Yes, I provide a text only feed to my subscribers, and only a few use it, and those that do wouldn't understand that there is much of an internet outside of usenet.
I welcome the death of usenet with open arms.
Like many others, I heaved a giant sigh of relief when AOL announced that having essentially slaughtered usenet, they were now backing out. Thank God! Many, how many years? 10? Now others are saying they too are cutting off punter access to usenet. Excellent. I, for one, couldn't be more pleased!
eff = good
rights = good
Corporate
entities
run by
megalomanics
acting in pure
self interest
without regard
to setting pro-
corporate,anti-freedom
legal precident
and often acting outside
of agreements they
themselves have
signed = bad
Just a few points.
I am an ISP. Me, myself, the corporate me.
Being an ISP costs me real money. I mean REAL money. My connectivity is the largest expense I have.
My network is built out of cisco gear mostly, all aquired at deep discount via eBay. My bandwidth comes from a real tier1, not a suitshop pretending to be a tier1, (read "business DSL" Provider), but good ole old-school T1s, They are expensive. I got a break on my local loop, (29 miles) to provide an "interesting" service to a remote area. Good on my upstream for being considerate.
If my growth continues, I'll pass break-even in a few months, and actually move into the profit zone in a year or so, at which point, I'll start paying interns from the local high-school to act as part-time sysadmins, and I'll put the rest into grants and scholarships.
I am well disposed to Vonage and such. However the hype is far from the reality. This service is a HUGE bandwidth hog. I stand by my peering agreement with my customers/users. But my users/customers who choose to try the Vonage "advatage" will effectively kill me.
I am a "Free Community Wireless" provider. I live on services. The connectivity/peering is free. I charge for a good email service (folks can use hotmail, gmail, yahoo whatever, but if they want it from me, I charge for it, and it's a good service) I have some web-hosting clients, who are happy, and some other such revinue streams. Also, some folks in the community I serve just kick in a few bucks gratis.
Folks have turned off their "faster" cable "dsl" service because my service is BETTER, not faster, just better.
Vonage has an interesting prototype service, but it is not at all ready for prime time. It's too fat, way too fat. If they want to claim to be a phone company, then they need to actually act like a phone company, get their ducks in a row, roll out a useful, not damaging service, and provide real predictable quality of service, and not go for a free ride on MY back, at MY expense.
Time will tell if this will work. I could easily fail at this project. It would be a shame, Vonage's "big marketing, big hype, big promises (that they don't keep)" isn't helping me any. And I know I am not at all alone.
I'm not opposed to Vonage as such. I think it's a cool concept. But they need to straigten up. SIP is cool, IAX is better. This technology needs to mature.
Here's a write up on an ebike, hasn't
on
E-bike E-xperiences?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
been updated in quite a while, but
http://www.eruditium.org/cmefford/
There have been all kinds of rumours and innuendo over the years that all strongly imply that MS does indeed care about "piracy". They are said to care very much that there is enough pirated MS and MS-locked software out there to keep the public from really seriously examining the alternatives.
Of course they have to sell some of their wares to be legit, but don't forget, their primary product is their stock, and their stock priced is based wholly and completely in their monopoly posistion.
If, say by chance, all the businesses running illegit MS and MS-locked software had to pony up or be evicted from the MS family, that all those neato stacks of developers releases of software somehow "stopped working", and MS's market share slid two points, they'd loose a whole heck of a lot more money than they would gain by recovering the doubtful revenues from the sales of licenses.
--side note--
When did the term piracy come into parlance for software? I don't like the term, it's laden with emotion, and is in fact, factually wrong. Piracy is a form of theft of goods in transit, by force.
Theft -through out the ages- can only take place if the rightful owner loses the benefit AND use of the goods. If I light my candle from your candle (without permission) I haven't stolen your flame. I may in fact have committed trespass, but I didn't commit theft. Also, if I go into a convience store, gun down everyone in sight and steal the smokes and cash from the drawer, I've commited grand-larceny, murder, robbery, battery and kinds of other stuff, but not piracy. If I hijack a truck and take the goods, I've commited piracy, just like hijacking a ship-at-sea, or an airliner for that matter. IN TRANSIT.
It is true that a lot less people would use all the usual suspects, MS Office, Photoshop, Acrobat distiller, Visio, MS Project, the whole line of MS OSes, if they had to actually pay for them. Even more so if they actually had to pay the listed price.
However, some folks act just like parasites, and I personally enjoy the fact that the foss community isn't packed full of the folks who are philosophically aligned with the warez crowd.
Pretty much all technology that we currently take for granted was at one time considered impossible by rational people working with the tools of the time, which were not too bad. And, they were usually first postulated by folks who were not widely held to be rational.
So, 'the mere impossibility of a task, is a poor excuse for a lack of enterprise in it's undertaking.'
Slashdot Mirror
free community wireless, WITHOUT Ads? Will they lobby to get us outlawed?
So that it will again become useful.
Yes, I provide a text only feed to my subscribers,
and only a few use it, and those that do
wouldn't understand that there is much of
an internet outside of usenet.
I welcome the death of usenet with open arms.
Like many others, I heaved a giant sigh of relief
when AOL announced that having essentially slaughtered
usenet, they were now backing out. Thank God!
Many, how many years? 10?
Now others are saying they too are cutting
off punter access to usenet. Excellent. I, for
one, couldn't be more pleased!
Look at it this way;
eff = good
rights = good
Corporate
entities
run by
megalomanics
acting in pure
self interest
without regard
to setting pro-
corporate,anti-freedom
legal precident
and often acting outside
of agreements they
themselves have
signed = bad
Does that help?
Just a few points. I am an ISP. Me, myself, the corporate me. Being an ISP costs me real money. I mean REAL money. My connectivity is the largest expense I have. My network is built out of cisco gear mostly, all aquired at deep discount via eBay. My bandwidth comes from a real tier1, not a suitshop pretending to be a tier1, (read "business DSL" Provider), but good ole old-school T1s, They are expensive. I got a break on my local loop, (29 miles) to provide an "interesting" service to a remote area. Good on my upstream for being considerate. If my growth continues, I'll pass break-even in a few months, and actually move into the profit zone in a year or so, at which point, I'll start paying interns from the local high-school to act as part-time sysadmins, and I'll put the rest into grants and scholarships. I am well disposed to Vonage and such. However the hype is far from the reality. This service is a HUGE bandwidth hog. I stand by my peering agreement with my customers/users. But my users/customers who choose to try the Vonage "advatage" will effectively kill me. I am a "Free Community Wireless" provider. I live on services. The connectivity/peering is free. I charge for a good email service (folks can use hotmail, gmail, yahoo whatever, but if they want it from me, I charge for it, and it's a good service) I have some web-hosting clients, who are happy, and some other such revinue streams. Also, some folks in the community I serve just kick in a few bucks gratis. Folks have turned off their "faster" cable "dsl" service because my service is BETTER, not faster, just better. Vonage has an interesting prototype service, but it is not at all ready for prime time. It's too fat, way too fat. If they want to claim to be a phone company, then they need to actually act like a phone company, get their ducks in a row, roll out a useful, not damaging service, and provide real predictable quality of service, and not go for a free ride on MY back, at MY expense. Time will tell if this will work. I could easily fail at this project. It would be a shame, Vonage's "big marketing, big hype, big promises (that they don't keep)" isn't helping me any. And I know I am not at all alone. I'm not opposed to Vonage as such. I think it's a cool concept. But they need to straigten up. SIP is cool, IAX is better. This technology needs to mature.
been updated in quite a while, but http://www.eruditium.org/cmefford/
There have been all kinds of rumours and innuendo over the years that all strongly imply that MS does indeed care about "piracy". They are said to care very much that there is enough pirated MS and MS-locked software out there to keep the public from really seriously examining the alternatives. Of course they have to sell some of their wares to be legit, but don't forget, their primary product is their stock, and their stock priced is based wholly and completely in their monopoly posistion. If, say by chance, all the businesses running illegit MS and MS-locked software had to pony up or be evicted from the MS family, that all those neato stacks of developers releases of software somehow "stopped working", and MS's market share slid two points, they'd loose a whole heck of a lot more money than they would gain by recovering the doubtful revenues from the sales of licenses. --side note-- When did the term piracy come into parlance for software? I don't like the term, it's laden with emotion, and is in fact, factually wrong. Piracy is a form of theft of goods in transit, by force. Theft -through out the ages- can only take place if the rightful owner loses the benefit AND use of the goods. If I light my candle from your candle (without permission) I haven't stolen your flame. I may in fact have committed trespass, but I didn't commit theft. Also, if I go into a convience store, gun down everyone in sight and steal the smokes and cash from the drawer, I've commited grand-larceny, murder, robbery, battery and kinds of other stuff, but not piracy. If I hijack a truck and take the goods, I've commited piracy, just like hijacking a ship-at-sea, or an airliner for that matter. IN TRANSIT.
It is true that a lot less people would use all the usual suspects, MS Office, Photoshop, Acrobat distiller, Visio, MS Project, the whole line of MS OSes, if they had to actually pay for them. Even more so if they actually had to pay the listed price. However, some folks act just like parasites, and I personally enjoy the fact that the foss community isn't packed full of the folks who are philosophically aligned with the warez crowd.
Pretty much all technology that we currently take for granted was at one time considered impossible by rational people working with the tools of the time, which were not too bad. And, they were usually first postulated by folks who were not widely held to be rational. So, 'the mere impossibility of a task, is a poor excuse for a lack of enterprise in it's undertaking.'