Your analogies don't hold water at all. I think skype on a mobile phone is great. I want dialtone, not monopoly in the same way that I want a carrier/Internet connection of some kind. I'll buy the products and services from whom I wish, and not be captive to some joker MBA's idea of a monopoly. Choice counts.
Enslaving developers to draconian rules is not only boorish, but it's ultimately harmful to the business doing it-- and consumers get wise to the BS quickly, and go elsewhere.
Say you were the #4 mobile OS maker, and you wanted to get market opportunities. Would you enslave your developer community in this way? Or would you try and eat your competitor's lunch by outdoing them in quality, selection, variety, and freedom?
Although draconian, I say partition machines that are parts of botnets, those that distribute undeniable spam, and those that perform port probes. Yes, I know that spoofing makes that tougher, but it's a start so as to jolt people into taking responsibilities for their ownership in their own systems.
Apple apps don't run on Windows phones; hell, most of their own apps barely run on their phones. My Windows 5 Treo 700w is miserable.
It's true that banning VoIP makes friends with the carriers. A good alt.store some place will deliver those apps soon. Then things are out of the carrier's gouging control again, and so much the better.
Competition is cool. The Amazons of the world can actually make money from rivals, easily and handily.
Open a store, make it a cool and safe place to go, and clean up. Microsoft keeps hardware vendors in business by getting their OS and apps to run in lots of places on lots of hardware. Their UI, good or bad as it might be, is at least understood. They have a chance to be egalitarian, but instead, copy the mistakes of their rivals, instead of breaking new ground. Oh, wait.... that's what they always do-- or at least that's the perception.
Nah. Not going to happen. You give too much credit to presidential appointees. On its surface, it would appear that it's not going to happen for so many theories of law. While the road to hell may be paved with good intentions, this one will get derailed. Should it by madness get to Obama, and he signs, it, the uproar will positively chill you, and for good reason.
In the US, speech is extraordinarily free. This sentence was going to be a free excercise, but I'd get modded troll. Oh, wait....
You grasp the concept, but you use the phrase 'compared to what other phone'. You're the exact target the MBAs are looking for. They want you to believe that your phone is an HDTV, a reader, a GPS,......
Then Twitter is a cult, because 60% leave after the first 30days. The rest are persecuted by getting hit by cars as they tweet, using maniacally contrived apps like TweetDeck, and so on. All to dribble less than 160 characters about the tuna fish sandwich they're about to eat. But then there's Oprah, and now the WH. OMG-- Obama's part of the cult!
With all due respect, I'd rather eat glass than become an AT&T customer ever again.
A good friend of mine has an iPhone 3. It has a nice and bright display, admittedly. Reducing the font size to capture more than a few paragraphs is unwieldy. Other criticisms regarding having to constantly scroll, and the comparatively tiny size of the display, make it unusable as a reader. There's an old expression that each new hammer considers everything a nail. Lots of applications are suited to the geometry of iPhones and other mobiles that I've seen. An adequate reader just isn't it in my estimation. Yours apparently varies.
There's the next problem: you get once source, your provider. I like my paper delivered, crappy as its content can be. Oh-- I can go down to the corner store and buy one, or ten of them if I want. I'm sure there's an analog to this in digital fabrications beyond the DRM used today via some kind of linking. But I want to eat my cereal, and read a full page of comics... or the obituaries, or whatever it is. Browsers can't do that today without unusual modifications for huge screen geometries, and I want huge screen geometries that can adjust to what I'm using with real kerning and not this half-space crap. I want seriffed fonts, not eye-burning crap that every browser likes to deliver by default.
The iPhone, Android, Pre, whatever, will NOT be an acceptable reader. The Kindle ][ barely gets there, and its graphics quality and high ambient light readability are horrible. The reflection of the screen is enough to rot my rods and cones out of my head.
Don't settle for crappy mobile phones as a reading device. Teeny weeny fingers and teeny weeny displays aren't an adaptation, rather they're confinement in some telco MBA's jail and fantasy. Resist.
Give me an auto-adjusting, very strong LCD, lightweight, big format so that I can visually read and scroll pages, all with a long battery life and I might reconsider-- if I can get RSS feeds downloaded, and other news stuff. Books would be fine as well, as long as they're not DRM'd to death. A little background music might be nice, too. And if it can clean the pool, so much the better.
Rotten LCDs. Small real estate (geometry). Poor page management and inconsistent application deployment. Rotten security. Incapacity to assert style. Horrible kerning. Poor portability of devices; battery life is often miserable. Can't be read in sunlight. Fragile.
Imagine: sitting out on the patio, coffee cup in hand, and reading an iPhone. No. Not going to do it for me because the UI is so startlingly awful, exacerbated by sunlight, and the need for constant manipulation to get what I want to read. Sorry.
The browser makes a crappy newspaper. Various e-readers have a chance, especially if I can mix my local paper with the NYT, the WSJ, SFC, and maybe/. for breakfast. Add in my comics. Put it on my cable bill. I'm sold-- and happy I don't have to haul sacks of dead trees to a recycler.
I'll echo your thoughts. SunOS was like running university Berkeley. Solaris was very cool, then it got stranger and stranger. Sprinkle in Java, and it was stranger still. But it ran Oracle nicely, and it had a predictable behavior.
The leap to Solaris 10 and 'opensolaris' was a real jolt. I don't think Sun realized the problem of running alternate platform support and the troubles it could bring.
When organizations run scared, they clam up. Liability... bad press, platform criticisms because platforms are so hard to level. It did them in. Thar's gold in them parachutes....
There are several very reasonable schemes for wireless connectivity that are very difficult to crack, and they cost, well essentially NOTHING.
However, while you're not looking, I'll take my single board computer, plug it in under your cubicle drawer, and retransmit everything back to my recorders, so that I can crack things open at my leisure.
Since you probably don't encrypt anything, or use LMhashes for passwords, it ought to be a cinch.
Elliptical encryption can produce waves, but if the seed is large enough, it's a bear to detect. Bigger waves, bigger cache to AND for rhythms.... hint hint.
What's needed is some sort of slam dunk header with Britney Spears in some sort of Japanese HD interlaced display. Hash it with bluefish, then salt it up with Atomic Rooster.
This also bodes badly for Layer 7 router problems-- the kind where ISPs 'deep dive' into packet streams to throttle them back, so that all important ISP-provided movies can go through unfettered.
Nemertes Research are lackeys of the telecom industry in my opinion. Scare tactics to support metering is what's behind this. There's far more possible problems from security concerns than streaming.
The cable cos and telcos are all watching their revenues drop, and want some kind of defense. Their research is a red herring, designed to distract from the real problem: ISP greed.
Certainly you can't go too far in length because of timing, but I've tracked NIC-level response on Cat5 cable on 140M+ GBE runs and the amount of retransmits are very, very low order where present at all. I'm sure there's crappy cable and bad crimps and high ambient noise that can have an affect on it, and some conditions are actually transient. Cable quality is also important, but we *never* use the cheap stuff. Granted we also have a very cool TDR and an OTDR as well; we're just experienced. And we caution people about non-standard runs having future incompatibility problems. The BiCSI heads would explode if we did otherwise.
The domain is successful Ethernet via the TIA TSB specs using the IEEE recommendations for connectivity with the signaling method employed. Good signal, no weird phase shifts or nullings, and no discriminator problems (e.g. via NEXT).
Standing waves are inevitable in non-DC cable connectivity and are a red herring unless propagation effects signal discrimination, or unwittingly becomes an antenna for other problems. In my experience (50K+ end point terminations), it's not been a problem. With a few discrete components, I can make any Ethernet cable into a wicked antenna. But the question would be: why would I do that? Standing or sitting waves (pun intended) may change ground-level, but that's when STP or 'screened' cabling is an alternative. If you need shielding because of ground-based level shift, use fiber. In fact, fiber is just about as easy to terminate as UTP these days.
Uh, what part of unshielded twisted pair don't you understand? The whole idea of the twists assuages any reasonable amount of both reception and transmission externally. Modern endpoint tranceivers are really good at signal to noise problems; you can usually make cables quite a bit longer than the IEEE specs call for with total impunity. And Cat6 isn't necessary, either, just quality Cat5/5e is fine.
The only place where fast transmission cables have problem with Ethernet is at the connectors. Crosstalk there, and ONLY THERE, can be a problem unless you do something pretty unnatural to the cable. RJ-45s simpily suck because of the parallel tines. Crimp according to directions. Takes about 30sec a side. If you're worried, shoot a TDR down the line. Fluke and others make some pretty cheapo testers, or bug a cable guy to test it for you. This is not rocket science. Don't wimp out and have someone else do it. Buy quality connectors and cable, and just do it. Get the color code, follow it, and move on.
Consider that IPV6 takes care of the details; no Turing Test needed. At some point, you won't be able to spoof an address without setting off a last-mile or even core-located router alarm. Once you kill NAT, we're all exposed like worms after a shovel turn in the garden. The need for CAPTCHA and other algorithms that authenticate humanity will be reduced to simply partitioning your machine if it turns out to be a spam or other bot. Get your machine clean, or you don't logon. At least that's the concept until it gets cracked.
I believe as long as there are psycopaths and sociopaths, Turing's Tests will be hacked. Why not just actually give up the misbelief that you're anonymous on the Internet?
Do you want a publisher that's incentivized to make revenue on what you publish, or Google-- who gets zero for doing it?
Maybe a half-million was spent on marketing dollars, bringing in quite a bit of revenue for my publishers and me over the past 20 years. What's Google going to spend, and and get in return, while they whore your stuff to any one that can search and click? You do the math. If you want to open source or Creative Commons your works, that's admirable. Knock yourself out; I've done the same. But it was my choice. I've been robbed of that in this case.
I get to control how I want my works distributed. Google robbed me of that.
Google does in deed offer my works in their entirety. Go fish.
The actual COGS for my books ranges from 91c (204pps) to $1.34 (392pps with color). Go fish again.
Google is not my desired channel. You shouldn't let them be yours, either. I've written 14 books and have had 10 published. I don't want Google's hands on any of them, for any reason, at any time. They have, in fact, stolen them from me. In this regard, they're no better than the Pirate Bay's distribution of Adobe Creator or MS Office.
I signed a contract with a book publisher, not with Google. I wrote the book for an audience, and signed the book publisher to reach that audience. I didn't sign a deal with Google. I didn't release the copyright to anyone but the publisher, who by contract (a common contract) cannot release it to others. Google's ability to offer my hard work for free to anyone searching, robs me of my ability to sell the work through the channel of my choosing. In fact, and without a doubt, they stole my hard work and offered it for free to anyone that can search on specific terms.
To writers that want to paraphrase my work, go ahead. Those that plagiarize my work will be punished when I find them. It's theft of my hard damn work, and my blood sweat and tears.
Google simply took the book from a university library shelf, and redistributed it to the world, intact and incarnate. That, my friend, is theft. I don't want Google to expose my book. Google in fact thwarts my income by giving my work away for free.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh, no.
Your analogies don't hold water at all. I think skype on a mobile phone is great. I want dialtone, not monopoly in the same way that I want a carrier/Internet connection of some kind. I'll buy the products and services from whom I wish, and not be captive to some joker MBA's idea of a monopoly. Choice counts.
Enslaving developers to draconian rules is not only boorish, but it's ultimately harmful to the business doing it-- and consumers get wise to the BS quickly, and go elsewhere.
Say you were the #4 mobile OS maker, and you wanted to get market opportunities. Would you enslave your developer community in this way? Or would you try and eat your competitor's lunch by outdoing them in quality, selection, variety, and freedom?
Although draconian, I say partition machines that are parts of botnets, those that distribute undeniable spam, and those that perform port probes. Yes, I know that spoofing makes that tougher, but it's a start so as to jolt people into taking responsibilities for their ownership in their own systems.
Route around the bastards, I say.
In their offense, this ruling doesn't make sense.
Apple apps don't run on Windows phones; hell, most of their own apps barely run on their phones. My Windows 5 Treo 700w is miserable.
It's true that banning VoIP makes friends with the carriers. A good alt.store some place will deliver those apps soon. Then things are out of the carrier's gouging control again, and so much the better.
Competition is cool. The Amazons of the world can actually make money from rivals, easily and handily.
Open a store, make it a cool and safe place to go, and clean up. Microsoft keeps hardware vendors in business by getting their OS and apps to run in lots of places on lots of hardware. Their UI, good or bad as it might be, is at least understood. They have a chance to be egalitarian, but instead, copy the mistakes of their rivals, instead of breaking new ground. Oh, wait.... that's what they always do-- or at least that's the perception.
Nah. Not going to happen. You give too much credit to presidential appointees. On its surface, it would appear that it's not going to happen for so many theories of law. While the road to hell may be paved with good intentions, this one will get derailed. Should it by madness get to Obama, and he signs, it, the uproar will positively chill you, and for good reason.
In the US, speech is extraordinarily free. This sentence was going to be a free excercise, but I'd get modded troll. Oh, wait....
Ah.
You grasp the concept, but you use the phrase 'compared to what other phone'. You're the exact target the MBAs are looking for. They want you to believe that your phone is an HDTV, a reader, a GPS, ......
Then Twitter is a cult, because 60% leave after the first 30days. The rest are persecuted by getting hit by cars as they tweet, using maniacally contrived apps like TweetDeck, and so on. All to dribble less than 160 characters about the tuna fish sandwich they're about to eat. But then there's Oprah, and now the WH. OMG-- Obama's part of the cult!
With all due respect, I'd rather eat glass than become an AT&T customer ever again.
A good friend of mine has an iPhone 3. It has a nice and bright display, admittedly. Reducing the font size to capture more than a few paragraphs is unwieldy. Other criticisms regarding having to constantly scroll, and the comparatively tiny size of the display, make it unusable as a reader. There's an old expression that each new hammer considers everything a nail. Lots of applications are suited to the geometry of iPhones and other mobiles that I've seen. An adequate reader just isn't it in my estimation. Yours apparently varies.
There's the next problem: you get once source, your provider. I like my paper delivered, crappy as its content can be. Oh-- I can go down to the corner store and buy one, or ten of them if I want. I'm sure there's an analog to this in digital fabrications beyond the DRM used today via some kind of linking. But I want to eat my cereal, and read a full page of comics... or the obituaries, or whatever it is. Browsers can't do that today without unusual modifications for huge screen geometries, and I want huge screen geometries that can adjust to what I'm using with real kerning and not this half-space crap. I want seriffed fonts, not eye-burning crap that every browser likes to deliver by default.
The iPhone, Android, Pre, whatever, will NOT be an acceptable reader. The Kindle ][ barely gets there, and its graphics quality and high ambient light readability are horrible. The reflection of the screen is enough to rot my rods and cones out of my head.
Don't settle for crappy mobile phones as a reading device. Teeny weeny fingers and teeny weeny displays aren't an adaptation, rather they're confinement in some telco MBA's jail and fantasy. Resist.
Give me an auto-adjusting, very strong LCD, lightweight, big format so that I can visually read and scroll pages, all with a long battery life and I might reconsider-- if I can get RSS feeds downloaded, and other news stuff. Books would be fine as well, as long as they're not DRM'd to death. A little background music might be nice, too. And if it can clean the pool, so much the better.
High ambient light makes them difficult to read. Oh, and that insane $2400 contract you signed to get your iPhone has nothing to do with it.
Rotten LCDs. Small real estate (geometry). Poor page management and inconsistent application deployment. Rotten security. Incapacity to assert style. Horrible kerning. Poor portability of devices; battery life is often miserable. Can't be read in sunlight. Fragile.
Maybe with binoculars and an assistant.
Imagine: sitting out on the patio, coffee cup in hand, and reading an iPhone. No. Not going to do it for me because the UI is so startlingly awful, exacerbated by sunlight, and the need for constant manipulation to get what I want to read. Sorry.
The browser makes a crappy newspaper. Various e-readers have a chance, especially if I can mix my local paper with the NYT, the WSJ, SFC, and maybe /. for breakfast. Add in my comics. Put it on my cable bill. I'm sold-- and happy I don't have to haul sacks of dead trees to a recycler.
I'll echo your thoughts. SunOS was like running university Berkeley. Solaris was very cool, then it got stranger and stranger. Sprinkle in Java, and it was stranger still. But it ran Oracle nicely, and it had a predictable behavior.
The leap to Solaris 10 and 'opensolaris' was a real jolt. I don't think Sun realized the problem of running alternate platform support and the troubles it could bring.
When organizations run scared, they clam up. Liability... bad press, platform criticisms because platforms are so hard to level. It did them in. Thar's gold in them parachutes....
As we feared: he was trying to be an open source.
Now he's closed.
And your employer is a twit.
There are several very reasonable schemes for wireless connectivity that are very difficult to crack, and they cost, well essentially NOTHING.
However, while you're not looking, I'll take my single board computer, plug it in under your cubicle drawer, and retransmit everything back to my recorders, so that I can crack things open at my leisure.
Since you probably don't encrypt anything, or use LMhashes for passwords, it ought to be a cinch.
Sarcasm aside-- your employer is a Luddite.
Not necessarily.
Elliptical encryption can produce waves, but if the seed is large enough, it's a bear to detect. Bigger waves, bigger cache to AND for rhythms.... hint hint.
What's needed is some sort of slam dunk header with Britney Spears in some sort of Japanese HD interlaced display. Hash it with bluefish, then salt it up with Atomic Rooster.
This also bodes badly for Layer 7 router problems-- the kind where ISPs 'deep dive' into packet streams to throttle them back, so that all important ISP-provided movies can go through unfettered.
Nemertes Research are lackeys of the telecom industry in my opinion. Scare tactics to support metering is what's behind this. There's far more possible problems from security concerns than streaming.
The cable cos and telcos are all watching their revenues drop, and want some kind of defense. Their research is a red herring, designed to distract from the real problem: ISP greed.
Certainly you can't go too far in length because of timing, but I've tracked NIC-level response on Cat5 cable on 140M+ GBE runs and the amount of retransmits are very, very low order where present at all. I'm sure there's crappy cable and bad crimps and high ambient noise that can have an affect on it, and some conditions are actually transient. Cable quality is also important, but we *never* use the cheap stuff. Granted we also have a very cool TDR and an OTDR as well; we're just experienced. And we caution people about non-standard runs having future incompatibility problems. The BiCSI heads would explode if we did otherwise.
We'll agree on fiber, however. GBICs-R-Us.
You miss the point.
The domain is successful Ethernet via the TIA TSB specs using the IEEE recommendations for connectivity with the signaling method employed. Good signal, no weird phase shifts or nullings, and no discriminator problems (e.g. via NEXT).
Standing waves are inevitable in non-DC cable connectivity and are a red herring unless propagation effects signal discrimination, or unwittingly becomes an antenna for other problems. In my experience (50K+ end point terminations), it's not been a problem. With a few discrete components, I can make any Ethernet cable into a wicked antenna. But the question would be: why would I do that? Standing or sitting waves (pun intended) may change ground-level, but that's when STP or 'screened' cabling is an alternative. If you need shielding because of ground-based level shift, use fiber. In fact, fiber is just about as easy to terminate as UTP these days.
Uh, what part of unshielded twisted pair don't you understand? The whole idea of the twists assuages any reasonable amount of both reception and transmission externally. Modern endpoint tranceivers are really good at signal to noise problems; you can usually make cables quite a bit longer than the IEEE specs call for with total impunity. And Cat6 isn't necessary, either, just quality Cat5/5e is fine.
The only place where fast transmission cables have problem with Ethernet is at the connectors. Crosstalk there, and ONLY THERE, can be a problem unless you do something pretty unnatural to the cable. RJ-45s simpily suck because of the parallel tines. Crimp according to directions. Takes about 30sec a side. If you're worried, shoot a TDR down the line. Fluke and others make some pretty cheapo testers, or bug a cable guy to test it for you. This is not rocket science. Don't wimp out and have someone else do it. Buy quality connectors and cable, and just do it. Get the color code, follow it, and move on.
Consider that IPV6 takes care of the details; no Turing Test needed. At some point, you won't be able to spoof an address without setting off a last-mile or even core-located router alarm. Once you kill NAT, we're all exposed like worms after a shovel turn in the garden. The need for CAPTCHA and other algorithms that authenticate humanity will be reduced to simply partitioning your machine if it turns out to be a spam or other bot. Get your machine clean, or you don't logon. At least that's the concept until it gets cracked.
I believe as long as there are psycopaths and sociopaths, Turing's Tests will be hacked. Why not just actually give up the misbelief that you're anonymous on the Internet?
Consider:
Do you want a publisher that's incentivized to make revenue on what you publish, or Google-- who gets zero for doing it?
Maybe a half-million was spent on marketing dollars, bringing in quite a bit of revenue for my publishers and me over the past 20 years. What's Google going to spend, and and get in return, while they whore your stuff to any one that can search and click? You do the math. If you want to open source or Creative Commons your works, that's admirable. Knock yourself out; I've done the same. But it was my choice. I've been robbed of that in this case.
You're incorrect in all regards.
I get to control how I want my works distributed. Google robbed me of that.
Google does in deed offer my works in their entirety. Go fish.
The actual COGS for my books ranges from 91c (204pps) to $1.34 (392pps with color). Go fish again.
Google is not my desired channel. You shouldn't let them be yours, either. I've written 14 books and have had 10 published. I don't want Google's hands on any of them, for any reason, at any time. They have, in fact, stolen them from me. In this regard, they're no better than the Pirate Bay's distribution of Adobe Creator or MS Office.
I signed a contract with a book publisher, not with Google. I wrote the book for an audience, and signed the book publisher to reach that audience. I didn't sign a deal with Google. I didn't release the copyright to anyone but the publisher, who by contract (a common contract) cannot release it to others. Google's ability to offer my hard work for free to anyone searching, robs me of my ability to sell the work through the channel of my choosing. In fact, and without a doubt, they stole my hard work and offered it for free to anyone that can search on specific terms.
To writers that want to paraphrase my work, go ahead. Those that plagiarize my work will be punished when I find them. It's theft of my hard damn work, and my blood sweat and tears.
Google simply took the book from a university library shelf, and redistributed it to the world, intact and incarnate. That, my friend, is theft. I don't want Google to expose my book. Google in fact thwarts my income by giving my work away for free.