My time is too short to go looking for dodgy rips or cinema cams of something on bit-torrent.
with a little practice it's easy to spot the real thing, and there are always helpful to confirm it. the truth is that torrent is much easier and flexible than any other method of paying for content.
i live in silicon valley, supposedly the heart of technical innovation and home to 7.5m people, and i rarely get over 1MB/s and we have a 2GB cap. that's when it works at all.
While what we have is different than what you have, it's not inherently better or worse - just different and an adaptation to our market characteristics.
the USA is inherently worse, because when we purchase a phone, we are bound to a particular carrier. not only do we have contracts and locked phones, but we also have incompatible networks. that means that once a carrier nabs a user with the latest shiny new phone, they are locked. that's an incentive to spend a lot on advertising that shiny new phone and spend very little on things like improving their infrastructure and customer service.
What I'm getting at is that it's better to try and poke the heaviest users to put a little thought into finding another source rather than instantaneously throttling all users as a means of being "fair".
that makes sense if at&t was some sort of collective run by the users. it's not. it's a system where users pay at&t to provide a service. i don't give a rats ass about fairness. i care about getting the service i paid for. regardless of how much bandwidth i consume, it's not my problem that at&t sold a service they could'd provide. oh, and my bill says "unlimited data".
i do understand this sort of thinking though... this small subset of consumers wreaking havoc on at&t's network. however the other side of the story is that despite at&t raking in record profits (think 4+ years of iphone exclusivity) they are still running hardware in places that dates back to the 1970s. it's called reaping what you sow, and they've sown very little. they have a system where it only takes 5% of the users to use their maximum bandwidth (if that?) to bring down the network? that indicates a larger problem in the infrastructure.
that's common sense. amazon wants to drive people to amazon books sales not google books, to amazon appstore, not google market, to amazon VOD, not google movies.
will you be able to get google market through some sort of hack? probably.
if they aren't valuable in a traditional sense, then how? seems to me,
1. it's becoming generally known that businesses rarely make $ from their service. 2. there is no brand loyalty to groupon. 3. they can be easily duplicated / copied.
and finally,
4. unreliable profit stream. the businesses that seek their service do so because they need a quick cash influx. unfortunately, those are the same type of businesses that are likely to default on their debts. they are essentially in the business of making high-risk loans.
the US has no interest in it's neighbors, or anyone else, being stable. that just makes it harder to exploit them. that's why they are active all of the world destabilizing governments.
mexico isn't any different. even if they aren't actively destabilizing mexico, they are doing so by the policies they set around trade and drug control.
Do I know that the lawsuit is frivolous based on a variety of heuristics, bullshit meters and slippery slope possibilities? Yes.
you my friend are the reason we have the legal system we do. people that think they are somehow smart enough to decide all manner of issues based on anecdotal evidence of hearsay.
you can't stop people from filing invalid lawsuits, because you don't know they are invalid until they get in front of a judge and the evidence is presented. or would you apply some sort of magically future-scope where you can tell the outcome before you even allow the suit to be filed?
Almost always, I can order something for half the price online. What do I get for doubling my cost if I go locally? Horrible customer service and having to drive to the store (even more money) instead of having it come to my door. Plus, my service experience with Amazon is better than just about any retail store. This lack of service basically rules out me buying electronics in any local store. And the price is usually cheaper online even with sales tax.
so true. every so often i make the mistake of attempting to purchase something at a BM. i *always* wind up back at my house wondering how i can get the last 2 hours of my life back.
and we have no idea whatsoever they'll do with Ice Cream Sandwich when it comes out on devices
yes, we do. they've publicly stated many times they will open source HC. there's no reason not to believe that.
google, being a publicly held company, is in the business of making money. first and foremost and before anything else. don't act so shocked when the act of making money gets in google's way when it comes to releasing source when you demand it.
Today's phones don't have the hardware to pull this off effectively. But, tomorrow's phones will arrive.
define "tomorrow".
what evidence is there that mobile devices will ever, in the foreseeable future anyway, have the excess battery power to run a VM? the problem is that as batteries get better, they invent new hardware to consume the battery. batteries for the most part are always just barely good enough to run the hardware, and hardware and the software it runs are limited by the battery.
This is just stupid. We WANT AT&T and T-mobile to merge because having one carrier maintain all the GSM infrastructure and manage that spectrum is simply more efficient.
yes, and we want one cable company, one shipping company, one grocery store chain, and one airline too. because after all, it's more efficient right?
5 employees == $600k per year in salary, plus benefits, plus bonuses, stock options, the office space to house them, their computers and maintenance on those computers, other IT costs associated with those employees, and so on. if you have hundreds of "cheap" projects like this, the cost adds up.
don't be so dramatic. oracle will keep things where they can make money, and kill things where they can't. it's pretty simple, and expected behavior from a public company.
It seem strange that Oracle would push people away from Java, especially since Sun spent a great deal of time getting people to adopt it.
i think it's far from that complicated. oracle doesn't care if any particular technology lives or dies. they care if they can make money from it. oracle will do all it can to monetize java. that includes but it not limited to spending less on engineers to maintain it resulting in buggy releases. it also includes building a business around professional services for java deployments, and only fixing bugs that licensed, paying customers care about.
and finally, the real goldmine is JVM-based patent lawsuits. whether java is a quality product, or if anyone is even using java, is irrelevant to that.
There's still comparatively heavy competition in most markets for wired communications services.
? i live in a city of +1 million, and for phone / internet / TV there's AT&T and comcast... and i'm convinced both these guys collude to fix prices as prices are almost identically high and service is identically poor from both providers.
because information is useful when it's shared, and physically carrying around the data on disks / whatever isn't necessarily safer when you consider the scale in which the data is shared.
The titles of both the/. post and the original article imply it's okay to track your spouse, as if you own them and can follow them around, which is not true without their consent. The summary clarifies this as does the original article body. #1 vehicles are in public places and #2 the person who hired the investigator owns or partially owns the car.
hmmm. there's a law that says i can't follow my spouse around?
However, I have a big problem with anyone messing with someone else's car while the car is on public streets. Does anyone else think this is completely backwards?
like everyone else has said: joint ownership. i can ask someone, and sign paperwork that gives someone permission to "mess" with my jointly owned / used car, wherever it may be.
offshoring is cyclic. a technology springs up in nation A, and flourishes for a while, until nation B does it cheaper. which goes on until nation C can do it cheaper than B, and so on.
do you think it's all going to stop in china? china will be able to do everything cheaper than everyone, forever? i'm not bettering on that.
or maybe you think folks should learn the language of every offshoring target. if that were true, i'd be fluent in indian, thai, serbian, russian, and portugese as well.
on the days i forget to take my medication, whenever folks are speaking together in non-english, i yell at them "WHAT ARE YOU SAYING ABOUT ME?". they usually laugh and think i'm joking.
Slashdot Mirror
My time is too short to go looking for dodgy rips or cinema cams of something on bit-torrent.
with a little practice it's easy to spot the real thing, and there are always helpful to confirm it. the truth is that torrent is much easier and flexible than any other method of paying for content.
i live in silicon valley, supposedly the heart of technical innovation and home to 7.5m people, and i rarely get over 1MB/s and we have a 2GB cap. that's when it works at all.
While what we have is different than what you have, it's not inherently better or worse - just different and an adaptation to our market characteristics.
the USA is inherently worse, because when we purchase a phone, we are bound to a particular carrier. not only do we have contracts and locked phones, but we also have incompatible networks. that means that once a carrier nabs a user with the latest shiny new phone, they are locked. that's an incentive to spend a lot on advertising that shiny new phone and spend very little on things like improving their infrastructure and customer service.
What I'm getting at is that it's better to try and poke the heaviest users to put a little thought into finding another source rather than instantaneously throttling all users as a means of being "fair".
that makes sense if at&t was some sort of collective run by the users. it's not. it's a system where users pay at&t to provide a service. i don't give a rats ass about fairness. i care about getting the service i paid for. regardless of how much bandwidth i consume, it's not my problem that at&t sold a service they could'd provide. oh, and my bill says "unlimited data".
i do understand this sort of thinking though ... this small subset of consumers wreaking havoc on at&t's network. however the other side of the story is that despite at&t raking in record profits (think 4+ years of iphone exclusivity) they are still running hardware in places that dates back to the 1970s. it's called reaping what you sow, and they've sown very little. they have a system where it only takes 5% of the users to use their maximum bandwidth (if that?) to bring down the network? that indicates a larger problem in the infrastructure.
As far as I know it still has access to an app store
no, it doesn't. it does not have any google apps.
http://searchengineland.com/amazon-android-tablet-undermines-google-94664
that's common sense. amazon wants to drive people to amazon books sales not google books, to amazon appstore, not google market, to amazon VOD, not google movies.
will you be able to get google market through some sort of hack? probably.
if they aren't valuable in a traditional sense, then how? seems to me,
1. it's becoming generally known that businesses rarely make $ from their service.
2. there is no brand loyalty to groupon.
3. they can be easily duplicated / copied.
and finally,
4. unreliable profit stream. the businesses that seek their service do so because they need a quick cash influx. unfortunately, those are the same type of businesses that are likely to default on their debts. they are essentially in the business of making high-risk loans.
the US has no interest in it's neighbors, or anyone else, being stable. that just makes it harder to exploit them. that's why they are active all of the world destabilizing governments.
mexico isn't any different. even if they aren't actively destabilizing mexico, they are doing so by the policies they set around trade and drug control.
Do I know that the lawsuit is frivolous based on a variety of heuristics, bullshit meters and slippery slope possibilities? Yes.
you my friend are the reason we have the legal system we do. people that think they are somehow smart enough to decide all manner of issues based on anecdotal evidence of hearsay.
hi there,
you can't stop people from filing invalid lawsuits, because you don't know they are invalid until they get in front of a judge and the evidence is presented. or would you apply some sort of magically future-scope where you can tell the outcome before you even allow the suit to be filed?
Quite frankly, most shareholders should just shut up when it comes to corporate governance.
agreed. i'm glad all the enron shareholders just kept quiet and didn't interfere. this allowed enron to focus on long term strategy. oh wait ...
Almost always, I can order something for half the price online. What do I get for doubling my cost if I go locally? Horrible customer service and having to drive to the store (even more money) instead of having it come to my door. Plus, my service experience with Amazon is better than just about any retail store. This lack of service basically rules out me buying electronics in any local store. And the price is usually cheaper online even with sales tax.
so true. every so often i make the mistake of attempting to purchase something at a BM. i *always* wind up back at my house wondering how i can get the last 2 hours of my life back.
and we have no idea whatsoever they'll do with Ice Cream Sandwich when it comes out on devices
yes, we do. they've publicly stated many times they will open source HC. there's no reason not to believe that.
google, being a publicly held company, is in the business of making money. first and foremost and before anything else. don't act so shocked when the act of making money gets in google's way when it comes to releasing source when you demand it.
Today's phones don't have the hardware to pull this off effectively. But, tomorrow's phones will arrive.
define "tomorrow".
what evidence is there that mobile devices will ever, in the foreseeable future anyway, have the excess battery power to run a VM? the problem is that as batteries get better, they invent new hardware to consume the battery. batteries for the most part are always just barely good enough to run the hardware, and hardware and the software it runs are limited by the battery.
This is just stupid. We WANT AT&T and T-mobile to merge because having one carrier maintain all the GSM infrastructure and manage that spectrum is simply more efficient.
yes, and we want one cable company, one shipping company, one grocery store chain, and one airline too. because after all, it's more efficient right?
Goldman Sachs and the others just stole from the taxpayers.
ya we know. knowing is not the problem. doing something about it is the problem.
5 employees == $600k per year in salary, plus benefits, plus bonuses, stock options, the office space to house them, their computers and maintenance on those computers, other IT costs associated with those employees, and so on. if you have hundreds of "cheap" projects like this, the cost adds up.
don't be so dramatic. oracle will keep things where they can make money, and kill things where they can't. it's pretty simple, and expected behavior from a public company.
It seem strange that Oracle would push people away from Java, especially since Sun spent a great deal of time getting people to adopt it.
i think it's far from that complicated. oracle doesn't care if any particular technology lives or dies. they care if they can make money from it. oracle will do all it can to monetize java. that includes but it not limited to spending less on engineers to maintain it resulting in buggy releases. it also includes building a business around professional services for java deployments, and only fixing bugs that licensed, paying customers care about.
and finally, the real goldmine is JVM-based patent lawsuits. whether java is a quality product, or if anyone is even using java, is irrelevant to that.
There's still comparatively heavy competition in most markets for wired communications services.
? i live in a city of +1 million, and for phone / internet / TV there's AT&T and comcast ... and i'm convinced both these guys collude to fix prices as prices are almost identically high and service is identically poor from both providers.
because information is useful when it's shared, and physically carrying around the data on disks / whatever isn't necessarily safer when you consider the scale in which the data is shared.
The titles of both the /. post and the original article imply it's okay to track your spouse, as if you own them and can follow them around, which is not true without their consent. The summary clarifies this as does the original article body. #1 vehicles are in public places and #2 the person who hired the investigator owns or partially owns the car.
hmmm. there's a law that says i can't follow my spouse around?
However, I have a big problem with anyone messing with someone else's car while the car is on public streets. Does anyone else think this is completely backwards?
like everyone else has said: joint ownership. i can ask someone, and sign paperwork that gives someone permission to "mess" with my jointly owned / used car, wherever it may be.
offshoring is cyclic. a technology springs up in nation A, and flourishes for a while, until nation B does it cheaper. which goes on until nation C can do it cheaper than B, and so on.
do you think it's all going to stop in china? china will be able to do everything cheaper than everyone, forever? i'm not bettering on that.
or maybe you think folks should learn the language of every offshoring target. if that were true, i'd be fluent in indian, thai, serbian, russian, and portugese as well.
on the days i forget to take my medication, whenever folks are speaking together in non-english, i yell at them "WHAT ARE YOU SAYING ABOUT ME?". they usually laugh and think i'm joking.
not to mention, china is ripe for social revolution. that could take them in a lot of different directions, some of which are not positive.