Having worked for Time-Warner in the Roadrunner division, and having RTFA, let me be the one to smash your dreams:
This is not a subscriber level service.
Cable companies essentially have the same topology in HFC (hybrid fiber-coax) networks. They have their data center, with their connection to the backbone, and have fiber to several hubs, which are essentially the "regional" or "metropolitan" branch sites. From the hubs, served by fiber, coax is run to the individual nodes, which subscriber services are branched off from. What this is all about is the connection between hubs and nodes - there's more overhead bandwidth available farther downstream - but not yet to the customer premise. The four coax lines sent from the hub to the node can now support 100mbps symmetrical.
This enhances the inter-nodal communications, the junctions between the fiber backbone most major cable companies have deployed and the coax they use to push their various signals out to consumer premises. In essence, they're getting 100mbps over coax for the four coax "pipes" used to support the node itself. While it's a big deal insomuch as it means they have a lot more ceiling with regards to bandwidth and deployment of available services, it's not the point that they've got fiber past the hubs to the individual nodes... yet. It does mean, however, that there's less need to deploy more nodes (read: capital expense) so they can spend that money on R&D and getting "faster" to go "farther." Ultimately, it'll end up with fiber to the pole, then finally fiber to the house.
What it WILL mean? You should see an increase in upload caps sooner than you thought... and cable companies are getting ready for a lot, lot more HD and HD-on-demand services. Remember, their focus is still video - data is just an added bonus.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! What's their hand sign? Do they go around flashing their USB drive covers to each other to represent their set? Do they have license plates with their IP subnets? Yeah, boyee!
From TFA: "The stolen code was a portion of Cisco's Internetworking Operating System version 12.3. The incident has been a matter of concern because malicious hackers might find flaws in the code that could be exploited to impair the functioning of Cisco's routers."
Translation: We don't have time to QA this code, so we'd rather not have anyone do it themselves, either, then hack us with the holes we neglected to look for in the first place.
Ugh. Sometimes I wonder if there ought to be an open-source REQUIREMENT in RFP's to vendors. Hell, code availability has HELPED Linksys (who's also Cisco!) - folks have "hacked" it to make it MORE robust, but you don't see any greater number of "hacks" for Linksys products than you do for anyone else...
Maybe Cisco ought to focus on the security BASICS (it's still easiest to get into some else's network because they never changed the default password than it is to script-kid some mutated hack into working) rather than worrying that "outsiders" might actually harden their products FOR them...
The silver button in fact looks like a small trackball... something you could reach to make fine adjustments or precise aiming. Would be really nice to be able to reach up with one hand on the analog stick and use one finger to exactly align a shot, rather than having to guess at how much more pressure might make me shoot wide...
Wrong..22c (1/5th the speed of light). You were off by a factor of 100 - you forgot to handle the percentage...
On Google - enter "1,500,000 miles per hour in feet per second", then seach for "speed of light in feet per second." Divide the first by the second, THEN MULTIPLY BY 100 SINCE YOU'RE WORKING WITH PERCENT!
While this seems astounding, leaving some to wonder "how's a star stay together at 1.5MM mph?", it's important to remember that, for all intents and purposes, it's travelling through NOTHING, through a vacuum. As long as its velocity is stable (not running into things to slow it down), there's no inertia to change it's shape, etc.
Is there *really* a difference, physically, on an object moving at 1.5MM mph and one standing completely still, if they're not interacting with anything else? No. Their inertias are the same, so their physical properties and interactions are the same.
Momentum, however, could be a bitch. Imagine this star slamming into another star (or, a la the Death Star, a small planet in the Aldeberan system). Ka-pow, with the graphic like on the old Batman series! Would make Levy-Shoemaker look like a BB gun (you're gonna put your eye out!)...
So I expect that Longhorn will run perfectly well on today's mid- to high-end systems, since they're trying to take advantage of video power currently going unused. Today's bottom-range systems may not run it at all, or will do so pokily.
So, for all these "high-end" systems being sold to consumer-sheep at Best Buy, Circuit City, Dell Online, etc. with the "Intel Integrated Graphics" and "Shared Video Memory," they'll run like CRAP because the processor will be so busy rendering Longhorn GUI details that it is bumping "normal" priority threads/processes out for the system itself?
Yeah, I can see that happening. What is MORE likely is that Longhorn will use the XP UI, and auto-detect those systems that have separate video cards and turn on additional GUI features from there...
Much like reverse-DNS, this creates a standard for backwards-masking phone numbers +.e164.arpa and hosting them in DNS like anything else. The root structure, etc. would have to be stabilized worldwide like DNS, but it would make adding country codes, area codes, etc. very easy and provide for some pretty swift and nifty ties between IP, IPv6, domain names/DNS and phone numbers.
Makes one wonder about lawsuits coming with regards to local number portability...
"I moved to Kansas from Texas, but I still want to keep my Dallas area code! I want SBC to have to transfer my POTS phone number to my new address!"
For VoIP providers, this is a relatively easy task - they just assign the inbound number to an account/IP address. For POTS providers, this is a bit more complex, as the routing tables on the Class 5 switches (using SS7) aren't set up like DNS is for the internet...
The original article has been/.'ed already, but there's a cogent point to be made:
Unless the images are titled, tagged, annotated, etc., there's no good way to index them.
If I just throws a bunch of images up on a web site, there's not good technology, other than some pretty advanced facial recognition stuff, that can determine who, or what, a particular picture represents.
Change the resolution, color depth, etc. and I change the checksum for the image, so the index fails to recognize that one picture is the "same" as another, just resized, etc.
I see a lot of that on Google's image search - but can't find a way around it, either.
I wonder - would he take extra money to wear the ball in his moth WHILE "The Gimp" is tattooed on his forehead? Would the advertiser be liable for medical bills?
Now, all the uber-geeks can finally at least say that by bidding they had a chance at getting head on the internet...
Seriously, folks, I shave my head daily. I'll sell advertising space on the BACK of my head so that everyone behind me can read it. How creepy would it be to want to read someone's forehead, but not want to stare...
They're talking about regulating the ads used by the different campaigns and them working with groups like 509's.
Hardly a "OMG MY RIGHTS" issue.
Unless, of course, you happen to support one of those 509's, and would rather contribute to them and finance their speaking for you rather than learning to build your own web site, hosting it and putting up a redundant page.
In that case, it is an OMG MY RIGHTS situation, because I'm being told that I can't help someone speak for me, even if they can spak louder than "just me" or have more resources when those who think like me pool together.
Doesn't matter which side of the fence you're on, you're being told that the only way you can tell someone the grass is greener is by shouting over the fence instead of coming together to buy ad space on a billboard.
LOL... have you installed OO on a Mac? It's not too bad an installation, once you get X11 installed (which is easy, too). Included in the Mac distro is an explanation of the startup script, which both starts X11 and spawns OO on X11. It's really pretty handy, but still a kluge as it leaves the X terminal window open (not necessary). I'd really love it (and consider paying for it) if they ever get the actual Mac integration piece done. Alas, I'm not a coder.
As for Ubuntu, I saw it mentioned here and installed it for a testbed. Turns out that it's a really solid distro with a simple installer and nice package management. OO should look at something like that to help them with module updates, etc.
Some read, some post, and some follow advice... then there's the trolls...
While current Mac/OSX support is decent (you have to use it under X11, but there's easy to use startup scripts for that), I'd love to see a true Mac version. I've been using OOO on my Ubuntu box for a while and found no problems with it for general WP and spreadsheet usage, and I use it on my Mac regularly (mostly with MS Word docs from the office). I enjoy it and think that for a four-year-old product it's a shining example of OpenSource.
The problem with the current patenting scheme as it applies to software is that it's a conceptual patent. Patents, however, were meant to protect applications of concepts.
Take, for instance, the fire service. My dad's a career fireman and sits on several technical committees that draft and approve the specifications for different types of equipment used in firefighting (specifically, breathing apparatus). Every time the specification changes (recently, to include a visual warning device in the face mask to display the percentage/amount of breathable air left in a tank), the vendors have to build new functionality into their gear. Each one has to design something that meets the standard, and each one patents their implementation of the standard, or licenses an already patented mechanism that meets the requirements. Point being, the vendors can't patent the CONCEPT of having a heads-up display, just their particular electro-mechanical implementation if it's something novel.
Software, on the other hand, has been allowed to patent a CONCEPT (such as one-click ordering) rather than a particular implementation simply because they claim that exposing their particulars with respect to implementation (source code) would give someone a competitive advantage against them.
Hogwash. In fact, it's easier to modify a physical device enough to get a new patent... it's harder to modify software to make it apparently distinct from the original patented source, esepcially if it's written in another language where someone is going to make comparisons not on a line-by-line basis but a method-by-method basis, and get into comparative analysis.
I agree that the system is broken and needs to be fixed... and I think the way to do that *is* in fact to require software patents to include their source code as well as a solid description of the methods used (perhaps an object model, as well?)...
The important lines...
on
OQO For Sale
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Unfortunately for Linux users, there is no option to not have any OS installed.
The USB is currently 1.1
So you have to pay M$ royalties, regardless of whether you intend to use Windows, and no USB 2.0 support. Lovely.
Riiight... I don't sign a EULA or any such agreement when I purchase the CD, but that only means that I own the physical CD - not the copyright to the content that's ON the CD. Current copyright laws (other than DMCA) prevent me from selling COPIES of that CD, but I'm free to resell that CD to whomever wants to buy it.
Thus, re-distributing the physical CD that you purchased as your property would be legal (though you would no longer own the right to digital reproductions you might have made as you no longer "own" the content), but re-distributing the protected works contained therein remains illegal.
No, it had digital outs. The point was that hours of random tracks is not some new feature only available to those with digital music players... my iPod does it, but that's not why I bought the iPod.
Since I currently only have Linux machines at home, the included software was useless.
So, was it or was it *not* linux friendly? Seems like linux friendly, especially with java-based software, would mean that the included OS-agnostic, linux-friendly software would both be included AND work. What's the deal, man?
Slashdot Mirror
This is not a subscriber level service.
Cable companies essentially have the same topology in HFC (hybrid fiber-coax) networks. They have their data center, with their connection to the backbone, and have fiber to several hubs, which are essentially the "regional" or "metropolitan" branch sites. From the hubs, served by fiber, coax is run to the individual nodes, which subscriber services are branched off from. What this is all about is the connection between hubs and nodes - there's more overhead bandwidth available farther downstream - but not yet to the customer premise. The four coax lines sent from the hub to the node can now support 100mbps symmetrical.
This enhances the inter-nodal communications, the junctions between the fiber backbone most major cable companies have deployed and the coax they use to push their various signals out to consumer premises. In essence, they're getting 100mbps over coax for the four coax "pipes" used to support the node itself. While it's a big deal insomuch as it means they have a lot more ceiling with regards to bandwidth and deployment of available services, it's not the point that they've got fiber past the hubs to the individual nodes... yet. It does mean, however, that there's less need to deploy more nodes (read: capital expense) so they can spend that money on R&D and getting "faster" to go "farther." Ultimately, it'll end up with fiber to the pole, then finally fiber to the house.
What it WILL mean? You should see an increase in upload caps sooner than you thought... and cable companies are getting ready for a lot, lot more HD and HD-on-demand services. Remember, their focus is still video - data is just an added bonus.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! What's their hand sign? Do they go around flashing their USB drive covers to each other to represent their set? Do they have license plates with their IP subnets? Yeah, boyee!
Translation: We don't have time to QA this code, so we'd rather not have anyone do it themselves, either, then hack us with the holes we neglected to look for in the first place.
Ugh. Sometimes I wonder if there ought to be an open-source REQUIREMENT in RFP's to vendors. Hell, code availability has HELPED Linksys (who's also Cisco!) - folks have "hacked" it to make it MORE robust, but you don't see any greater number of "hacks" for Linksys products than you do for anyone else...
Maybe Cisco ought to focus on the security BASICS (it's still easiest to get into some else's network because they never changed the default password than it is to script-kid some mutated hack into working) rather than worrying that "outsiders" might actually harden their products FOR them...
Here's hoping it really is a small trackball...
Wonder if that pirate pic was taken with a WinCE based Smartphone? That would only be too ironic...
Wrong. .22c (1/5th the speed of light). You were off by a factor of 100 - you forgot to handle the percentage...
On Google - enter "1,500,000 miles per hour in feet per second", then seach for "speed of light in feet per second." Divide the first by the second, THEN MULTIPLY BY 100 SINCE YOU'RE WORKING WITH PERCENT!
Is there *really* a difference, physically, on an object moving at 1.5MM mph and one standing completely still, if they're not interacting with anything else? No. Their inertias are the same, so their physical properties and interactions are the same.
Momentum, however, could be a bitch. Imagine this star slamming into another star (or, a la the Death Star, a small planet in the Aldeberan system). Ka-pow, with the graphic like on the old Batman series! Would make Levy-Shoemaker look like a BB gun (you're gonna put your eye out!)...
So, for all these "high-end" systems being sold to consumer-sheep at Best Buy, Circuit City, Dell Online, etc. with the "Intel Integrated Graphics" and "Shared Video Memory," they'll run like CRAP because the processor will be so busy rendering Longhorn GUI details that it is bumping "normal" priority threads/processes out for the system itself?
Yeah, I can see that happening. What is MORE likely is that Longhorn will use the XP UI, and auto-detect those systems that have separate video cards and turn on additional GUI features from there...
United States Government-Attorney Office
(702) 388-6336 - 0.6 mi S
United States Government: Fbi-Federal Bureau of Investigations
(702) 385-1281 - 1.2 mi S
Sheri's Ranch
(775) 751-5111 - 45 mi W
Las Vegas Freebies
(702) 368-1779 - 4.1 mi SW
Way to go Google!!!
In Google's sense, I'd suspect the second... :)
Actually, there's a plan for something just like this - an ITU standard, in fact. Check out , a link to the wikipedia article on E.164.
Much like reverse-DNS, this creates a standard for backwards-masking phone numbers + .e164.arpa and hosting them in DNS like anything else. The root structure, etc. would have to be stabilized worldwide like DNS, but it would make adding country codes, area codes, etc. very easy and provide for some pretty swift and nifty ties between IP, IPv6, domain names/DNS and phone numbers.
"I moved to Kansas from Texas, but I still want to keep my Dallas area code! I want SBC to have to transfer my POTS phone number to my new address!"
For VoIP providers, this is a relatively easy task - they just assign the inbound number to an account/IP address. For POTS providers, this is a bit more complex, as the routing tables on the Class 5 switches (using SS7) aren't set up like DNS is for the internet...
The original article has been /.'ed already, but there's a cogent point to be made:
Unless the images are titled, tagged, annotated, etc., there's no good way to index them.
If I just throws a bunch of images up on a web site, there's not good technology, other than some pretty advanced facial recognition stuff, that can determine who, or what, a particular picture represents.
Change the resolution, color depth, etc. and I change the checksum for the image, so the index fails to recognize that one picture is the "same" as another, just resized, etc.
I see a lot of that on Google's image search - but can't find a way around it, either.
all your domain are belong to us
The overview diagram points to a directory, so it can be virtually hosted anywhere, further distributing the load.
Maybe they'd be kind enough to measure the /. effect and post a separate graph showing traffic with referrals from slashdot? Now that would be neato...
Cheers, guys! Steady on!
I wonder - would he take extra money to wear the ball in his moth WHILE "The Gimp" is tattooed on his forehead? Would the advertiser be liable for medical bills?
Seriously, folks, I shave my head daily. I'll sell advertising space on the BACK of my head so that everyone behind me can read it. How creepy would it be to want to read someone's forehead, but not want to stare...
They're talking about regulating the ads used by the different campaigns and them working with groups like 509's.
Hardly a "OMG MY RIGHTS" issue.
Unless, of course, you happen to support one of those 509's, and would rather contribute to them and finance their speaking for you rather than learning to build your own web site, hosting it and putting up a redundant page.
In that case, it is an OMG MY RIGHTS situation, because I'm being told that I can't help someone speak for me, even if they can spak louder than "just me" or have more resources when those who think like me pool together.
Doesn't matter which side of the fence you're on, you're being told that the only way you can tell someone the grass is greener is by shouting over the fence instead of coming together to buy ad space on a billboard.
LOL... have you installed OO on a Mac? It's not too bad an installation, once you get X11 installed (which is easy, too). Included in the Mac distro is an explanation of the startup script, which both starts X11 and spawns OO on X11. It's really pretty handy, but still a kluge as it leaves the X terminal window open (not necessary). I'd really love it (and consider paying for it) if they ever get the actual Mac integration piece done. Alas, I'm not a coder.
As for Ubuntu, I saw it mentioned here and installed it for a testbed. Turns out that it's a really solid distro with a simple installer and nice package management. OO should look at something like that to help them with module updates, etc.
Some read, some post, and some follow advice... then there's the trolls...
While current Mac/OSX support is decent (you have to use it under X11, but there's easy to use startup scripts for that), I'd love to see a true Mac version. I've been using OOO on my Ubuntu box for a while and found no problems with it for general WP and spreadsheet usage, and I use it on my Mac regularly (mostly with MS Word docs from the office). I enjoy it and think that for a four-year-old product it's a shining example of OpenSource.
The problem with the current patenting scheme as it applies to software is that it's a conceptual patent. Patents, however, were meant to protect applications of concepts.
Take, for instance, the fire service. My dad's a career fireman and sits on several technical committees that draft and approve the specifications for different types of equipment used in firefighting (specifically, breathing apparatus). Every time the specification changes (recently, to include a visual warning device in the face mask to display the percentage/amount of breathable air left in a tank), the vendors have to build new functionality into their gear. Each one has to design something that meets the standard, and each one patents their implementation of the standard, or licenses an already patented mechanism that meets the requirements. Point being, the vendors can't patent the CONCEPT of having a heads-up display, just their particular electro-mechanical implementation if it's something novel.
Software, on the other hand, has been allowed to patent a CONCEPT (such as one-click ordering) rather than a particular implementation simply because they claim that exposing their particulars with respect to implementation (source code) would give someone a competitive advantage against them.
Hogwash. In fact, it's easier to modify a physical device enough to get a new patent... it's harder to modify software to make it apparently distinct from the original patented source, esepcially if it's written in another language where someone is going to make comparisons not on a line-by-line basis but a method-by-method basis, and get into comparative analysis.
I agree that the system is broken and needs to be fixed... and I think the way to do that *is* in fact to require software patents to include their source code as well as a solid description of the methods used (perhaps an object model, as well?)...
Unfortunately for Linux users, there is no option to not have any OS installed.
The USB is currently 1.1
So you have to pay M$ royalties, regardless of whether you intend to use Windows, and no USB 2.0 support. Lovely.
Riiight... I don't sign a EULA or any such agreement when I purchase the CD, but that only means that I own the physical CD - not the copyright to the content that's ON the CD. Current copyright laws (other than DMCA) prevent me from selling COPIES of that CD, but I'm free to resell that CD to whomever wants to buy it.
Thus, re-distributing the physical CD that you purchased as your property would be legal (though you would no longer own the right to digital reproductions you might have made as you no longer "own" the content), but re-distributing the protected works contained therein remains illegal.
Not that that was the point of *this* case...
No, it had digital outs. The point was that hours of random tracks is not some new feature only available to those with digital music players... my iPod does it, but that's not why I bought the iPod.
...Linux friendly... is OS-agnostic...
Since I currently only have Linux machines at home, the included software was useless.
So, was it or was it *not* linux friendly? Seems like linux friendly, especially with java-based software, would mean that the included OS-agnostic, linux-friendly software would both be included AND work. What's the deal, man?