Did you see 2.4ghz? Bluetooth works within roughly the same channel grouping as 802.11b/g. It uses frequency hopping, and in many implementations is good for about 10m so it's somewhat impractical for what they're trying to do. There are other Bluetooth classes that both have a larger range, and also a slightly better data rate. But you don't want them, so I wouldn't worry about the lack of an implementation. Worse: Bluetooth is low-power (hence the short range, incl standby modes, etc) and must be bonded with devices, thus not freely allowing its use in a MAN, but maybe a LAN, but more preferred: a PAN.
Anyone with any agenda can manipulate Wikipedia. There are no real credentials, just a few rules. I'm surprised that there hasn't been more argumentative revising of various entries. The medium is rife with contentious possibilities. That one political school of thoughts and its agents would manipulate content is no surprise at all.
Seeking justice implies injury (we probably have that, and you cite several likely cases) and the need to remedy that injury.
Doing that, getting justice, means removing anonymity for the full editing process-- which can be done with lots of software. Then we can pick, perhaps by color or another annotation, which version we want to see; left wing, right wing, centrist, socialist, green, and so on. We'll know the content by its source and judge from there. Until then, please don't be surprised by media content swaying on public forums.
No, it's your job to be familiar with the operation of your operating system, your network, and your applications, and their functionality as a user.
Certainly, when things go wrong or seemingly wrong, you can get support. You won't learn much from it as the support personnel are there to fix a problem, not educate you or substitute as your OS/network/apps trainer.
Support personnel are there to help you use the software to achieve a task.
If you want to support your revenue, become familiar with what you're doing- just like operating a car, a pistol, or a remote control-- all of which can kill you.
You have an obligation not to shoot off as in shoot-ready-aim just because you didn't want to do something that was unobvious to you. Yes, error messages suck. Yes, the manual and help screens were written in techicaljargonesegeekspeak. Deal with personal responsibility. Otherwise, we're sending you to India for tech support (with apologies to my Indian friends).
1) the mad bcc cya artists, who propagate more messages than the worst spammers on earth
2) all of the millions of people that don't RTFM or help screens before lifting the phone and calling tech support; yes, the manuals and help screens suck, so did your chemistry book.
3) people that experiment with key configuration settings. Go ahead, click that DHCP button.
4) the well-intentioned, yet clueless. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
5) fanboi bigots; these weak ego'd miscreants are so insecure that the mere mention of a competing technology will drive them into brutal defensive postures. Their reactions remind me of our current political upheaval
It comes from learning Z80/8080 assembler first, before BASIC, before C. Until that point, I knew a few macro languages.
In my mind, I'm still in a 32K machine, living with the OS, writing strings to hardware ports, and using my own interrupt vector code in concert with the host cycles to get work done.
When I work in C or C++ (heaven forbid #), there's a link list in my mind about array conservation, minimizing strings, using hashing and strict Booleans to get a job done.
No, I'm not an embedded systems coder; I just end up thinking like one.
My comments used to go thru an assembler, and I'd look at the code and try and re-optimize it. And when my code would explode, it would explode to unrecognizable shards of crap until I learned atomization (objects) and resource re-entrance. Now when my code doesn't work, my deadman's switch monitor twigs, which backstreams messages. It makes coding highly involved, but vastly more productive because *I CAN* reuse my code.
I worry more about the OS than my own code; there's so much that's not predictable in operating systems today. They should do more work with smaller kernels and leave modularity out of the kernel. Just my 2c.
Slavery has only time to honor it, innovation to suffer from it, and the master-slave context to remain after that that employment is terminated for reasons that only a stockholder could love. Fie.
Every quarter, each publicly traded corporation must feed JabbaTheStockAnalysts, who will deem them more, or less capitalized by their whimsy, the weather, and other important factors.
Martin's not very nice towards the consumer/populist mentality that he's sworn to protect.
We the Major Corps, in order to form a more perfect shareholder experience, establish Justice, ensure domestic Profits, provide for the common litigation defence, promote the general Marketing Plan, and Secure the the blessings of the SEC, to ourselves and Posterity, do ordain......
Oh, now that Craigslist and others have eaten their classifieds, and online communities do better news, they're starting to pay attention.
They do this by wrapping the Sunday Comics in tear-away ads, and other slimey things that their sales guys must drool over.
They launched a city site, and have all sorts of 'business partners' to feed and link content. Seemingly astute, but state of the art 1998.
Their website currently as a registration policy that makes the old WSJ and NYT premiums seem laughable by comparison.
I think I like their old crabby-assed publisher better. At least he knew how to pay reporters and do investigative journalism. The reporters are all but gone, and there hasn't been an investigative piece since the takeover. Why ruffle advertiser feathers, after all?
Perhaps it's Sneaky Time to do this on Holiday Break (for Congress, anyway) so that he won't catch too much hell.
It would make a nice present for Murdoch, and the other media gluttons.
Where I live, we have a newspaper monopoly brought to you by Gannett and the quality of the newspaper plainly stinks, now that they've put all of the competition out of business.
That pesky competition stuff seems all too familiar at the FCC these days. It makes one wonder what might happen if the FCC had the interests of the American consumer in mind, rather than that of the media and telco mega-corps.
Let's see. Why would someone need GBE to the home.
Well, mom's in the kitchen downloading a stream at HD RATES of her favorite show, Oprah 2.0.
Dad's upstairs doing an online improvement of his golf swing.
Junior's in his bed room watching porn, with four MURPGs going, a live video of the away game that the b-ball team is playing, and carrying on audio conversations with 11 people in the game in realtime.
Sis is in the living room, having a virtual pajama party with ten of her friends. Now that the price of gasoline is $91.099/gal, everything's virtual.
Bowser's getting an online MRI scan to see if the surgery went ok. The darn robot's been chasing him around the house, but the house downstairs computer located him by GIS and now his him in the clutches of the MRI machine. Darn dog, anyway.
While some of this is science fiction, so were cell phones, HDTV, MRI units, and multi-user role playing games just 20 years ago.
Your statement reminds me of Bill Gate's declaration that everyone will be fine in just 640K of DRAM. This same madness infects passive optical distribution systems, and one day, there'll be a digital backhoe that'll rip lots of this stuff out to be replaced by non-proprietary, head-in-the-sand, cheapskate infrastructure.
FIOS and its proprietary GPON scheme is balanced towards downloads. It's not symmetrical, and was never planned to be. The differences between BPON and GPON are moot in the consumer's context-- they're both *passive* optical networking schemes that use splitters, and that's where I have problems with it. It's inexpensive, and it's a bad long term asset play.
FIOS is one of any number of schemes, and it requires, as does cable, surrendering the consumer possibility of third party provisioning over time. In other words, you're tied to the carrier and its scheme-- Verizon in the case of FIOS.
Although the same thing can be said about cable in most markets, the upstream switch is all important. Those beige cans now sitting in various neighborhoods don't have the concurrent peak throughput you speak of. Open up one of those cans if you like and look inside, then put what you see into a spreadsheet. This is the eventual downfall of FIOS; it's a short term solution, and it's not bi-directionally symmetrical.
Gigabit to the den isn't going to be very practical in FIOS. Worse, Verizon promises a lot of communities FIOS deployments, but then takes years to get started as the capital costs are huge, and Verizon has a weak market cap and can't do everything they promise right away. This has the effect of causing communities to take the bait, then wait years. Look at Ft Wayne IN for a peak of how slow it can go.
Congestion hasn't started because their approach isn't taxed very much yet.
Will Comcast be able to compete? Yes. It's the last mile + the inherent long term viability of the design that makes a difference. Comcast already has great position in easements, rights of way, and a distributed network where 'triple play' is paying the bills. They have the same upstream viability in terms of aggregate/peak throughput that Verizon or (AT&T) DSL has. They don't, however, have the cost of deployment-- which is going down quickly.
Instead of FIOS, we need intermediate/neighborhood distribution infrastructure that allows pure symmetry through the network, if the asset life of the deployment is going to be viable in 20 years.
The added services over time are what will be the ticket; triple/quadruple/quintuple or whatever marketing words that you'd like to describe services with. The anti-cable marketing FUD is just that. Comcast and cable in general has a great chance to win based not only on historical reasons, but because they're not mindless telcos, whose mentality hasn't shifted much since the 1960s. FIOS, in a way, is like ATM: bad technology that looks really good on the surface, but isn't market sensitive. Telcos never are: they're monopolized revenue sensitive.
Newbury Networks, among others, have used triangulation coupled with latency to 'watch' 'intruders' on networks.
Businesses that don't put lock on their doors-- oops I mean a strong access key-- invite break-ins. It IS POSSIBLE to secure specific access points to the point where it's no longer useful to try and crack them; WPA2 with a random strong temporal, randomly-changed key (say 24hrs at most) will suffice. Instead, notebooks or stationary devices are more astute targets for the ne'er-do-wells.
Self-built companies are admirable, if for their survivability.
I don't imply that your code is in anyway unethical or illegal.
However, the origin of code is important. If it's GPLVx, CCx, or Whateverx is a big deal. Whether open or closed source is a matter for another discussion.
It seems we've both had drama-queen coders that were more interested in creating smoke than writing with fire. We'd both sack them.
There's a decided process, however, where referential source integrity is part and parcel to quality code. Dragging and dropping snippets can seem great on the outside until something explodes, minutes later during a compile, or years later when Swiss Cheese code starts to rear its ugly head. That's why vetting code, putting into a tree, using quality assurance methods, deliver desirable and solid and possibly re-usable assets with out the first hesitation of origin.
That's what I've implied. Nothing more. Drama queen coders are a hassle, but I'll take ethics (not morals, the two are different) over unethical/unvetted code in a heartbeat, and never look back.
as is mentioned upthread, published works are owned by their authors by copyright in the USA,
I'd prefer an ethical behavior on the part of all of my employees; some do better jobs than others-- but ethics comes first. Our code is clean, was clean, will be clean, and adheres to the licensing and copyright strictures.
Dry-ripping/cutting&pasting code from any old website is beyond stupid, it's lax, possibly criminal, and well, you haven't vetted the code against standards and practices-- what if it blows up or creates a nice nugget of crap in otherwise vetted code.
I disagree with your practices. They put output over ethics, suggest unscrupulous use of code, violate standards practices, and create possible conflicts with other code. Swiping unknown code from a random website's bad practice.
Slashdot Mirror
Did you see 2.4ghz? Bluetooth works within roughly the same channel grouping as 802.11b/g. It uses frequency hopping, and in many implementations is good for about 10m so it's somewhat impractical for what they're trying to do. There are other Bluetooth classes that both have a larger range, and also a slightly better data rate. But you don't want them, so I wouldn't worry about the lack of an implementation. Worse: Bluetooth is low-power (hence the short range, incl standby modes, etc) and must be bonded with devices, thus not freely allowing its use in a MAN, but maybe a LAN, but more preferred: a PAN.
I'm sure your are understanding this. problem.
Outsourcing there is much of today. Many countries have good writers that can speak English, evin if its a secund languig.
American technical writers can cost very much money, you know.
Footnotes are great.
Training is great, too, but because it costs money, no one does it. Then they all go berserk when something doesn't work in an obvious way to them.
That's not to say software quality and behavior is in any way always optimum, rather, one person's instinct is another person's banal obscurity.
Train train train.... (sung to Aretha Franklin's Chain chain chain....)
Anyone with any agenda can manipulate Wikipedia. There are no real credentials, just a few rules. I'm surprised that there hasn't been more argumentative revising of various entries. The medium is rife with contentious possibilities. That one political school of thoughts and its agents would manipulate content is no surprise at all.
Seeking justice implies injury (we probably have that, and you cite several likely cases) and the need to remedy that injury.
Doing that, getting justice, means removing anonymity for the full editing process-- which can be done with lots of software. Then we can pick, perhaps by color or another annotation, which version we want to see; left wing, right wing, centrist, socialist, green, and so on. We'll know the content by its source and judge from there. Until then, please don't be surprised by media content swaying on public forums.
No, it's your job to be familiar with the operation of your operating system, your network, and your applications, and their functionality as a user.
Certainly, when things go wrong or seemingly wrong, you can get support. You won't learn much from it as the support personnel are there to fix a problem, not educate you or substitute as your OS/network/apps trainer.
Support personnel are there to help you use the software to achieve a task.
If you want to support your revenue, become familiar with what you're doing- just like operating a car, a pistol, or a remote control-- all of which can kill you.
You have an obligation not to shoot off as in shoot-ready-aim just because you didn't want to do something that was unobvious to you. Yes, error messages suck. Yes, the manual and help screens were written in techicaljargonesegeekspeak. Deal with personal responsibility. Otherwise, we're sending you to India for tech support (with apologies to my Indian friends).
1) the mad bcc cya artists, who propagate more messages than the worst spammers on earth
2) all of the millions of people that don't RTFM or help screens before lifting the phone and calling tech support; yes, the manuals and help screens suck, so did your chemistry book.
3) people that experiment with key configuration settings. Go ahead, click that DHCP button.
4) the well-intentioned, yet clueless. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
5) fanboi bigots; these weak ego'd miscreants are so insecure that the mere mention of a competing technology will drive them into brutal defensive postures. Their reactions remind me of our current political upheaval
I still think in cycles, or ticks.
It comes from learning Z80/8080 assembler first, before BASIC, before C. Until that point, I knew a few macro languages.
In my mind, I'm still in a 32K machine, living with the OS, writing strings to hardware ports, and using my own interrupt vector code in concert with the host cycles to get work done.
When I work in C or C++ (heaven forbid #), there's a link list in my mind about array conservation, minimizing strings, using hashing and strict Booleans to get a job done.
No, I'm not an embedded systems coder; I just end up thinking like one.
My comments used to go thru an assembler, and I'd look at the code and try and re-optimize it. And when my code would explode, it would explode to unrecognizable shards of crap until I learned atomization (objects) and resource re-entrance. Now when my code doesn't work, my deadman's switch monitor twigs, which backstreams messages. It makes coding highly involved, but vastly more productive because *I CAN* reuse my code.
I worry more about the OS than my own code; there's so much that's not predictable in operating systems today. They should do more work with smaller kernels and leave modularity out of the kernel. Just my 2c.
Slavery has only time to honor it, innovation to suffer from it, and the master-slave context to remain after that that employment is terminated for reasons that only a stockholder could love. Fie.
Lincoln freed the slaves.
We all have free speech and right to association as part of the First Amendment.
Sign such an agreement, and you give up your rights to both.
Capitalist tool.... and another wedge against the spirit behind "We the people...." as opposed to "We, the slaves to stockholders...."
Applause to California and other states that don't enforce these enslavements.
Every quarter, each publicly traded corporation must feed JabbaTheStockAnalysts, who will deem them more, or less capitalized by their whimsy, the weather, and other important factors.
Yoda doesn't have a chance.
You know those crazy craters, getting legs and all. Happens all the time.
There are lots of idiot analysts and journalists out there.
This post had kerosene poured on it.
It makes you wish for less people running around with lit matches.
Bravo on the thesis.
Martin's not very nice towards the consumer/populist mentality that he's sworn to protect.
We the Major Corps, in order to form a more perfect shareholder experience, establish Justice, ensure domestic Profits, provide for the common litigation defence, promote the general Marketing Plan, and Secure the the blessings of the SEC, to ourselves and Posterity, do ordain......
Oh, now that Craigslist and others have eaten their classifieds, and online communities do better news, they're starting to pay attention.
They do this by wrapping the Sunday Comics in tear-away ads, and other slimey things that their sales guys must drool over.
They launched a city site, and have all sorts of 'business partners' to feed and link content. Seemingly astute, but state of the art 1998.
Their website currently as a registration policy that makes the old WSJ and NYT premiums seem laughable by comparison.
I think I like their old crabby-assed publisher better. At least he knew how to pay reporters and do investigative journalism. The reporters are all but gone, and there hasn't been an investigative piece since the takeover. Why ruffle advertiser feathers, after all?
Perhaps it's Sneaky Time to do this on Holiday Break (for Congress, anyway) so that he won't catch too much hell.
It would make a nice present for Murdoch, and the other media gluttons.
Where I live, we have a newspaper monopoly brought to you by Gannett and the quality of the newspaper plainly stinks, now that they've put all of the competition out of business.
That pesky competition stuff seems all too familiar at the FCC these days. It makes one wonder what might happen if the FCC had the interests of the American consumer in mind, rather than that of the media and telco mega-corps.
As implemented in FIOS it is. Otherwise, yes, it's an international standard.
Let's see. Why would someone need GBE to the home.
Well, mom's in the kitchen downloading a stream at HD RATES of her favorite show, Oprah 2.0.
Dad's upstairs doing an online improvement of his golf swing.
Junior's in his bed room watching porn, with four MURPGs going, a live video of the away game that the b-ball team is playing, and carrying on audio conversations with 11 people in the game in realtime.
Sis is in the living room, having a virtual pajama party with ten of her friends. Now that the price of gasoline is $91.099/gal, everything's virtual.
Bowser's getting an online MRI scan to see if the surgery went ok. The darn robot's been chasing him around the house, but the house downstairs computer located him by GIS and now his him in the clutches of the MRI machine. Darn dog, anyway.
While some of this is science fiction, so were cell phones, HDTV, MRI units, and multi-user role playing games just 20 years ago.
Your statement reminds me of Bill Gate's declaration that everyone will be fine in just 640K of DRAM. This same madness infects passive optical distribution systems, and one day, there'll be a digital backhoe that'll rip lots of this stuff out to be replaced by non-proprietary, head-in-the-sand, cheapskate infrastructure.
Hell, Corning wins either way.
It's a bad long term asset play because eventually, it's destined to not have passive splitters, and become a real nodal active network.
In ten years, all that stuff changes-- again!
New CPE (oh yeah, new revenue stream at the last ten feet!).
And new cabinets full of new equipment and revised gear that has to follow a symmetrical, rather than biased asymmetrical model!
Verizon was either visionary, or pulled their design out of Corning's butt, depending whether you're a PR person or a realist.
FIOS and its proprietary GPON scheme is balanced towards downloads. It's not symmetrical, and was never planned to be. The differences between BPON and GPON are moot in the consumer's context-- they're both *passive* optical networking schemes that use splitters, and that's where I have problems with it. It's inexpensive, and it's a bad long term asset play.
FIOS is one of any number of schemes, and it requires, as does cable, surrendering the consumer possibility of third party provisioning over time. In other words, you're tied to the carrier and its scheme-- Verizon in the case of FIOS.
Although the same thing can be said about cable in most markets, the upstream switch is all important. Those beige cans now sitting in various neighborhoods don't have the concurrent peak throughput you speak of. Open up one of those cans if you like and look inside, then put what you see into a spreadsheet. This is the eventual downfall of FIOS; it's a short term solution, and it's not bi-directionally symmetrical.
Gigabit to the den isn't going to be very practical in FIOS. Worse, Verizon promises a lot of communities FIOS deployments, but then takes years to get started as the capital costs are huge, and Verizon has a weak market cap and can't do everything they promise right away. This has the effect of causing communities to take the bait, then wait years. Look at Ft Wayne IN for a peak of how slow it can go.
Congestion hasn't started because their approach isn't taxed very much yet.
Will Comcast be able to compete? Yes. It's the last mile + the inherent long term viability of the design that makes a difference. Comcast already has great position in easements, rights of way, and a distributed network where 'triple play' is paying the bills. They have the same upstream viability in terms of aggregate/peak throughput that Verizon or (AT&T) DSL has. They don't, however, have the cost of deployment-- which is going down quickly.
Instead of FIOS, we need intermediate/neighborhood distribution infrastructure that allows pure symmetry through the network, if the asset life of the deployment is going to be viable in 20 years.
The added services over time are what will be the ticket; triple/quadruple/quintuple or whatever marketing words that you'd like to describe services with. The anti-cable marketing FUD is just that. Comcast and cable in general has a great chance to win based not only on historical reasons, but because they're not mindless telcos, whose mentality hasn't shifted much since the 1960s. FIOS, in a way, is like ATM: bad technology that looks really good on the surface, but isn't market sensitive. Telcos never are: they're monopolized revenue sensitive.
Newbury Networks, among others, have used triangulation coupled with latency to 'watch' 'intruders' on networks.
Businesses that don't put lock on their doors-- oops I mean a strong access key-- invite break-ins. It IS POSSIBLE to secure specific access points to the point where it's no longer useful to try and crack them; WPA2 with a random strong temporal, randomly-changed key (say 24hrs at most) will suffice. Instead, notebooks or stationary devices are more astute targets for the ne'er-do-wells.
Self-built companies are admirable, if for their survivability.
I don't imply that your code is in anyway unethical or illegal.
However, the origin of code is important. If it's GPLVx, CCx, or Whateverx is a big deal. Whether open or closed source is a matter for another discussion.
It seems we've both had drama-queen coders that were more interested in creating smoke than writing with fire. We'd both sack them.
There's a decided process, however, where referential source integrity is part and parcel to quality code. Dragging and dropping snippets can seem great on the outside until something explodes, minutes later during a compile, or years later when Swiss Cheese code starts to rear its ugly head. That's why vetting code, putting into a tree, using quality assurance methods, deliver desirable and solid and possibly re-usable assets with out the first hesitation of origin.
That's what I've implied. Nothing more. Drama queen coders are a hassle, but I'll take ethics (not morals, the two are different) over unethical/unvetted code in a heartbeat, and never look back.
as is mentioned upthread, published works are owned by their authors by copyright in the USA,
I'd prefer an ethical behavior on the part of all of my employees; some do better jobs than others-- but ethics comes first. Our code is clean, was clean, will be clean, and adheres to the licensing and copyright strictures.
Dry-ripping/cutting&pasting code from any old website is beyond stupid, it's lax, possibly criminal, and well, you haven't vetted the code against standards and practices-- what if it blows up or creates a nice nugget of crap in otherwise vetted code.
I disagree with your practices. They put output over ethics, suggest unscrupulous use of code, violate standards practices, and create possible conflicts with other code. Swiping unknown code from a random website's bad practice.
Dogged determination. Referential integrity in the face of astounding, if typical, high-priced FUD.
Three Cheers to a friend of the open source community, diligent, tenacious, and gleeful in that determination.
Integrity counts. Pamela Jones is a champion of the OSS community and the values it stands for.
It's not my task.
But since you insist: http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/11/25/canada.taser.ap/index.html
from this very afternoon.