netscape). Microsoft executives go into convulsions if something technical becomes successful and they don't have a hand in the pie.
Part of the reason Netscape had problems on the Windows platform was because of the browser wars. Microsoft routinely hides API calls from competitors that they are using to make the appearance that competing software is inferior. Netscape wasn't the only competitor in the browser wars but they were the biggest. There was also Mozilla that is still fighting the fight although their Firefox (as you point out) is gaining huge ground.
Although you may not use IE, it still leaves you with a huge security risk that you can't get rid of. The integration into the OS makes it a hiding tiger waiting to bite you in the backside when you aren't looking.
B.
I can't speak to OS X in particular but I know it depends on the browser you are using. For example, Mozilla uses the Gecko engine while Konqueror uses KHTML. For an incomplete list see:
e s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_layout_engin
B.
"I don't know if the intent is to be clever with packaging, prevent theft, but it's gotten so bad I have started factoring in how much pain the packaging looks to promise vs. how much I want the product. Sounds silly, but after a few plastic cuts for a couple of two-buck knick knacks..."
There are reasons to use these plastic gimmicks;
1) It is easy to package and can be done mechanically.
2) It is difficult for a thief to nick it.
3) It is bulky so if the thief stuffs it in their pocket, it is easily identifiable.
4) Items in it stay where they were put when encased. This prevents damage when shipping as well as makes display uniform.
and lastly...
5) Nobody really has taken corporate management to task for this so reasons 1-4 outweigh 5.
The only question I got is does the plastic really need to be that thick?
B.
To play Devil's advocate (hey, I'm in Gentoo) You are talking about servers versus single user systems. Linux isn't in the same class target wise as Windows simply because it isn't the OS of choice for Joe Sixpack. When that happens, I feel you will see just as many stupidly successful attacks as you see today in Windows. Why? Because the targets will be those same people that use "password" or "12345" for their security. Remember, rootkits existed for *nix long before they existed for Windows. The security of any system, be it Linux, Unix, Windows, OS X, etc... Is solely dependent on the one at the keyboard and unfortunately all too often that person is an idiot.
B.
Bravo! Good post that I agree with 100%. I would take this:
"2) opening all their existing software patents"
one step further....
2) Dump all their software patents into the public domain nullifying god only knows how many other patents are out there.
They can keep their hardware patents but they dump their software ones....
Of course this will never happen because of the cost associated in getting those patents.
B.
Many of the comments here aren't focusing on the real root...Bureaucracies...
Schools are bureaucracies and as such process large amounts of average people. When presented with problems, bureaucracies tend to come to a screeching halt. "Special needs" kids just like "gifted" kids are round pegs in a square holed bureaucracy. There isn't enough of either group to justify their own school in a community and you can't just ignore them and let them drop through the cracks of society. I don't buy the notion that there is nothing that should be done to identify the correct level of a child and assign them appropriate work for that level. One solution that has never been explored to my knowledge is the elimination of the classical grade levels you have in schools and place children in classes according to their educational ability. Education should be a tailored experience to each student. If a student is good at math but poor in English, it makes little sense to hold them back in math because they are poor in English. That is what established grade levels do.
B.
This is why. Sit there for a moment and consider just what exactly is "Total Cost of Ownership"? In a nutshell it is hardware+software+training+support. You will always have the same formula be it Windows or Linux. So let's break it down...
Windows:
Hardware: $$$$ (As needed to support new OS)
Software: $$$$ (Yearly license fees)
Training: $$$$ (As you add new people. If you are going to save it may be here since Microsoft's dominant position in the market make it feasible that employees already know the system)
Support: $$$$ (Yearly or on an "as needed" basis)
Linux:
Hardware: $$$$ (As needed to support OS but older hardware will work and in fact may work better than newer hardware)
Software: ---- (No cost at all if you stay solely FOSS)
Training: $$$$ (As you add new people. Here is where the cost may go up)
Support: $$$$ (Yearly for the first few years then "As needed" basis. Cost can be high here to start but should go down as you progress)
So you see, right from the start you have a savings in Linux. The only way to save with Microsoft is if they "cheat" and undercut on their license fees. The assumption (often wrong) that is made in the Windows TCO studies is that training costs will be low since "everyone is likely to know Windows" already. It would be interesting to follow a large organization as they deploy Vista. By that I mean follow the TCO from day one. That will give you a huge clue on the true TCO.
B.
Add to that the different avenues to pr0n (P2P, Usenet, IRC, etc) that this study didn't even consider that is likely to raise that 1% some. All-in-all, I still think (right or wrong) that pr0n is a big motivator for Internet access especially broadband.
B.
My guess would be one of these:
Microsoft+winforms patent search.