32-bit byte counters and long sample times can be an issue(you can count 500/1000/1500 times the number of bytes as packets without overflowing the counter) But most of it is legacy, packet counts were the way it was done on a lot of equipment even though it's not the most correct method.
It's also amazing how often equipment gets that byte count wrong (I've seen it often with ISP head end equipment). Also there is no shortage of equipment that can overflow 32-bit byte counts faster than the ISP samples.
Also many interfaces are encapsulating the data (PPP-OE) and most ISPs do some mathematics so you are not charged for the overhead.
So you have a direct ethernet connection to your ISP? Most people use cable, dsl, or some type of wireless across different kinds of head end equipment.
Building an incorrect bandwidth meter is easy. Incorrect meters will calculate your bandwidth like ( 'MTU size' * 'number of packets' = usage), which will over estimate usage by a large margin (30% off is common), since a large number of packets are much smaller then MTU, DNS replies for example. It is 'somewhat' more accurate to take ('average packet size' * 'number of packets') per user, since different usage will come up with a different avg_pkt size. Counting each packets size and keeping track of it is the most accurate, but also the most resource intensive therefore the least likely to occur in bulk by the ISP.
Another place that can cause a significant skew in total bits is where bandwidth is monitored. Most ISPs count traffic before the restriction of your slow connection, therefore packet loss and re-transmits get counted against you (if the ISP uses no, or a bad queuing discipline this can end up being a significant amount of bandwidth). Monitoring how much was downloaded is best done on the CPE, such as the cable modem or dsl modem, but that would lead to firmware hacks and such to lie to the provider.
Work out a deal with the nearest datacenter for a point to point wifi ethernet bridge. Those can reach over 10 miles reliably. If T1 is $2619.20/mo you could buy a gigabit bridge and become an ISP. Wireless gigabit will go 5 miles, just look at this device.
If it's from the manufacture the drivers can bypass the hosts file and communicate directly with the network card if they wanted/needed to. You'd have to have an external firewall monitoring and blocking said traffic. Chances are the software would turn in Diablo 3 like, where you had to have an internet connection for it to work at all in the first place.
One reason more minorities get stopped, arrested, and thrown in jail then non-minorities, In the US.
--The state can afford to.
Whites spend far more on defense attorneys, which in turn involves far more time and effort by the prosecution to get a conviction. People that can't afford good defense (public defenders are not the definition of good defense) are easy targets. No cop wants to stop some white guy on something marginal, then get grilled by an attorney for 3 days straight about everything he's done in his career.
If minorities could bring the same defense to the courtroom, the state would have to hire more judges and staff to deal with cases that take much longer (very expensive and therefore unlikely). Instead the DA would tell the police forces to reduce the number of 'Driving While Black' style arrests.
Is it really so hard for everybody involved here to type.0042
There has been much talk of this this type of error in deciphering and most of it is that most people see.xx as one hundredths of the whole, not one hundredths of one hundredths.
Usually, then again after reading about the money market manipulation scam posted on./ yesterday, keeping an eye out for fraud and conspirators is a good idea.
No, he's saying that if they didn't invest their net income would not have decreased 'for now', but that because they invested in their future that net incomes may be even larger in the future, risk of the unknown aside.
Conversely you can't have been that stupid to miss what he said.
Probably not $5M, but for example I bought a SSD the other day, I shopped a few sites, Amazon and Newegg were two with the best prices in particular. Newegg also had a slightly better deal on another product I wanted too, I bought the SSD and other product from them. If Amazon wasn't up I wouldn't even have had the chance to comparison shop, Online competition is fierce between the large retailers.
Because that 7k spread across all the different ISPs and providers represents about.0001% of each ones bandwidth. It would require far more effort and resources then you can possibly believe. Now some of the ISPs have DPI and could do it, but I'd rather they drop the DPI and just give internet access.
Yeah, I got that message a while back. They claim a 50% boost, but I haven't seen it. Even after resetting the modem and router, everything seems to download at about the same speed as before. I suspect BS (hardly atypical for Time Warner).
Since you don't list what kind of router you have, what kind of firewall rule processing it's doing, and if you're using wireless it's hard to tell who the weakest link is.
I never use a ISP integrated modem/router(/wireless gack), too many of them suck and lock out too many options. If a regular router you can stick your own server on the WAN port and run something like http://www.speedtest.net/mini.php , across the LAN you should see 100Mbps (or more if it's Gb the entire way). If it's slower then 100Mb on wired your routers performance sucks. Test wired first then add your WLAN in, I have seen many wireless setups that where showing a 150Mbps (good) connection not even perform 30Mbps transfers.
Even more advanced tests would be to try to run 2 speed tests locally at the same time. Most equipment will starve one stream (one 99Mbps/one 1Mbps), some equipment will give bad jitter and the total speed will be less then 75% of line speed, and latency will be high, and very rarely the equipment will have decent queuing and the two streams will be close to even at around 95% of total line speed and latency will be decent.
Actually getting 20Mbps+ from the random internet host is not very common. Testing a close, fast host inside the TW network is the best way to tell. This might help.
He doesn't say, but he could capture DNS and use his server to reply to the packets instead. For the longest times some ISP's have done stuff like that.
>"why should I pay for network at home if I can get it free from my neighbor"
I help a friend provide a free wi-fi spot in a downtown area. We limit each MAC to only download around 3GB per month and each IP is rate limited to 1Mb. It's not there to replace a paid connection, and seems to keep most of the bandwidth heavy freeloaders away. Because there is not a huge number of residences in the area there is not a problem with people switching MACs (or if they are, they are using so little data that it's meaningless noise).
It's likely free but not unlimited is the answer, speed limiting is easy, bandwidth limiting is more difficult on users willing to take measures (doing DPI can stop most freeloaders, but most routers aren't capable of that)
>So the end result would be worse then not having that clause in the constitution
In that particular case, but having that clause may have kept the government from digging a Greek sized debt hole before now. The point being is the government (really everyone) needs spending limits when playing with other peoples money.. what no debt limit, whoooohoo, spend it up boys, we need some diamond plated desks.
>belief that they can put ten marbles (dollars) into a tin can (the world) and magically get 11 marbles back out.
Um, if you give me 10 marbles and I make a marble producing factory with them, yes you can get 11 marbles back out. In fact that's the entire purpose of loans, the $financial_entity will give you one if they think that you'll produce a useful economic product. The system falls apart when it stops giving the funds to the people who can produce and starts giving money to everybody (government induced housing crisis) or insider fraud (free market failure, point of this article) or overly complex (mortgage backed derivative whats?).
Slashdot Mirror
32-bit byte counters and long sample times can be an issue(you can count 500/1000/1500 times the number of bytes as packets without overflowing the counter) But most of it is legacy, packet counts were the way it was done on a lot of equipment even though it's not the most correct method.
http://www.google.com/search?q=interface+byte+counter+incorrect
It's also amazing how often equipment gets that byte count wrong (I've seen it often with ISP head end equipment). Also there is no shortage of equipment that can overflow 32-bit byte counts faster than the ISP samples.
Also many interfaces are encapsulating the data (PPP-OE) and most ISPs do some mathematics so you are not charged for the overhead.
So you have a direct ethernet connection to your ISP? Most people use cable, dsl, or some type of wireless across different kinds of head end equipment.
Building an incorrect bandwidth meter is easy. Incorrect meters will calculate your bandwidth like ( 'MTU size' * 'number of packets' = usage), which will over estimate usage by a large margin (30% off is common), since a large number of packets are much smaller then MTU, DNS replies for example. It is 'somewhat' more accurate to take ('average packet size' * 'number of packets') per user, since different usage will come up with a different avg_pkt size. Counting each packets size and keeping track of it is the most accurate, but also the most resource intensive therefore the least likely to occur in bulk by the ISP.
Another place that can cause a significant skew in total bits is where bandwidth is monitored. Most ISPs count traffic before the restriction of your slow connection, therefore packet loss and re-transmits get counted against you (if the ISP uses no, or a bad queuing discipline this can end up being a significant amount of bandwidth). Monitoring how much was downloaded is best done on the CPE, such as the cable modem or dsl modem, but that would lead to firmware hacks and such to lie to the provider.
What city?
Work out a deal with the nearest datacenter for a point to point wifi ethernet bridge. Those can reach over 10 miles reliably. If T1 is $2619.20/mo you could buy a gigabit bridge and become an ISP. Wireless gigabit will go 5 miles, just look at this device.
Look at this instead at about 1/10th the cost http://www.ubnt.com/airfiber
All this is beyond the point, paying thousands for radios, towers, links and other crap shouldn't be necessary so you can play COD5 on your next x-box
If it's from the manufacture the drivers can bypass the hosts file and communicate directly with the network card if they wanted/needed to. You'd have to have an external firewall monitoring and blocking said traffic. Chances are the software would turn in Diablo 3 like, where you had to have an internet connection for it to work at all in the first place.
Whoa, what command prompt code did you use to get your command line in inverse color? Mine's the standard white on black.
To sum up your statement
--People that can defend themselves are not readily attacked.
You defend yourself from cops with lawyers. If you cannot afford to do so, you are the victim.
One reason more minorities get stopped, arrested, and thrown in jail then non-minorities, In the US.
--The state can afford to.
Whites spend far more on defense attorneys, which in turn involves far more time and effort by the prosecution to get a conviction. People that can't afford good defense (public defenders are not the definition of good defense) are easy targets. No cop wants to stop some white guy on something marginal, then get grilled by an attorney for 3 days straight about everything he's done in his career.
If minorities could bring the same defense to the courtroom, the state would have to hire more judges and staff to deal with cases that take much longer (very expensive and therefore unlikely). Instead the DA would tell the police forces to reduce the number of 'Driving While Black' style arrests.
>The Black Panthers party even encourage Black Youth to commit crimes and commit crimes against Whites.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party#Controversy
I don't see anything about the rape of a woman, but there is no controversy that they were a group that used violence for their means.
Is it really so hard for everybody involved here to type .0042
There has been much talk of this this type of error in deciphering and most of it is that most people see .xx as one hundredths of the whole, not one hundredths of one hundredths.
Net/Gross
Amazon grosses close to $5M per hour. 'Makes' is a terrible term to use because it doesn't define if your making a profit or loss.
Usually, then again after reading about the money market manipulation scam posted on ./ yesterday, keeping an eye out for fraud and conspirators is a good idea.
No, he's saying that if they didn't invest their net income would not have decreased 'for now', but that because they invested in their future that net incomes may be even larger in the future, risk of the unknown aside.
Conversely you can't have been that stupid to miss what he said.
Probably not $5M, but for example I bought a SSD the other day, I shopped a few sites, Amazon and Newegg were two with the best prices in particular. Newegg also had a slightly better deal on another product I wanted too, I bought the SSD and other product from them. If Amazon wasn't up I wouldn't even have had the chance to comparison shop, Online competition is fierce between the large retailers.
Because that 7k spread across all the different ISPs and providers represents about .0001% of each ones bandwidth. It would require far more effort and resources then you can possibly believe. Now some of the ISPs have DPI and could do it, but I'd rather they drop the DPI and just give internet access.
Yeah, I got that message a while back. They claim a 50% boost, but I haven't seen it. Even after resetting the modem and router, everything seems to download at about the same speed as before. I suspect BS (hardly atypical for Time Warner).
Since you don't list what kind of router you have, what kind of firewall rule processing it's doing, and if you're using wireless it's hard to tell who the weakest link is.
I never use a ISP integrated modem/router(/wireless gack), too many of them suck and lock out too many options. If a regular router you can stick your own server on the WAN port and run something like http://www.speedtest.net/mini.php , across the LAN you should see 100Mbps (or more if it's Gb the entire way). If it's slower then 100Mb on wired your routers performance sucks. Test wired first then add your WLAN in, I have seen many wireless setups that where showing a 150Mbps (good) connection not even perform 30Mbps transfers.
Even more advanced tests would be to try to run 2 speed tests locally at the same time. Most equipment will starve one stream (one 99Mbps/one 1Mbps), some equipment will give bad jitter and the total speed will be less then 75% of line speed, and latency will be high, and very rarely the equipment will have decent queuing and the two streams will be close to even at around 95% of total line speed and latency will be decent.
Actually getting 20Mbps+ from the random internet host is not very common. Testing a close, fast host inside the TW network is the best way to tell. This might help.
http://www.timewarnercable.com/en/residential-home/support/speed-test.html/
>Your range on a household router is just barely enough to get across the street
Hmm, maybe I should stop buying my antenna from L-com
He doesn't say, but he could capture DNS and use his server to reply to the packets instead. For the longest times some ISP's have done stuff like that.
$Client:53-> 8.8.8.8:53-> iptables rewrite src (local:53) -> local:53 - > iptables rewrite src (8.8.8.8:53) -> $client:53
It would be quite silly to use open wireless and not visit the https:/// version of whatever sites you use.
>"why should I pay for network at home if I can get it free from my neighbor"
I help a friend provide a free wi-fi spot in a downtown area. We limit each MAC to only download around 3GB per month and each IP is rate limited to 1Mb. It's not there to replace a paid connection, and seems to keep most of the bandwidth heavy freeloaders away. Because there is not a huge number of residences in the area there is not a problem with people switching MACs (or if they are, they are using so little data that it's meaningless noise).
It's likely free but not unlimited is the answer, speed limiting is easy, bandwidth limiting is more difficult on users willing to take measures (doing DPI can stop most freeloaders, but most routers aren't capable of that)
For as long as they [can] keep it up.
>So the end result would be worse then not having that clause in the constitution
In that particular case, but having that clause may have kept the government from digging a Greek sized debt hole before now. The point being is the government (really everyone) needs spending limits when playing with other peoples money.. what no debt limit, whoooohoo, spend it up boys, we need some diamond plated desks.
>belief that they can put ten marbles (dollars) into a tin can (the world) and magically get 11 marbles back out.
Um, if you give me 10 marbles and I make a marble producing factory with them, yes you can get 11 marbles back out. In fact that's the entire purpose of loans, the $financial_entity will give you one if they think that you'll produce a useful economic product. The system falls apart when it stops giving the funds to the people who can produce and starts giving money to everybody (government induced housing crisis) or insider fraud (free market failure, point of this article) or overly complex (mortgage backed derivative whats?).
Don't worry, we're the government, we're here to help.
Private Joker: How can you shoot women or children?
Door Gunner: Easy! Ya just don't lead 'em so much!