Re:summary of ted stevens' bill?
on
HR 5252 Bill Dies
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Think of Net Neutrality like making your ISP's service to you a utility, like electricity. You pay for what you use (bandwidth). Without Net Neutrality, customers (you) or content providers (google, youtube, etc.) will have to pay more money on top of the bandwidth they use for no good reason (it doesn't cost the ISP any more money to transfer google's bits than it does AOL's bits or VoIP bits). The equivalent in our electric utility example would be if the electric company charged you a higher rate for the electricity that powers your TV vs. the electricity that powers your refrigerator. Or even more accurately if your electric company charged you a higher rate for electricity when your TV is watching Lost or Heroes vs. when you're watching a Stargate rerun. Net Neutrality is good - you want your internet connection to be like a utility - bits is bits, like watts is watts.
Others have addressed the QOS issue, but basically QOS is a solution for getting good enough performance out of a specific protocol / service when your bandwidth is all used up. If this is the case, buy more bandwidth to give you the overhead you need and then you won't need QOS.
What if somebody used this tool with their 8 year old daughter to play "airport"? Is that a crime? What if the TSA or NWA used it for training purposes?
Somehow I think if this same tool was constructed but had a different explanation around it (and didn't use "Bin Laden, Osama" as the default name entry) then this wouldn't have blown up into a big deal.
...made a powerful tool available for someone who intends to do harm.
He saved the HTML from NWA's actual ticket printout page on their website, and made a form to fill in like 10 variables mad-libs style. I hardly call that "a powerful tool". More like saving somebody who knows how to right-click about 90 seconds of work to forge it themselves.
And the author kinda forgot Iraq War I (non-unified administration).
No, they qualified the statement with "involving more than a week of ground combat"; the Gulf War ended 100 hours after the official ground campaign began, hence the nickname "100 hour war".
It sounds like you're just disappointed that the GOP can't take credit for more wars...
Honestly I think the "memory leak" is a separate issue from the speed issue. For whatever reason Firefox seems to render some pages more slowly. Extensions will certianly slow down Firefox - and maybe that's my problem because I have a lot of extensions - but for me I'm willing to make that tradeoff because of the extra functionality. I don't normally notice the speed difference but at work we have some reports for internal systems that are extrememly long pages that Firefox chokes on but IE handles OK.
I think the default in Firefox should be to leave the tab bar with only one tab for the same reason. I actually prefer it because I just double-click on any empty space in the tab bar to open a new tab. Seems like the easiest thing to do for me (outside of gestures) - the empty tab bar is like a really big "new tab" button.
One thing they could do like some Linux distros is make you type the password even if you are a priviledged user, but have that be valid for X number of minutes of which you won't be prompted again.
The two biggest things that bother me about UAC is 1) it grays the whole screen when it pops the dialog box - this takes excess time and resources, especially on a multiple monitor machine running high resolutions, and 2) that you have to confirm EVERY admin action, if you're about to do 10 "administrative" things in a row.
I don't like mail-style RSS reading like Opera has. If you do like Opera's RSS capability then you would be better off using Thunderbird's RSS features instead of Firefox - it's very similar to Opera's. There are however extensions for Firefox that load RSS into the browser's sidebar, which I prefer over all other methods (including Opera's). Check out the Sage and WizzRSS extensions.
I agree that Microsoft (or likely anybody else) won't change to a per-core pricing model, but for different reasons. The point of per-CPU pricing is just to determine the market - the type of user/computer:
1 CPU = most laptops and desktops, low end servers
2 CPU = high-end workstations, average servers
4 CPU = high-end servers
As the number of cores ramp up, as you said to 4/8/16, then charging per core would be like charging per GHz or per L2 cache size - it doesn't make sense, adding cores will just be another way that new chips get faster than old ones. But the number of actual CPUs/sockets to define a specific market will likely stay the same for some time. Other than the Oracle debacle that grandparent poster mentioned, all per-core pricing theories have just been speculation. I can't imagine any company successfully pulling that off.
Chill out. Timely news is important especially on something like this. I believe IE7 is supposed to be released (pushed out as a "high priority" Windows update) in October. RC1 was actually released over a week ago (August 23 or 24) so I would say this news is almost two weeks old. I had to spend some time trying to figure out if this was something actually new or if Slashdot was just slow to the story for some reason; if the parent's comment were closer to the top it would have saved me some time.
Not that I'm an expert but I might be able to help a little bit - I have VMware server running on ubuntu Dapper running a number of VM's, mostly for fun, but one is a Windows XP installation just to run Quicken.
The VMware Tools is something that you install onto the guest OS that basically gives you better performance (display and mouse I believe). If you notice a sluggish mouse this helps tremendously, makes it seem almost native. Also if you have a VM where you have to press ctrl+alt to get back out to your host OS, installing the VMware Tools will make it so the mouse can seamlessly go between both (like if you're not in full screen mode).
The Server version is free where the Workstation version is not. The Workstation version has some additional functionality with saving snapshots and whatnot, it's better for a development environment for doing lots of testing. The server version you can run on one machine and connect to it from another machine (that dialog that pops up every time you start asking if you want to connect to local host or a remote computer). The Player is a simple version that just plays already built VM's, you can't create new ones or modify the properties of them (RAM, devices, etc.).
Hope that helps.
Re:this could be a dangerous IPO
on
Vonage IPO
·
· Score: 1
Now, anyone who's got DSL doesn't need Vonage for their primary phone service.
Speakeasy's OneLink offers DSL without a phone line (I have it) and I'm sure there are others.
plenty of people would much rather buy phone service from a company they already do business with.
I was personally thrilled to do away with Verizon and get Vonage. I guess there is some level of comfort in doing business with the "big guy", but that comfort zone will change over time.
The thing is that technology is supposed to make things easier / cheaper / more efficient. But for some reason it seems that phone service, both mobile and home, has continued to get more expensive over the years. VOIP providers are finally correcting that, and while Verizon will obviously try to hang on to their old business model as long as possible, it won't last forever.
So, then you've read what, one or two blogs in your life? How do you think the content in blogs is any different than the content in books or magazines or in the news or the conversation you're going to have with your co-workers on Monday morning? Why do you think the medium defines the content? They are unrelated.
Oh yes and all these newfangled jargon words I can hardly keep up. What are these "web" and "email" and "IM" things I keep hearing about? I wish people would stop coining these new words just so they can feel superior and to confuse me.
Acutally a google search for "define: blog" returns 28 results (definitions). You just picked one that happened to support your stance.
Just because somebody or some entity (corporation, organization e.g. Google Blog, IE Blog, Mozillazine, etc.) picks a blog as the medium to communicate to the world doesn't make their information or opinions any more worthless than some attention whore / self-involved twit / sellout who decided to publish a book or write a magazine article. It really irritates me when people (usually old people) disregard any information that came from the "interweb" and wasn't published on paper. Look, the medium is irrelevant to content. Sure there are bad blogs that are as you described, I'll even concede that it's the vast majority of them (livejournal/myspace), but the medium is relatively new and there are a number of very quality blogs on a wide variety of topics that are informative and worth reading. But then if you think about it, is the ratio of bad blogs to good blogs any worse than the ratio of bad to good books or magazines or tv shows or newspapers?
The other thing is that some people claim "dupe!" to things that were posted a month or two ago. Funny thing about the technology industry is how fast things change, so while the basic article subject might be a dupe there are likely new developments that are worth discussing. Now in this instance that doesn't appear to be the case as this dupe was two days ago...
Do you have any references to back that up? It seems way off to me. I think you're confusing that with the number of requests that the root servers see that are unnecessary (redundant / could be cached by ISP's) which I believe is 98% -- but that's not 98% of all DNS traffic, not even close.
Check out this, this, this and this; over half of the big ISP's have a cached response for the most popular sites on the net.
I doubt that it'll work for callers behind a phone system and without a direct number
There are a number of ways around this. I had a new experience recently with Verisign when purchasing an SSL cert for a site. They sent me a link to a page that I could go to for "faster verification" so they could verify and issue the cert faster. When I went to the page I put in my phone number and they called me with a repeating automated message and the receptionist was able to route the call to me - something to the effect of "I'm calling for John Doe at extension 810. If you are John Doe press * now." that would repeat. Long story short I was able to verify the information through this automated call and it worked pretty well even through our phone system.
Amazon has a demo of a similar click-to-call system here: http://www.estara.com/livedemo/a9/. If you click the "Click to Call Business" button you get a popup to put in your phone number and extension. If you click your mouse in the extension box another form pops up:
Telephone Extension Enter your telephone extension below. You can include a pause by using the comma key (,) Example:,143 [text box] Will a receptionist answer this call? No Yes
So it looks like that system is adaptable to be able to handle various types of phone systems or receptionists.
Yeah I haven't been able to see it on google's site either after trying a number of searches on the main google, google local, google mobile, etc. I wonder if it's also limited to the business hours of the advertiser.
Google's PDA search on your phone uses the tel: protocol, if you go here in your browser and look at the links at the top you'll see what I mean - your computer's browser won't do anything with it (maybe it could though...) but your phone recognises it. Very usefull stuff on a web capable phone but as you said not the same thing.
I agree with the no anonymous users editing it and I'd take it a step further... limit the number of times a particular user can edit any given article. That way they can make their contribution and move on. If other people change what they wrote they can only change it back so many times before they're locked out of it - that should at least help to slow down the "fiddlers" and people who think their version is the only correct version.
Also I believe there was some talk about having some kind of "certified" experts on particular topics that can monitor an entry, but they would have gone through some kind of pre-qualification. I'm talking really broad here, there would be a number of specifics to work out, but I think these things would help the situation.
In the IBM commercial referenced in TFA, they seem to imply that RFID was the technology that alerted the home office that the truck went the wrong way. This could be accomplished with GPS locating and a radio transmitter to send the coordinates back to the office, but neither technology has anything to do with RFID. Unless IBM has a grid of RFID readers laid into roads throughout the US...
Slashdot Mirror
Think of Net Neutrality like making your ISP's service to you a utility, like electricity. You pay for what you use (bandwidth). Without Net Neutrality, customers (you) or content providers (google, youtube, etc.) will have to pay more money on top of the bandwidth they use for no good reason (it doesn't cost the ISP any more money to transfer google's bits than it does AOL's bits or VoIP bits). The equivalent in our electric utility example would be if the electric company charged you a higher rate for the electricity that powers your TV vs. the electricity that powers your refrigerator. Or even more accurately if your electric company charged you a higher rate for electricity when your TV is watching Lost or Heroes vs. when you're watching a Stargate rerun. Net Neutrality is good - you want your internet connection to be like a utility - bits is bits, like watts is watts. Others have addressed the QOS issue, but basically QOS is a solution for getting good enough performance out of a specific protocol / service when your bandwidth is all used up. If this is the case, buy more bandwidth to give you the overhead you need and then you won't need QOS.
What if somebody used this tool with their 8 year old daughter to play "airport"? Is that a crime? What if the TSA or NWA used it for training purposes?
Somehow I think if this same tool was constructed but had a different explanation around it (and didn't use "Bin Laden, Osama" as the default name entry) then this wouldn't have blown up into a big deal.
...made a powerful tool available for someone who intends to do harm.
He saved the HTML from NWA's actual ticket printout page on their website, and made a form to fill in like 10 variables mad-libs style. I hardly call that "a powerful tool". More like saving somebody who knows how to right-click about 90 seconds of work to forge it themselves.
And the author kinda forgot Iraq War I (non-unified administration).
No, they qualified the statement with "involving more than a week of ground combat"; the Gulf War ended 100 hours after the official ground campaign began, hence the nickname "100 hour war".
It sounds like you're just disappointed that the GOP can't take credit for more wars...
Honestly I think the "memory leak" is a separate issue from the speed issue. For whatever reason Firefox seems to render some pages more slowly. Extensions will certianly slow down Firefox - and maybe that's my problem because I have a lot of extensions - but for me I'm willing to make that tradeoff because of the extra functionality. I don't normally notice the speed difference but at work we have some reports for internal systems that are extrememly long pages that Firefox chokes on but IE handles OK.
I think the default in Firefox should be to leave the tab bar with only one tab for the same reason. I actually prefer it because I just double-click on any empty space in the tab bar to open a new tab. Seems like the easiest thing to do for me (outside of gestures) - the empty tab bar is like a really big "new tab" button.
One thing they could do like some Linux distros is make you type the password even if you are a priviledged user, but have that be valid for X number of minutes of which you won't be prompted again.
The two biggest things that bother me about UAC is 1) it grays the whole screen when it pops the dialog box - this takes excess time and resources, especially on a multiple monitor machine running high resolutions, and 2) that you have to confirm EVERY admin action, if you're about to do 10 "administrative" things in a row.
I don't like mail-style RSS reading like Opera has. If you do like Opera's RSS capability then you would be better off using Thunderbird's RSS features instead of Firefox - it's very similar to Opera's. There are however extensions for Firefox that load RSS into the browser's sidebar, which I prefer over all other methods (including Opera's). Check out the Sage and WizzRSS extensions.
Microsoft just actually released an SP2B for XP. Not SP3, but SP2B reduces the number of updates after the initial install.
2 E16832116059 o ws-xp-sp2b-makes.html
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N8
http://labnol.blogspot.com/2006/07/microsoft-wind
I agree that Microsoft (or likely anybody else) won't change to a per-core pricing model, but for different reasons. The point of per-CPU pricing is just to determine the market - the type of user/computer:
1 CPU = most laptops and desktops, low end servers
2 CPU = high-end workstations, average servers
4 CPU = high-end servers
As the number of cores ramp up, as you said to 4/8/16, then charging per core would be like charging per GHz or per L2 cache size - it doesn't make sense, adding cores will just be another way that new chips get faster than old ones. But the number of actual CPUs/sockets to define a specific market will likely stay the same for some time. Other than the Oracle debacle that grandparent poster mentioned, all per-core pricing theories have just been speculation. I can't imagine any company successfully pulling that off.
Chill out. Timely news is important especially on something like this. I believe IE7 is supposed to be released (pushed out as a "high priority" Windows update) in October. RC1 was actually released over a week ago (August 23 or 24) so I would say this news is almost two weeks old. I had to spend some time trying to figure out if this was something actually new or if Slashdot was just slow to the story for some reason; if the parent's comment were closer to the top it would have saved me some time.
Not that I'm an expert but I might be able to help a little bit - I have VMware server running on ubuntu Dapper running a number of VM's, mostly for fun, but one is a Windows XP installation just to run Quicken. The VMware Tools is something that you install onto the guest OS that basically gives you better performance (display and mouse I believe). If you notice a sluggish mouse this helps tremendously, makes it seem almost native. Also if you have a VM where you have to press ctrl+alt to get back out to your host OS, installing the VMware Tools will make it so the mouse can seamlessly go between both (like if you're not in full screen mode). The Server version is free where the Workstation version is not. The Workstation version has some additional functionality with saving snapshots and whatnot, it's better for a development environment for doing lots of testing. The server version you can run on one machine and connect to it from another machine (that dialog that pops up every time you start asking if you want to connect to local host or a remote computer). The Player is a simple version that just plays already built VM's, you can't create new ones or modify the properties of them (RAM, devices, etc.). Hope that helps.
I was personally thrilled to do away with Verizon and get Vonage. I guess there is some level of comfort in doing business with the "big guy", but that comfort zone will change over time.
The thing is that technology is supposed to make things easier / cheaper / more efficient. But for some reason it seems that phone service, both mobile and home, has continued to get more expensive over the years. VOIP providers are finally correcting that, and while Verizon will obviously try to hang on to their old business model as long as possible, it won't last forever.
bloggers pretty much all sound the same
So, then you've read what, one or two blogs in your life? How do you think the content in blogs is any different than the content in books or magazines or in the news or the conversation you're going to have with your co-workers on Monday morning? Why do you think the medium defines the content? They are unrelated.
Oh yes and all these newfangled jargon words I can hardly keep up. What are these "web" and "email" and "IM" things I keep hearing about? I wish people would stop coining these new words just so they can feel superior and to confuse me.
Acutally a google search for "define: blog" returns 28 results (definitions). You just picked one that happened to support your stance.
Just because somebody or some entity (corporation, organization e.g. Google Blog, IE Blog, Mozillazine, etc.) picks a blog as the medium to communicate to the world doesn't make their information or opinions any more worthless than some attention whore / self-involved twit / sellout who decided to publish a book or write a magazine article. It really irritates me when people (usually old people) disregard any information that came from the "interweb" and wasn't published on paper. Look, the medium is irrelevant to content. Sure there are bad blogs that are as you described, I'll even concede that it's the vast majority of them (livejournal/myspace), but the medium is relatively new and there are a number of very quality blogs on a wide variety of topics that are informative and worth reading. But then if you think about it, is the ratio of bad blogs to good blogs any worse than the ratio of bad to good books or magazines or tv shows or newspapers?
The other thing is that some people claim "dupe!" to things that were posted a month or two ago. Funny thing about the technology industry is how fast things change, so while the basic article subject might be a dupe there are likely new developments that are worth discussing. Now in this instance that doesn't appear to be the case as this dupe was two days ago...
Do you have any references to back that up? It seems way off to me. I think you're confusing that with the number of requests that the root servers see that are unnecessary (redundant / could be cached by ISP's) which I believe is 98% -- but that's not 98% of all DNS traffic, not even close.
Check out this, this, this and this; over half of the big ISP's have a cached response for the most popular sites on the net.
Amazon has a demo of a similar click-to-call system here: http://www.estara.com/livedemo/a9/. If you click the "Click to Call Business" button you get a popup to put in your phone number and extension. If you click your mouse in the extension box another form pops up:So it looks like that system is adaptable to be able to handle various types of phone systems or receptionists.
Yeah I haven't been able to see it on google's site either after trying a number of searches on the main google, google local, google mobile, etc. I wonder if it's also limited to the business hours of the advertiser.
Google's PDA search on your phone uses the tel: protocol, if you go here in your browser and look at the links at the top you'll see what I mean - your computer's browser won't do anything with it (maybe it could though...) but your phone recognises it. Very usefull stuff on a web capable phone but as you said not the same thing.
The Kill-A-Watt is pretty good.
Gunaxf sbe gur rkcynangvba, ohg qbrf rirelguvat ba n qnexarg unir gb or EBG-13 rapbqrq?
I agree with the no anonymous users editing it and I'd take it a step further... limit the number of times a particular user can edit any given article. That way they can make their contribution and move on. If other people change what they wrote they can only change it back so many times before they're locked out of it - that should at least help to slow down the "fiddlers" and people who think their version is the only correct version.
Also I believe there was some talk about having some kind of "certified" experts on particular topics that can monitor an entry, but they would have gone through some kind of pre-qualification. I'm talking really broad here, there would be a number of specifics to work out, but I think these things would help the situation.
In the IBM commercial referenced in TFA, they seem to imply that RFID was the technology that alerted the home office that the truck went the wrong way. This could be accomplished with GPS locating and a radio transmitter to send the coordinates back to the office, but neither technology has anything to do with RFID. Unless IBM has a grid of RFID readers laid into roads throughout the US...