I still don't understand why ISPs don't save everyone a lot of hassle, and sell service like Usenet providers or cellphone providers do.
That is $X/GB, or $X/month for unlimited bandwith at a capped speed they can offer 24/7/365 at that price. Now, really, there will be a capped bandwidth in all of the above, but it seems to me they could make everyone happier if they allowed something like this:
$300/month - 1.5Mbps/1.5Mbps unlimited throughput $200/month - 512Kbps/512Kbps unlimited throughput $2 per GB at 1.5Mbps/1.5Mbps(or whatever the maximum speed on the link is) $50/month best effort service with bursts up to 1.5Mbps/256Kbps - what we have now, but clearly advertised as provided per what the ISP can manage - not guaranteed, or even worked hard to maintain.
Basically, it would be nice to have block pricing, so someone who just had to get a 2 GB file, could drop an extra $4 that month to get it at full speed...
That said, all this only works if customers can get SLA backed monitoring software at the router for metering, so they know how much they're using, and can adjust accordingly. The major downside for ISPs is that all the grandma's currently floating the broadband could go to patying $2 a month for the 1GB they use for e-mail, and get it at SLA + full speed.
What always interests me is the ones that do "hidden" containers inside a container. You have a presumably "safe" outer partition, and a "normal" inner one. Supposedly, there's no discernable difference between a container with a hidden partition and one without. There are 2 passwords, one gets the clean partition, the other the real partition.
If all of the above is true, how would the government know if they was a second password or not? I'm guessing they could just torture everyone who had any encrypted containers and figure about half will never give a password up because there isn't one to give up, and the others will eventually give the password up.
I just wonder how far our govt could go till some people start going V style on them? Or has it already happened, with less celluoid results?
Well, I've seen Parallels beta 2 on a Macintel Mini, and let me tell you, I was impressed. I don't know how they do it, but it puts VMWare to shame... It was 98% full speed, that is the GUI was like WinXP on bare hardware. We played some movie trailers, and smooth as silk. Heck, we played 2 different trailers, one on OSX, the other in IE on the VM, both no stutter.
And all this without the Parallel's tools installed in the VM. Try doing ANYTHING in VMWare w/out the tools installed, and see how laggy just the UI is.
I'm jealous. If parallels was available for the PC, I'd pay the $40 they want for the final. But as I want to run Linux in a VM on XP, Parallels won't help.
Umm, I still would like to see why you think freenet is facilitating it any more or less than the internet in general (or are you getting ready to get off the net as you're facilitating it with ISP payments?).
Freenet is a protocal at the base, same as bittorrent, Usenet, HTTP, HTTPS... It even has some of the same goals - HTTPS, secure messages; HTTP, distribution and caching of data; Bittorrent - multiswarmed data transfer. It just puts them together, and adds one other thing, an attempt of anynomity.
I don't see anywhere that the goal of freenet is facilitating child porn. It *is* faciliting anonymous transmission of information. However, to many people, the internet in general is that too.
In fact, I'll bet far more people use straight SSL or FTP to transfer CP than know about or mess with freenet. Are you pushing to ban SSL?
Can anyone explain to me why I'd want anything other than Windows Classic though? I mean, I find transparency distracting, and fading out the window edges, while looking cool, to me seems like it will obfsucate the edge so you might well end up mis clicking more often and getting the wrong app to front.
OTOH, it heartens me to know I can still use the (similar anyway) interface I've been used to since Win95. Is it just me, or does it seem wasteful to force people to retrain to use an upgrade of the same product?
One thing I wish MS would learn from Opera is the way to add features, but upgrade with keeping the UI the same for everything that isn't a new feature, and it's the same from your old customizations.
It would be even nicer if you could easily have a bundle of basic UI settings you could drop in a new install, so it'd be an instant theme (but carry from your old install).
Well, true, but I'm not about to change from Opera to do something that still seems better done on my PC in Lotus Word Pro or Adobe InDesign depending on what I want to accomplish. If there is one thing that seems to me to be the absolutely worst suited to online delivery, it is wordprocessing.
Ok, but how would that really help? The AdBlocking I'm familiar with - proxomitron - wouldn't be deterred by who's hosting the ad, it doesn't care, it bases it on the div ID or the size of the banner, or some identifier in the path or really anything. I'm assuming that AdMuncher, AdBlock and the upcoming Opera Content Block will be likewise.
You really only care if you want to have any choice in the application you use for accessing the web. If you never want anything different than the market leader, then you don't care. Some portion of the population, however small, like to choose between applications for a job so they can pick the one that fits their method of doing stuff. These people like standards so they can still do the "stuff", but in their own way.
It's like phones, all the different phones only work cause there is a standard for them to plug into. Remember how much fun it was renting the one and only phone from ma bell? Some people don't want to do that with computers either.
I think that currently OpenRPG would provide a great interface, maybe coupled with ventrillo. The only problem remains getting people together, which is always a difficulty. There are several communities dedicated to this though.
This is a worse ripoff that I thought. Again I will pimp (no I don't have stock) www.streamload.com. How/. has missed this service (that's been around since 2000) amazes me.
Look, you basically only pay for downloads. You get 25GB free. If you are a paying customer, there's no limit on data stored, though I do think that's going to go to 250GB eventually. Granted, the DL cost isn't as good as Amazons, but unless you are downloading a lot, the free uploading and storage will make it cheaper. Especially as for many people, 25GB is enough offsite storage, and important files they'd store are under the 10MB free filesize limit.
www.streamload.com will offer you 25GB free, with limited downloads (10MB per file, 100MB per month) or pay for more downloads or storage space - the next level up goes to 250GB for $10/month.
This is all great, but Streamload will offer you 25GB for free, and you can dl 10MB files for free, or pay for one month of however much data you need to download. You only pay to download data files over 10MB.
Assuming important files, it's likely you'd never need to pay. That all said, for basic files, yahoo briefcase would do too.
The big problem with streamload or any web solution is our upload speeds make any real backup of more than then basic text or some pictures impractical time wise.
Actually, they only warn on very very short keys - deprecitated 40 and 56 bit keys, that have been broken in days or less. Personally, using known weak encryption is worse from a social engineering perspective than not using encryption at all.
That said, I think Opera is moving towards indicating when sites do something that Opera ASA would consider outside best practices.
For all that site devs complain and point fingers at browsers when their bad code doesn't work, it's amusing to see anger over the browser pointing the finger back at the site dev occasionally.
All that siad, it seems similar to phishing warnings from IE7 - that is, this site isn't as secure as it might claim.
It would seem to me there is an easy solution. Write a WC3 complient page - validate it to no errors. Then put in the normal hacks to work in IE whatever. Then if anyone using Opera, KHTML, Webkit or whatever says it doesn't work, you KNOW it's a bug in the browser and can tell them so.
Most alternative browser users are both proud of the increasing standards complience of their browser, and quick to accept bugs with their browser (provided the page they get validates as WC3). They then usually report the bugs and pressure the vendor to fix them.
Of course making 5 or 6 different pages is hell, but the idea of all the alternative browsers is to have devs write to the WC3 specs and be done for all the browsers but IE (well, they'd like that to get IE too, but we're also pragmatic).
I don't use fast user switching a lot - but it's never crashed on me. Of course, I only use it when updating something on my parent's machine with their limited user account, flipping between admin and the account to make sure everything gets set right.
Let me just back up point #2 - While not a soldier myself, I have several family members who were volunteers during VietNam. And they always mistrusted those who were drafted, because many if not most of them were only there under duress.
Think of any endevor in life (I can only relate to work or college related, but it seems likely it would be the same) - let's say the professor choosen groups for a college project. Remember the person or people in the class who were there cause it was a required credit, but it wasn't in their major, and they didn't care about grades much? Remember how much help (not) they were in getting the project done?
Now imagine having to put your life in that person's hands. You sure you wouldn't much prefer a group made up of the people who wanted to be there, and were going for the A?
I'm not saying there aren't people in a volunteer army who didn't fully realize they might have to go fight some day, or that there aren't some disgrunteled in Iraq right now. I'm just saying with a draft, you'll have a lot more people doing the minimum possible to not get sent to jail, and just looking on when they get out (like many prisoners).
Slashdot Mirror
By the timing and the phrasing, I'm betting he switched before the Core came out.
Interestingly enough, I'm on 1Mbps/128Kbps DSL, out of a remote serving station in upstate NY, and usually get a good 1.2Mbps/240Kbps out of it.
I still don't understand why ISPs don't save everyone a lot of hassle, and sell service like Usenet providers or cellphone providers do.
That is $X/GB, or $X/month for unlimited bandwith at a capped speed they can offer 24/7/365 at that price. Now, really, there will be a capped bandwidth in all of the above, but it seems to me they could make everyone happier if they allowed something like this:
$300/month - 1.5Mbps/1.5Mbps unlimited throughput
$200/month - 512Kbps/512Kbps unlimited throughput
$2 per GB at 1.5Mbps/1.5Mbps(or whatever the maximum speed on the link is)
$50/month best effort service with bursts up to 1.5Mbps/256Kbps - what we have now, but clearly advertised as provided per what the ISP can manage - not guaranteed, or even worked hard to maintain.
Basically, it would be nice to have block pricing, so someone who just had to get a 2 GB file, could drop an extra $4 that month to get it at full speed...
That said, all this only works if customers can get SLA backed monitoring software at the router for metering, so they know how much they're using, and can adjust accordingly. The major downside for ISPs is that all the grandma's currently floating the broadband could go to patying $2 a month for the 1GB they use for e-mail, and get it at SLA + full speed.
What always interests me is the ones that do "hidden" containers inside a container. You have a presumably "safe" outer partition, and a "normal" inner one. Supposedly, there's no discernable difference between a container with a hidden partition and one without. There are 2 passwords, one gets the clean partition, the other the real partition.
If all of the above is true, how would the government know if they was a second password or not? I'm guessing they could just torture everyone who had any encrypted containers and figure about half will never give a password up because there isn't one to give up, and the others will eventually give the password up.
I just wonder how far our govt could go till some people start going V style on them? Or has it already happened, with less celluoid results?
Well, I've seen Parallels beta 2 on a Macintel Mini, and let me tell you, I was impressed. I don't know how they do it, but it puts VMWare to shame... It was 98% full speed, that is the GUI was like WinXP on bare hardware. We played some movie trailers, and smooth as silk. Heck, we played 2 different trailers, one on OSX, the other in IE on the VM, both no stutter.
And all this without the Parallel's tools installed in the VM. Try doing ANYTHING in VMWare w/out the tools installed, and see how laggy just the UI is.
I'm jealous. If parallels was available for the PC, I'd pay the $40 they want for the final. But as I want to run Linux in a VM on XP, Parallels won't help.
Firefox by default doesn't have tabs ...?
Ok, but really, how is MS in any position to say how someone ships some hardware?
Isn't this what people have been doing since usenet and forums and such??
Umm, I still would like to see why you think freenet is facilitating it any more or less than the internet in general (or are you getting ready to get off the net as you're facilitating it with ISP payments?).
Freenet is a protocal at the base, same as bittorrent, Usenet, HTTP, HTTPS... It even has some of the same goals - HTTPS, secure messages; HTTP, distribution and caching of data; Bittorrent - multiswarmed data transfer. It just puts them together, and adds one other thing, an attempt of anynomity.
I don't see anywhere that the goal of freenet is facilitating child porn. It *is* faciliting anonymous transmission of information. However, to many people, the internet in general is that too.
In fact, I'll bet far more people use straight SSL or FTP to transfer CP than know about or mess with freenet. Are you pushing to ban SSL?
I don't know about him, but I just use Directory Opus, and FTP directories, works great.
Can anyone explain to me why I'd want anything other than Windows Classic though? I mean, I find transparency distracting, and fading out the window edges, while looking cool, to me seems like it will obfsucate the edge so you might well end up mis clicking more often and getting the wrong app to front.
OTOH, it heartens me to know I can still use the (similar anyway) interface I've been used to since Win95. Is it just me, or does it seem wasteful to force people to retrain to use an upgrade of the same product?
One thing I wish MS would learn from Opera is the way to add features, but upgrade with keeping the UI the same for everything that isn't a new feature, and it's the same from your old customizations.
It would be even nicer if you could easily have a bundle of basic UI settings you could drop in a new install, so it'd be an instant theme (but carry from your old install).
Well, true, but I'm not about to change from Opera to do something that still seems better done on my PC in Lotus Word Pro or Adobe InDesign depending on what I want to accomplish. If there is one thing that seems to me to be the absolutely worst suited to online delivery, it is wordprocessing.
Ok, but how would that really help? The AdBlocking I'm familiar with - proxomitron - wouldn't be deterred by who's hosting the ad, it doesn't care, it bases it on the div ID or the size of the banner, or some identifier in the path or really anything. I'm assuming that AdMuncher, AdBlock and the upcoming Opera Content Block will be likewise.
And this is one of the biggest things that negates extensions value for many people considering FireFox.
Well, I find MDI to be really powerful, in, say, Opera, mIRC and Lotus Word Pro to name a few. Oh, and Adobe Photoshop.
You really only care if you want to have any choice in the application you use for accessing the web. If you never want anything different than the market leader, then you don't care. Some portion of the population, however small, like to choose between applications for a job so they can pick the one that fits their method of doing stuff. These people like standards so they can still do the "stuff", but in their own way.
It's like phones, all the different phones only work cause there is a standard for them to plug into. Remember how much fun it was renting the one and only phone from ma bell? Some people don't want to do that with computers either.
I think that currently OpenRPG would provide a great interface, maybe coupled with ventrillo. The only problem remains getting people together, which is always a difficulty. There are several communities dedicated to this though.
This is a worse ripoff that I thought. Again I will pimp (no I don't have stock) www.streamload.com. How /. has missed this service (that's been around since 2000) amazes me.
Look, you basically only pay for downloads. You get 25GB free. If you are a paying customer, there's no limit on data stored, though I do think that's going to go to 250GB eventually. Granted, the DL cost isn't as good as Amazons, but unless you are downloading a lot, the free uploading and storage will make it cheaper. Especially as for many people, 25GB is enough offsite storage, and important files they'd store are under the 10MB free filesize limit.
www.streamload.com will offer you 25GB free, with limited downloads (10MB per file, 100MB per month) or pay for more downloads or storage space - the next level up goes to 250GB for $10/month.
This is all great, but Streamload will offer you 25GB for free, and you can dl 10MB files for free, or pay for one month of however much data you need to download. You only pay to download data files over 10MB.
Assuming important files, it's likely you'd never need to pay. That all said, for basic files, yahoo briefcase would do too.
The big problem with streamload or any web solution is our upload speeds make any real backup of more than then basic text or some pictures impractical time wise.
Although this assumes you can somehow read the devs mind as to what they intended when they failed to write it in the commonly accepted methods.
Actually, they only warn on very very short keys - deprecitated 40 and 56 bit keys, that have been broken in days or less. Personally, using known weak encryption is worse from a social engineering perspective than not using encryption at all.
That said, I think Opera is moving towards indicating when sites do something that Opera ASA would consider outside best practices.
For all that site devs complain and point fingers at browsers when their bad code doesn't work, it's amusing to see anger over the browser pointing the finger back at the site dev occasionally.
All that siad, it seems similar to phishing warnings from IE7 - that is, this site isn't as secure as it might claim.
It would seem to me there is an easy solution. Write a WC3 complient page - validate it to no errors. Then put in the normal hacks to work in IE whatever. Then if anyone using Opera, KHTML, Webkit or whatever says it doesn't work, you KNOW it's a bug in the browser and can tell them so.
Most alternative browser users are both proud of the increasing standards complience of their browser, and quick to accept bugs with their browser (provided the page they get validates as WC3). They then usually report the bugs and pressure the vendor to fix them.
Of course making 5 or 6 different pages is hell, but the idea of all the alternative browsers is to have devs write to the WC3 specs and be done for all the browsers but IE (well, they'd like that to get IE too, but we're also pragmatic).
I don't use fast user switching a lot - but it's never crashed on me. Of course, I only use it when updating something on my parent's machine with their limited user account, flipping between admin and the account to make sure everything gets set right.
Let me just back up point #2 - While not a soldier myself, I have several family members who were volunteers during VietNam. And they always mistrusted those who were drafted, because many if not most of them were only there under duress.
Think of any endevor in life (I can only relate to work or college related, but it seems likely it would be the same) - let's say the professor choosen groups for a college project. Remember the person or people in the class who were there cause it was a required credit, but it wasn't in their major, and they didn't care about grades much? Remember how much help (not) they were in getting the project done?
Now imagine having to put your life in that person's hands. You sure you wouldn't much prefer a group made up of the people who wanted to be there, and were going for the A?
I'm not saying there aren't people in a volunteer army who didn't fully realize they might have to go fight some day, or that there aren't some disgrunteled in Iraq right now. I'm just saying with a draft, you'll have a lot more people doing the minimum possible to not get sent to jail, and just looking on when they get out (like many prisoners).