Am I the only one that finds the name Internap a little ironic here?
NAP == Network Access Point
If you understand that InterNAP's business model is to provide premium connectivity services (they buy bandwidth on all the big backbones and use that paid-for-bandwidth to provide guaranteed connectivity and all kinds of fancy routing-tricks to their customers) it actually makes sense that leaving InterNAP's service would result in crappy network performance.
Disclaimer: I am a shareholder of INAP, I bought shedloads of shares when they hit rock-bottom after the dot-bomb, although not enough to qualify for the 5% rule.
why can Microsoft not compete in exactly the same way?
I'm sure this has got to be redundant by now, but what the hell, at least I'll pile on...
Did you happen to notice WHO it was that Microsoft was explaining their error to? You know, the judge who ruled over the trial in which MS was convicted for illegal abuse of monopoly power?
When Apple gets convicted of illegal abuse of monopoly power, then you might have a point.
Note that simply having a monopoly (as Apple does with the portable music player market where they hold more than 90% marketshare) does not equate to abuse of that monopoly power.
RFID's in passports are one of the dumbest anti-terrorism ideas to make it past the drawing board. It has already been demonstrated that so-called "short-range" RFID tags can be read up to 70 feet away with easily attainable current technology, the tools will only get more sensitive as time passes.
The "anti-skimming material" that the Dept of State references will make it harder to get exact bits off the RFID, but it sure won't stop someone from being able to at least tell if you have one of these RFID passports in your pocket.
Carrying your passport around with you (as you are required to do in most foreign countries) will be the equivalent of wearing a big sign on your back that says, "Get Your Grudge On! Kidnap Me! I'm an American!"
Short of sending hundreds of legit blank passports directly to Osama, I can't think of a passport plan likely to enable more terrorism than this cockamamie scheme.
If you live in the US, you do realize they cannot legally exclude any preexisting conditions when you switch employers right?
It's not quite as simple as that, you have to have held continuous coverage for up to twelve months (or equal to that of the exclusionary period of the new plan which is usually capped at 12 months).
I guess my point wasn't clear - lots of people are unaware of how HIPAA changed the handling of pre-existing conditions back 1996 when such concerns were more valid. Its fear out of ignorance.
As an indie contractor I have effectively personal health insurance already.
Sigh. Get real. The UK spends 50% of what the US spends on health (as a percentage of GDP) yet gets much better health outcomes. Where is this inefficiency of which you speak?
I can't speak for the UK, but it is very common for Canadians to come to the USA for major procedures because the availability in Canada's socialized system is so poor. Break your arm or get radial keratomy or any number of common and relatively simple procedures and their system works pretty well. Need a liver transplant or a new kidney? Not so great.
Furthermore, if you read for comprehension, you will see that I am advocating against the way the US system currently works. There is too much corporate socialism in the current system, which I blame for a lot of out of control costs. Make each person individually responsible for their own medical costs - insurance and direct fees - and you'll see much more efficient spending.
This is what I don't understand. If you feel that a pay-cut is unfair, why do you stay with the company?
Health insurance. It isn't the only reason, but it is decent sized. In particular pre-existing ailments. A lot of health insurance plans will not cover pre-existing conditions until you've paid 12 months worth of fees.
For anyone with a kid or spouse with a pre-existing condition, the thought of no coverage, especially if the condition could dramatically worsen, is enough to keep them from even considering switching employers.
Which, is why I believe employeer-provided health insurance is evil. I don't believe in state-provided insurance either for all the inefficiences that come with socialism. I do advocate for personal health insurance, where you are personally responsible for each dollar spent for fees and it has no ties to your employer or any other group that would use it to coerce you into acting against your own best interests.
Were the MPAA asleep at the wheel? Or just too coked up to notice that the perfect bill to tag a broadcast flag rider on just slipped past them? I mean, if congress is handing out subsidies, doesn't the MPAA deserve one too?
I hate to break it to you, but there won't be a HitMovie.avi for you to download in a few years if this becomes the norm.
No, it does not.
It merely means that hollywood, as it exists today will not be around in a few years if that becomes the norm.
If you think the only to fund and film HitMovie.avi is the way Hollywood does it today, then you (like most of Hollywood) have a severe lack of imagination.
This might be great for HA and consolidation, but you're not going to get the performance of a 16 CPU server unless they have developed an interconnect with latency and bandwidth equivalent to an FSB.
They currently use 4x infiniband. It has about 10x the latency of a modern CC-NUMA internal interconnect. But your prediction of poor performance is pretty much worst case. Any application that knows how to take advantage of memory locality (just about any parallel app built with OpenMP) should see very good scalability on such a system.
I know this going to sound like an advert, and maybe it is, but I'm not getting compensated for it.
VMWare lets you run multiple virtual machines on one computer. That's cool and all, but there is another product out there that does the inverse - it lets you join together multiple independent machines (like those in a beowulf cluster) and turn them into one big virtual machine with one system image. So, if you have 16 seperate PCs, you can boot and run linux and it will look like one big 16-cpu server.
This "reverse" virtual machine is from Virtual Iron and, sadly, it is not free. But it is damn cool, especially when you look at the extra stuff you can do like dynamically add and delete entire PCs. Theoretically you could acheive 100% uptime by switching out individual PCs when they start to fail.
The idea has a lot of promise, OpenMosix kinda-sorta does something like that, but not at all as slick. I'm hoping someone decides to take Xen in a similar direction so we can all build beowulf clusters in the basement and turn them into giant single systems.
Modify that to be a "conservative muslim family" and you are probably right. But, in contradiction to what you hear on Fox news, there are lots of muslims who are not conservative. A lot of them live in America, but they are all over of the globe. In fact, if you meet a muslim by chance, chances are he will not be a fundamentalist.
I'm still wondering if this is being used as a legalistic loophole or an honest concern about false arrest.
Does the motive matter? Even if the current defendent is as guilty as sin, that doesn't mean someone else hasn't been erroneously convicted due to "false testimony" by a buggy breathlyzer.
If the end result is less errors with breathlyzers and all the other "magic boxes" that are used to convict people, then isn't that the best result for society in the long run?
ABC has chosen to act as an independent agent in a free market, rather than subjecting its decisions to cartel politics.
Don't for a moment think that affiliate demands on the network are all one-sided. Maintaining affiliate status means a station has to comply with all kinds of rules set by the network too.
ABC is not simply acting as an independent agent, they are, in some sense, unilaterally re-writing their contracts with their affiliates. I would be damn pissed too if one of my clients decided that they could get away with rewriting our contract, in their favor, with no negotiation.
I agree that the net has changed things and it is high-fucking-time the television industry started to catch up, but don't go thinking ABC or even Apple is the white hat in this episode of the drama - its a lot more complex than that.
I am highly in doubt that a 75% reduction in file size will net video quality that is anywhere close to that of a standard DVD as you are claiming. I guess time will tell though.
Forget time, you can test it yourself today with the free x264 and cheap Nero Recode encoders. Or you can be lazy and just listen to apple who say that at worst, h264 requires up to only half the bitrate of MPEG-2 to deliver equivalent quality and in many cases substantially less bandwidth is sufficient - and apple's h264 encoder is not all that hot either.
If you got permission to take possession of your copy of the bundled software through a license agreement that came with it (which you did, your EULA), you didn't acquire ownership of it, so 109(a) doesn't apply to you.
If you will read more carefully, you will see that the post I was rebutting said the EULAs were not involved.
The video rental isn't going to sell you their major $$$ rental DVD for the price you'd get at a DVD store.
Yes they do. I've bought thousands of used DVDs from Blockbuster, Hollywood Video and MovieGallery. There is no such thing as a "major $$$ rental DVD" the rental places pay the same prices as everyone else, except for possible bulk discounts.
And do the copyright holders transfer ownership at all, or simply rent them out with the right to rent them further?
They don't. Just like DVDs, they sell the games to the rental stores.
Either way, I don't see how that was relvant to the "Why are there console games and not PC games in rental stores?" that I was trying to clear up.
You had a false premise - that the game manufacturers do not sell their games to the rental stores just like they sell them to everyone else when in fact, thats about what they do.
My belief as to why PC games are not rented is because the market is harder. Consoles just work, PCs have all kinds of idiosyncracies and none of the rental companies want to be in the business of either providing tech support or providing rental refunds for a large number of the game rentals. But legally, there is no reason they could not do so.
May I direct you to Exclusive rights in copyrighted works. I quote: "(3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;"
May I direct you to Limitations on exclusive rights: Effect of transfer of particular copy or phonorecord. I quote: "a) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 (3), the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this title, or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy or phonorecord."
In other words, while the owner of the copyright can license for rental, if they sell the copy instead of merely renting it, then the right of first sale says they no longer have control over the where/what/when of that copy.
Actually, Chinese hardly ever bow. Maybe you are thinking of Japanese who almost always bow.
Yeah, they bow their asses off to everyone. But based on my thorough research which consists of watching a lot of HK movies, it seems like the Chinese tend to bow to those of higher social rank.
You're an idiot. Go get the figures for desktop operating system market share.
If he's an idiot, you are a sexpot.
Go get the figures for desktop operating systems that support MPEG4. Wow - 100%. So, they could have picked a format that has both *more* coverage and is technically just as good. Instead they chose something that is arbitrarily restricted. Smart move.
I'm glad anonymity won, but I don't know if I'd feel the same way if some anonymous ass was slandering me on a popular website and people were believing it. It's a career killer for professional politicians, especially on the local level.
What needs to happen is for society at large to get a sort of karma-system for anonymous libel - so that AC's get less credence than those who put their name to their words. Taking away anonymity has all kinds of bad consquences, while ignoring anonymous libel just requires a thinking populace. I guess anonymity is doomed in the USA...
Slashdot Mirror
But I bet you'll be happy to see the ACLU and its lawyers when someone tries to block something you do want to see.
Like say, Rush Limbaugh?
Just looking at the sleek, curvy lines of an iPod Nano seems to give most Nano owners an erection as it is....
Hell, if the Nano had an option to vibrate it would be many a girl's best friend.
I think you're reading too much into the parent post.
I concur, but with a +5 score, you have to wonder if we just missed a paragraph or two that only the righteous can see.
Am I the only one that finds the name Internap a little ironic here?
NAP == Network Access Point
If you understand that InterNAP's business model is to provide premium connectivity services (they buy bandwidth on all the big backbones and use that paid-for-bandwidth to provide guaranteed connectivity and all kinds of fancy routing-tricks to their customers) it actually makes sense that leaving InterNAP's service would result in crappy network performance.
Disclaimer: I am a shareholder of INAP, I bought shedloads of shares when they hit rock-bottom after the dot-bomb, although not enough to qualify for the 5% rule.
I think you guys are all missing the point. The e-Passports are being introduced to stop fraud not terrorism.
And why is "fraud" such a big problem? Because terrorists use fraudulent ID to secretly enter the country.
Regular illegals just sneak in over the border when no one is looking, and of course, terrorists would never do that...
why can Microsoft not compete in exactly the same way?
I'm sure this has got to be redundant by now, but what the hell, at least I'll pile on...
Did you happen to notice WHO it was that Microsoft was explaining their error to? You know, the judge who ruled over the trial in which MS was convicted for illegal abuse of monopoly power?
When Apple gets convicted of illegal abuse of monopoly power, then you might have a point.
Note that simply having a monopoly (as Apple does with the portable music player market where they hold more than 90% marketshare) does not equate to abuse of that monopoly power.
RFID's in passports are one of the dumbest anti-terrorism ideas to make it past the drawing board. It has already been demonstrated that so-called "short-range" RFID tags can be read up to 70 feet away with easily attainable current technology, the tools will only get more sensitive as time passes.
The "anti-skimming material" that the Dept of State references will make it harder to get exact bits off the RFID, but it sure won't stop someone from being able to at least tell if you have one of these RFID passports in your pocket.
Carrying your passport around with you (as you are required to do in most foreign countries) will be the equivalent of wearing a big sign on your back that says, "Get Your Grudge On! Kidnap Me! I'm an American!"
Short of sending hundreds of legit blank passports directly to Osama, I can't think of a passport plan likely to enable more terrorism than this cockamamie scheme.
If you live in the US, you do realize they cannot legally exclude any preexisting conditions when you switch employers right?
It's not quite as simple as that, you have to have held continuous coverage for up to twelve months (or equal to that of the exclusionary period of the new plan which is usually capped at 12 months).
I guess my point wasn't clear - lots of people are unaware of how HIPAA changed the handling of pre-existing conditions back 1996 when such concerns were more valid. Its fear out of ignorance.
As an indie contractor I have effectively personal health insurance already.
Sigh. Get real. The UK spends 50% of what the US spends on health (as a percentage of GDP) yet gets much better health outcomes. Where is this inefficiency of which you speak?
I can't speak for the UK, but it is very common for Canadians to come to the USA for major procedures because the availability in Canada's socialized system is so poor. Break your arm or get radial keratomy or any number of common and relatively simple procedures and their system works pretty well. Need a liver transplant or a new kidney? Not so great.
Furthermore, if you read for comprehension, you will see that I am advocating against the way the US system currently works. There is too much corporate socialism in the current system, which I blame for a lot of out of control costs. Make each person individually responsible for their own medical costs - insurance and direct fees - and you'll see much more efficient spending.
This is what I don't understand. If you feel that a pay-cut is unfair, why do you stay with the company?
Health insurance. It isn't the only reason, but it is decent sized. In particular pre-existing ailments. A lot of health insurance plans will not cover pre-existing conditions until you've paid 12 months worth of fees.
For anyone with a kid or spouse with a pre-existing condition, the thought of no coverage, especially if the condition could dramatically worsen, is enough to keep them from even considering switching employers.
Which, is why I believe employeer-provided health insurance is evil. I don't believe in state-provided insurance either for all the inefficiences that come with socialism. I do advocate for personal health insurance, where you are personally responsible for each dollar spent for fees and it has no ties to your employer or any other group that would use it to coerce you into acting against your own best interests.
Were the MPAA asleep at the wheel? Or just too coked up to notice that the perfect bill to tag a broadcast flag rider on just slipped past them? I mean, if congress is handing out subsidies, doesn't the MPAA deserve one too?
I hate to break it to you, but there won't be a HitMovie.avi for you to download in a few years if this becomes the norm.
No, it does not.
It merely means that hollywood, as it exists today will not be around in a few years if that becomes the norm.
If you think the only to fund and film HitMovie.avi is the way Hollywood does it today, then you (like most of Hollywood) have a severe lack of imagination.
This might be great for HA and consolidation, but you're not going to get the performance of a 16 CPU server unless they have developed an interconnect with latency and bandwidth equivalent to an FSB.
They currently use 4x infiniband. It has about 10x the latency of a modern CC-NUMA internal interconnect. But your prediction of poor performance is pretty much worst case. Any application that knows how to take advantage of memory locality (just about any parallel app built with OpenMP) should see very good scalability on such a system.
I know this going to sound like an advert, and maybe it is, but I'm not getting compensated for it.
VMWare lets you run multiple virtual machines on one computer. That's cool and all, but there is another product out there that does the inverse - it lets you join together multiple independent machines (like those in a beowulf cluster) and turn them into one big virtual machine with one system image. So, if you have 16 seperate PCs, you can boot and run linux and it will look like one big 16-cpu server.
This "reverse" virtual machine is from Virtual Iron and, sadly, it is not free. But it is damn cool, especially when you look at the extra stuff you can do like dynamically add and delete entire PCs. Theoretically you could acheive 100% uptime by switching out individual PCs when they start to fail.
The idea has a lot of promise, OpenMosix kinda-sorta does something like that, but not at all as slick. I'm hoping someone decides to take Xen in a similar direction so we can all build beowulf clusters in the basement and turn them into giant single systems.
A Muslim family would not even have a dog.
Modify that to be a "conservative muslim family" and you are probably right. But, in contradiction to what you hear on Fox news, there are lots of muslims who are not conservative. A lot of them live in America, but they are all over of the globe. In fact, if you meet a muslim by chance, chances are he will not be a fundamentalist.
I'm still wondering if this is being used as a legalistic loophole or an honest concern about false arrest.
Does the motive matter? Even if the current defendent is as guilty as sin, that doesn't mean someone else hasn't been erroneously convicted due to "false testimony" by a buggy breathlyzer.
If the end result is less errors with breathlyzers and all the other "magic boxes" that are used to convict people, then isn't that the best result for society in the long run?
ABC has chosen to act as an independent agent in a free market, rather than subjecting its decisions to cartel politics.
Don't for a moment think that affiliate demands on the network are all one-sided. Maintaining affiliate status means a station has to comply with all kinds of rules set by the network too.
ABC is not simply acting as an independent agent, they are, in some sense, unilaterally re-writing their contracts with their affiliates. I would be damn pissed too if one of my clients decided that they could get away with rewriting our contract, in their favor, with no negotiation.
I agree that the net has changed things and it is high-fucking-time the television industry started to catch up, but don't go thinking ABC or even Apple is the white hat in this episode of the drama - its a lot more complex than that.
I am highly in doubt that a 75% reduction in file size will net video quality that is anywhere close to that of a standard DVD as you are claiming. I guess time will tell though.
Forget time, you can test it yourself today with the free x264 and cheap Nero Recode encoders. Or you can be lazy and just listen to apple who say that at worst, h264 requires up to only half the bitrate of MPEG-2 to deliver equivalent quality and in many cases substantially less bandwidth is sufficient - and apple's h264 encoder is not all that hot either.
If you got permission to take possession of your copy of the bundled software through a license agreement that came with it (which you did, your EULA), you didn't acquire ownership of it, so 109(a) doesn't apply to you.
If you will read more carefully, you will see that the post I was rebutting said the EULAs were not involved.
It sounds/sounded like you are saying that the Title 17 says a purchaser of a copy can continue to make copies.
False.
And the rest of your post is just rambling insanity that gets worse from there.
The video rental isn't going to sell you their major $$$ rental DVD for the price you'd get at a DVD store.
Yes they do. I've bought thousands of used DVDs from Blockbuster, Hollywood Video and MovieGallery. There is no such thing as a "major $$$ rental DVD" the rental places pay the same prices as everyone else, except for possible bulk discounts.
And do the copyright holders transfer ownership at all, or simply rent them out with the right to rent them further?
They don't. Just like DVDs, they sell the games to the rental stores.
Either way, I don't see how that was relvant to the "Why are there console games and not PC games in rental stores?" that I was trying to clear up.
You had a false premise - that the game manufacturers do not sell their games to the rental stores just like they sell them to everyone else when in fact, thats about what they do.
My belief as to why PC games are not rented is because the market is harder. Consoles just work, PCs have all kinds of idiosyncracies and none of the rental companies want to be in the business of either providing tech support or providing rental refunds for a large number of the game rentals. But legally, there is no reason they could not do so.
May I direct you to Exclusive rights in copyrighted works. I quote: "(3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;"
May I direct you to Limitations on exclusive rights: Effect of transfer of particular copy or phonorecord. I quote: "a) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 (3), the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this title, or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy or phonorecord."
In other words, while the owner of the copyright can license for rental, if they sell the copy instead of merely renting it, then the right of first sale says they no longer have control over the where/what/when of that copy.
Actually, Chinese hardly ever bow. Maybe you are thinking of Japanese who almost always bow.
Yeah, they bow their asses off to everyone. But based on my thorough research which consists of watching a lot of HK movies, it seems like the Chinese tend to bow to those of higher social rank.
You're an idiot. Go get the figures for desktop operating system market share.
If he's an idiot, you are a sexpot.
Go get the figures for desktop operating systems that support MPEG4. Wow - 100%. So, they could have picked a format that has both *more* coverage and is technically just as good. Instead they chose something that is arbitrarily restricted. Smart move.
I'm glad anonymity won, but I don't know if I'd feel the same way if some anonymous ass was slandering me on a popular website and people were believing it. It's a career killer for professional politicians, especially on the local level.
What needs to happen is for society at large to get a sort of karma-system for anonymous libel - so that AC's get less credence than those who put their name to their words. Taking away anonymity has all kinds of bad consquences, while ignoring anonymous libel just requires a thinking populace. I guess anonymity is doomed in the USA...