agreed...I'll consider DDT and antimalarial treatment. I applaud the sentiment, but the focus seems misguided. I wonder how many of the kids Negropronte has targeted actually live on a reliable power grid? $25/hour seems pretty steep for the usefull lifetime of a computer in the bush.
One wonders how much good could be done if said funds were used to keep a few more million contributing souls alive each year? An adult dose of antimalarial drugs run from $0.10 to $1.00, http://www.rbm.who.int/amd2003/amr2003/ch3.html depending upon who you ask. Add a few bucks for delivery and dissemination, and maybe one of those kids invents the $10 computer.
Ther ia a better question than "is high quality ubiquity good", the answer to that is obvious.
The real question is will the world support software insurance sales as a viable business? Using JBoss as an example, they sell 3 things
1. Cost advantage vs. other guy (note there must be another guy to make this work) 2. Faster Better Cheaper support for problems 3. Indemnification against IP suits.
If we are to assume high quality, don't we also assume low support costs? That delta is the gross margin on professional open source. So if the model is selling cheap, indemnified response to a "disaster", then how is this different than All State?
Given the limited bandwidth of most users to begin with, what advantage is there to having 10 separate sources for the content in the first place? At some point (the limit of your download bandwidth) your pipe gets choked, no matter how many different locations the content is served from.
At a place like MS, with the aforementioned HUGE outbound bandwidth, Torrent should be of little or NO advantage, timewise.
The real advantage of this technology is when you are the publisher with limited resources to pay your hosting service for per/GB delivered (approx 3.00USD/GB).
Has anyone done a side-by-side with known bandwidth inbound?
Lets really use the rights we've been given and start naming names. The driver is Erwin Jamie Petterson Jr., and the people that his car rammed into, after crossing the centerline, were Robert and Donna Weiser. As a point order, let me declare my bias: I know the Weiser family.
The DA in the case is attempting to prove "an extreme indifference to the value of human life" in order to get murder 2 to stick. See the Anchorage Daily News for more at http://www.adn.com/front/story/5332477p-5270490c.h tml
Alaska law expressly prohibits a TV in view of the driver of a motor vehicle, but somehow a DVD monitor and a playstation 2 console on the front dashboard of pickup truck are sufficiently different from a TV so as the alleged crime cannot be prosecuted from that angle.
The question is this; how is it that in every state in the US, you can be summarily arrested and charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI/SWI) for the simple act of sitting behind the wheel of a vehicle with the means to operate (read keys) after having 2-3 beers, BUT, a DVD, Playstation, and Monitor banking in to the stickshift of a 5000 lb truck traveling at 65 mph gets you only a cross-eyed look?
This guy should have the right to have his movies, and whatever else he wants in the front of his truck. He should be allowed to drive with a completely opaque windshield if he wants, IMHO. BUT it should be clear and unavoidable, that he also has the right to be held accountable for the consequences of his actions. Hit someone, in mid afternoon light, while they are in their lane...that's on you. Or at least it should be.
Slashdot Mirror
agreed...I'll consider DDT and antimalarial treatment. I applaud the sentiment, but the focus seems misguided. I wonder how many of the kids Negropronte has targeted actually live on a reliable power grid? $25/hour seems pretty steep for the usefull lifetime of a computer in the bush.
One wonders how much good could be done if said funds were used to keep a few more million contributing souls alive each year? An adult dose of antimalarial drugs run from $0.10 to $1.00, http://www.rbm.who.int/amd2003/amr2003/ch3.html depending upon who you ask. Add a few bucks for delivery and dissemination, and maybe one of those kids invents the $10 computer.
Ther ia a better question than "is high quality ubiquity good", the answer to that is obvious.
The real question is will the world support software insurance sales as a viable business?
Using JBoss as an example, they sell 3 things
1. Cost advantage vs. other guy (note there must be another guy to make this work)
2. Faster Better Cheaper support for problems
3. Indemnification against IP suits.
If we are to assume high quality, don't we also assume low support costs? That delta is the gross margin on professional open source.
So if the model is selling cheap, indemnified response to a "disaster", then how is this different than All State?
Given the limited bandwidth of most users to begin with, what advantage is there to having 10 separate sources for the content in the first place? At some point (the limit of your download bandwidth) your pipe gets choked, no matter how many different locations the content is served from.
At a place like MS, with the aforementioned HUGE outbound bandwidth, Torrent should be of little or NO advantage, timewise.
The real advantage of this technology is when you are the publisher with limited resources to pay your hosting service for per/GB delivered (approx 3.00USD/GB).
Has anyone done a side-by-side with known bandwidth inbound?
Lets really use the rights we've been given and start naming names. The driver is Erwin Jamie Petterson Jr., and the people that his car rammed into, after crossing the centerline, were Robert and Donna Weiser. As a point order, let me declare my bias: I know the Weiser family.
h tml
The DA in the case is attempting to prove "an extreme indifference to the value of human life" in order to get murder 2 to stick. See the Anchorage Daily News for more at http://www.adn.com/front/story/5332477p-5270490c.
Alaska law expressly prohibits a TV in view of the driver of a motor vehicle, but somehow a DVD monitor and a playstation 2 console on the front dashboard of pickup truck are sufficiently different from a TV so as the alleged crime cannot be prosecuted from that angle.
The question is this; how is it that in every state in the US, you can be summarily arrested and charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI/SWI) for the simple act of sitting behind the wheel of a vehicle with the means to operate (read keys) after having 2-3 beers, BUT, a DVD, Playstation, and Monitor banking in to the stickshift of a 5000 lb truck traveling at 65 mph gets you only a cross-eyed look?
This guy should have the right to have his movies, and whatever else he wants in the front of his truck. He should be allowed to drive with a completely opaque windshield if he wants, IMHO. BUT it should be clear and unavoidable, that he also has the right to be held accountable for the consequences of his actions. Hit someone, in mid afternoon light, while they are in their lane...that's on you. Or at least it should be.