What you're not following is that the layoffs are in AT&T's declining LANDLINE business, and the growth is in the AT&T WIRELESS business. They have deliberately kept these two businesses separate since the inception of wireless in the 1970's, and have never allowed technical or service people to move freely from one to the other.
Using a Mersenne prime for your private key is kinda like hiding the key to your house under the welcome mat. WAY too hard for any average dumb burglar to figure out.
Read again, stressing the word "independently". If it's in the course of their employment, I do not consider that "independent". (&#%@$& Trolls) { Searches in vain for someone with Mod points. }
No, it's not a crime for an older person to talk to a person underage, but I only do it with people who might be underage with their parents or guardians present. I'm probably paranoid, but there are too many ways to get in trouble these days doing it any other way. It's a sad commentary on the state of our society.
And he never bothered to do something basic like check her drivers license or something? I don't ever TALK to young women under about 25 independently without checking ID's first, and I'm not even remotely interested in sleeping with them (or they with me, for that matter).
One limiting factor of the availability of electric cars that we will be hitting if they become popular is that the motors for them rely on Rare Earth elements to make them light enough to be feasible to operate in an automotive environment. And the problem with rare earth elements is that they are, well, rare. Unless new sources are found (Canada is a probable place), world supplies are likely to be strained, driving up the price of these cars and making them unaffordable.
Since users of the Mac (2008) version of Office didn't have to put up with the Ribbon abortion, can we please exempt the Mac version of Firefox (and hopefully related browsers like the Mac-only Camino) from this big mistake?
There is also conjecture that earth's atmosphere was initially "seeded" by major cometary impacts, without which our kind of life could not have developed. So over the entire history of our planet, (if this is true) cometary impacts have not been completely negative from a human perspective.
And could humans subvert this process through genetic engineering to hasten this genetic drift if we decided that the ants WERE getting to be too much of a bother?
Don't be so smug if you're from the U.S.A., though. There is legislation under consideration that would outlaw anonymous presence on the internet AT ALL in this country... EVERY web address and identity would have to be registered with the government. Hasn't passed yet, but it's being considered.
Actually, in virtually all states there ARE strict legal limits on how and for what offenses an "incumbent local exchange carrier" (AT&T, in most of the areas in which it operates voice telephone service) can cut off your basic local telephone service. Such things are regulated by state commerce commissions or similar bodies, and usually enforced by them and by the public interest office of the state attorney general's office as well.
That is NOT true of internet service, however, which is almost completely unregulated.
Well, yes she is. Functionally, anyway. Vagina, not penis. The sex change surgery is complete, they just didn't remove that particular piece of internal plumbing.
Then there was the case of the "effectiveness" screen that denied coverage for a woman whose doctor was billing for a prostate ultrasound. Obviously unnecessary, right? WRONG. Transsexual. Still had her prostate intact from her former days as a male, still needed the prostate checked periodically.
WAIT. I patented posting from the future in 2009, 2013, 2017, 2024, 2036, and again in 2048. My lawyers (yes we STILL haven't shot all of them) are working diligently on patent renewals in 2067 and 2083.
The problem comes in with things like cable-delivered services, where a number of customers are essentially sharing a "party line". If one customer is using the 10MBPS fully, others don't get much at all. The question is, is the ISP (cable company) justified in cutting back on what each customer can use in order to be certain that the limited bandwidth is distributed "fairly" among all the people that the cable company chooses to put on the same circuit. Or does the cable company really have an obligation to make more bandwidth available by cutting down on the number of subscribers per "line"?
This doesn't happen much with the (slower-speed) telecom DSL service, because each customer has a dedicated pair back to the central office, as long as there is no significant "leakage" of signal within a cable bundle.
I'm told I get 10 MBPS. As far as I'm concerned, that means 10 MPBS 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for as long as I pay my bill. Any effort to throttle that back and I sue for false advertising.
Read it again. It says "UP TO 10 Mbps", doesn't it?
OMG WOW! I want to run some software from the late 80s, because it is obviously superior to modern software ~ Actually, I'd like to find a replacement for something like SuperPaint. An under $50 (call it $100 now) drawing program with multiple layers, on-screen coordinates for precise placement of objects, the ability to switch seamlessly between bitmap and object modes for creation (with "outline" ability), a really huge palate of available shapes, and a few other goodies I've forgotten over the years. I can't seem to buy anything like that these days.
NO, the good old USA. Mom lost her pension when her ex-company went bankrupt and she had to rely on Socialist Security. I tried to avoid that fate by taking my pension as a lump sum distribution, but it got hammered in the dot-com bust and is just now recovering. The good news is I had a bundle of it in gold in the past couple of months. Now that everybody else is buying gold, I'll be selling.
Not sure whose logo I should be staring at for that one. Sure not Bear Stearns.
Slashdot logo - made you move back into your mother's basement.
Funny, shortly after I discovered Slashdot (and got promoted to Technical Systems Architect, purely coincidental synchronicity I assume) my mother moved into my basement.
And as somebody who spent 1998 and 1999 personally helping Ameritech prove that they were complying with the "equal access" provisions of TA96, and saw the tremendous amount of time and effort that went into that enterprise throughout all areas of the company, I'd say you are at least as full of it if not more so.
We worked our butts off to comply with those regulations, and were subject to penalties that could literally run to tens of millions of dollars a month if we did NOT comply. There was no question of ducking. An entire Business Unit (Ameritech Information Industry Services) existed almost exclusively to HELP competitors who were customers of the company (using company-owned facilities to access end user customers) succeed in their efforts in spite of incredibly convoluted regulations.
As an example of the latter, if an RBOC dispatched a technician to a customer's premise to do some work, and the customer was not there, if the customer "belonged" to the RBOC the tech could use the "can be reached" number to contact the customer directly and make arrangements to meet them at a convenient time to get the work done. Here's how it had to work in the same situation if the customer belonged to a competitor: the tech called his or her dispatcher, who then called a designated individual at the Information Industry Services group. That person then called the IIS service rep responsible for dealing with the competitor, who called their opposite number at the competitive company. That person then usually called THEIR customer service department, who then called the customer. Information is then relayed back up the chain in the opposite direction. NOW, the rules of TA96 say that these two transactions (telco customer and CLEC customer) must take place in the same amount of time! See why we were a busy bunch?
I'm not saying that the telcos never sandbagged anything, or that they never lobbied to get better provisions in legislation. Of course they did. But when it came down to it in a regulated environment, the telcos did the work.
Slashdot Mirror
What you're not following is that the layoffs are in AT&T's declining LANDLINE business, and the growth is in the AT&T WIRELESS business. They have deliberately kept these two businesses separate since the inception of wireless in the 1970's, and have never allowed technical or service people to move freely from one to the other.
Not to mention the second amendment. Its kind of part of the bill of rights.
Provided the Supreme Court agrees that it is in the Chicago case this term
Using a Mersenne prime for your private key is kinda like hiding the key to your house under the welcome mat. WAY too hard for any average dumb burglar to figure out.
"I don't ever TALK to young women under about 25 independently without checking ID's first..."
Just goes to show you don't have to be a politician to be a liar.
Two bad assumptions there, Mr. Coward.
Read again, stressing the word "independently". If it's in the course of their employment, I do not consider that "independent". (&#%@$& Trolls) { Searches in vain for someone with Mod points. }
No, it's not a crime for an older person to talk to a person underage, but I only do it with people who might be underage with their parents or guardians present. I'm probably paranoid, but there are too many ways to get in trouble these days doing it any other way. It's a sad commentary on the state of our society.
And he never bothered to do something basic like check her drivers license or something? I don't ever TALK to young women under about 25 independently without checking ID's first, and I'm not even remotely interested in sleeping with them (or they with me, for that matter).
One limiting factor of the availability of electric cars that we will be hitting if they become popular is that the motors for them rely on Rare Earth elements to make them light enough to be feasible to operate in an automotive environment. And the problem with rare earth elements is that they are, well, rare. Unless new sources are found (Canada is a probable place), world supplies are likely to be strained, driving up the price of these cars and making them unaffordable.
That's why John Gilmore has that picture on his home page with the question "I'm still free. What about YOU?"
Since users of the Mac (2008) version of Office didn't have to put up with the Ribbon abortion, can we please exempt the Mac version of Firefox (and hopefully related browsers like the Mac-only Camino) from this big mistake?
There is also conjecture that earth's atmosphere was initially "seeded" by major cometary impacts, without which our kind of life could not have developed. So over the entire history of our planet, (if this is true) cometary impacts have not been completely negative from a human perspective.
And I guess these people have never heard of the Vinge Singularity before?
And could humans subvert this process through genetic engineering to hasten this genetic drift if we decided that the ants WERE getting to be too much of a bother?
Don't be so smug if you're from the U.S.A., though. There is legislation under consideration that would outlaw anonymous presence on the internet AT ALL in this country ... EVERY web address and identity would have to be registered with the government. Hasn't passed yet, but it's being considered.
Actually, in virtually all states there ARE strict legal limits on how and for what offenses an "incumbent local exchange carrier" (AT&T, in most of the areas in which it operates voice telephone service) can cut off your basic local telephone service. Such things are regulated by state commerce commissions or similar bodies, and usually enforced by them and by the public interest office of the state attorney general's office as well. That is NOT true of internet service, however, which is almost completely unregulated.
Well, yes she is. Functionally, anyway. Vagina, not penis. The sex change surgery is complete, they just didn't remove that particular piece of internal plumbing.
Then there was the case of the "effectiveness" screen that denied coverage for a woman whose doctor was billing for a prostate ultrasound. Obviously unnecessary, right? WRONG. Transsexual. Still had her prostate intact from her former days as a male, still needed the prostate checked periodically.
WAIT. I patented posting from the future in 2009, 2013, 2017, 2024, 2036, and again in 2048. My lawyers (yes we STILL haven't shot all of them) are working diligently on patent renewals in 2067 and 2083.
The problem comes in with things like cable-delivered services, where a number of customers are essentially sharing a "party line". If one customer is using the 10MBPS fully, others don't get much at all. The question is, is the ISP (cable company) justified in cutting back on what each customer can use in order to be certain that the limited bandwidth is distributed "fairly" among all the people that the cable company chooses to put on the same circuit. Or does the cable company really have an obligation to make more bandwidth available by cutting down on the number of subscribers per "line"?
This doesn't happen much with the (slower-speed) telecom DSL service, because each customer has a dedicated pair back to the central office, as long as there is no significant "leakage" of signal within a cable bundle.
I'm told I get 10 MBPS. As far as I'm concerned, that means 10 MPBS 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for as long as I pay my bill. Any effort to throttle that back and I sue for false advertising.
Read it again. It says "UP TO 10 Mbps", doesn't it?OK Min, you've got my vote for "this month's best SIG" with that one about "Microsoft.com" resolving. That's one I wish I'd thought of first.
NO, the good old USA. Mom lost her pension when her ex-company went bankrupt and she had to rely on Socialist Security. I tried to avoid that fate by taking my pension as a lump sum distribution, but it got hammered in the dot-com bust and is just now recovering. The good news is I had a bundle of it in gold in the past couple of months. Now that everybody else is buying gold, I'll be selling.
Not sure whose logo I should be staring at for that one. Sure not Bear Stearns.
And as somebody who spent 1998 and 1999 personally helping Ameritech prove that they were complying with the "equal access" provisions of TA96, and saw the tremendous amount of time and effort that went into that enterprise throughout all areas of the company, I'd say you are at least as full of it if not more so.
We worked our butts off to comply with those regulations, and were subject to penalties that could literally run to tens of millions of dollars a month if we did NOT comply. There was no question of ducking. An entire Business Unit (Ameritech Information Industry Services) existed almost exclusively to HELP competitors who were customers of the company (using company-owned facilities to access end user customers) succeed in their efforts in spite of incredibly convoluted regulations.
As an example of the latter, if an RBOC dispatched a technician to a customer's premise to do some work, and the customer was not there, if the customer "belonged" to the RBOC the tech could use the "can be reached" number to contact the customer directly and make arrangements to meet them at a convenient time to get the work done. Here's how it had to work in the same situation if the customer belonged to a competitor: the tech called his or her dispatcher, who then called a designated individual at the Information Industry Services group. That person then called the IIS service rep responsible for dealing with the competitor, who called their opposite number at the competitive company. That person then usually called THEIR customer service department, who then called the customer. Information is then relayed back up the chain in the opposite direction. NOW, the rules of TA96 say that these two transactions (telco customer and CLEC customer) must take place in the same amount of time! See why we were a busy bunch?
I'm not saying that the telcos never sandbagged anything, or that they never lobbied to get better provisions in legislation. Of course they did. But when it came down to it in a regulated environment, the telcos did the work.