Don't they have markets to regulate?
Shouldn't they be worried about promoting broadband access nationwide, which free-market competition has simply found not that profitable (see Rural America and various suburbs)? Shouldn't they be checking in on the ATT/Cingular super-bohemoth? Maybe get Comcast to stop screwing customers? Maybe?
I'm all for this. For the public to pool resources for bargaining power makes sense. The telcos have abused the system long enough and the consumers really don't have many options in most parts of the country. From what I see, the telcos are simply gaining monopoly power, and then screwing the consumer.
Currently in south Florida there are two broadband options: Comcast and Bellsouth. Currently, it's troublesome to get base broadband that is not bundled with other un-wanted services like phone and cable.
Comcast charges around $42 dollars a month if you have cable for their lowest-priced broadband. $56 dollars for standalone broadband. (Granted, these are at 6Mbit/s speeds, but I simply want to get by on the low speed stuff (like 256k or 512k/s.)
DSL from Bellsouth runs $40 for their lowest speed standalone DSL. And that option only became available as of Aug 1.
What I had before was a $25/month plan from Comcast which they're discontinuing and can no longer get. Basically, what I see Comcast doing is charging me more so they can afford to bury faster lines so that they can send out VideoOnDemand and other high-end services for which I do not want, but am forced to subsidize. And since there's no competition, I got no choice. Where's the FCC on this?
Does anybody see this differently?
Is it possible that the market is learning? Perhaps the majority now *correctly* assume that Vista will be buggy, unstable, a PITFA, and will happily allow everyone else to beta-test it. And given market saturation, there are relatively fewer first time PC purchases to bundle with Vista and boost initial adoptance. Have we hit a tipping point?
--
In Soviet Russia the former presidents outlive YOU!
Since the gov't is paying the salaries of the gov't owned media, isnt' this the equivalent of your boss handing out a reporting assignment? I see no danger to the freedom of the press, I see capitalism at work.
> at least 50 percent of the reports about Russia must be 'positive.'
I suppose regulating the media is easier than regulating the world: only good things can happen.
I for one hope they don't adopt MS's color-coded triangles. I don't care how much more data it can encode. It'll still be worthless to me since those of us that are color-blind can't read it.
I think I have a patent on this one... Should I sell it to Microsoft? Or should I license? For data/virus protection? Or for identity protection? Any advice?
really? Not in my experience. Torrent 1 has files a, b, and c. Torrent 2 has files c, d, and e. Torrent one has 100% of file c complete, while Torrent 2 is still trying to download file c with 94% remaining.
File c has same size, name, hash, etc in both torrents. Thus the client mis-allocates resources, no?
Actually, there is a fourth type. It's called 'trade secret.' And most companies are probably more paranoid about these than any other, as these give on the ground competetive advantage. (I think it's easier to steal trade secrets and use them without getting caught than any of the others.)
And if you don't believe me, then check out what these guys say:
http://www.abanet.org/intelprop/4types.html
No way. That bridge I walked across this morning was sturdy enough. It's just that I'm never going to walk on that bridge again.
Not for those historical, "can't cross the same stream twice" reasons either. I just don't trust engineers.
Re:Why does everyone hate Roland Piquepaille?
on
The Virtual Teacher
·
· Score: 1
I agree. Shady, yet market-efficient ethics at best. I don't like making extra clicks to get to vacuous articles with minimal, obvious commentary (although this sounds alot like articles from wired, computerworld, pcmag, and many others).
Does/. have a policy on this? Shouldn't the poster be require to link directly to actual vacuous article in question? Can't we use the power of the unfunded mandate to legislate the actions of posters? Perhaps we should take this to SCOTUS. Does Groklaw have anything on this?
When I read the headline, I mistook it as vocabulary related, as in "is the word 'paper' dead", or, "the death of hard copy." Methought I would run into some ebook, cybermarketing gimmick-laced futurismo.
That death might have concerned me; this death, not as much.
"...and while it may take you some TIME to code a data transform, and testing to get it correct, it's a heck of a lot simpler than say, coming up with a new algorithym to break the latest DRM attempt from the RIAA. At least you HAVE business rules. Anything that has business rules to transform one set of data to another is easy money, as far as I'm concerned."
Value added.
Time = money. Time for testing, time for programming = more money. All to get a transform that is doing about the same thing that you're already doing on old iron? Run the numbers.
"Easy money" ? When your boss figures out that you're wasting time and accomplishing nothing, then 'easy money' => 'involuntary job seeker.'
And yes, you can check the math.
This is crap. Installing/patching/upgrading stupid boxes is not a skill, and doesn't help people learn how to think abstractly--it's a simple procedural task, steps 1,2,3..n. No abstract thinking going on, simply read and click. Think car analogy, fixing cars is so helpful for abstract thinking that everybody is doing it.
This is not to say that understanding, diagnosing problems, and fixing them doesn't require thinking, only that patching/installing in it's simplified form doesn't cut it for higher ed. Not after such processes have been industrialized with tools like SUS. People use SUS so they can think about harder problems that have yet to be completed efficiently by silicon chipsets. Think security policy, user training, platform management (which is what he's doing)--he could only ask this question because he's not helping 1000 students figure out how to install a patch.
This whole question is going to expose problems/.ers have of relating back to real world problems and not getting stuck in cool techy solutions.
First mantra: understand the client.
Second mantra: understand their IT.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't they have markets to regulate? Shouldn't they be worried about promoting broadband access nationwide, which free-market competition has simply found not that profitable (see Rural America and various suburbs)? Shouldn't they be checking in on the ATT/Cingular super-bohemoth? Maybe get Comcast to stop screwing customers? Maybe?
I'm all for this. For the public to pool resources for bargaining power makes sense. The telcos have abused the system long enough and the consumers really don't have many options in most parts of the country. From what I see, the telcos are simply gaining monopoly power, and then screwing the consumer. Currently in south Florida there are two broadband options: Comcast and Bellsouth. Currently, it's troublesome to get base broadband that is not bundled with other un-wanted services like phone and cable. Comcast charges around $42 dollars a month if you have cable for their lowest-priced broadband. $56 dollars for standalone broadband. (Granted, these are at 6Mbit/s speeds, but I simply want to get by on the low speed stuff (like 256k or 512k/s.) DSL from Bellsouth runs $40 for their lowest speed standalone DSL. And that option only became available as of Aug 1. What I had before was a $25/month plan from Comcast which they're discontinuing and can no longer get. Basically, what I see Comcast doing is charging me more so they can afford to bury faster lines so that they can send out VideoOnDemand and other high-end services for which I do not want, but am forced to subsidize. And since there's no competition, I got no choice. Where's the FCC on this? Does anybody see this differently?
I for one welcome our new fruit-picking overlords.
Still, the real benefit of this article is that it catalogues and lists counter-arguments.
From TFA: it also mentions that global warming will cause more people to win the lottery, too.
Yeah, but as for your superheroes... I'd like to see some fossil records.
Is it possible that the market is learning? Perhaps the majority now *correctly* assume that Vista will be buggy, unstable, a PITFA, and will happily allow everyone else to beta-test it. And given market saturation, there are relatively fewer first time PC purchases to bundle with Vista and boost initial adoptance. Have we hit a tipping point? -- In Soviet Russia the former presidents outlive YOU!
doesn't walmart also need to increase it's orders of pirated HD movies?
Since the gov't is paying the salaries of the gov't owned media, isnt' this the equivalent of your boss handing out a reporting assignment? I see no danger to the freedom of the press, I see capitalism at work.
> at least 50 percent of the reports about Russia must be 'positive.' I suppose regulating the media is easier than regulating the world: only good things can happen.
... the news eats YOU!
I for one hope they don't adopt MS's color-coded triangles. I don't care how much more data it can encode. It'll still be worthless to me since those of us that are color-blind can't read it.
if we're back on the GHz race, then what was the race we just left? the multicore-race? doesn't sound snazzy enough.
I think I have a patent on this one... Should I sell it to Microsoft? Or should I license? For data/virus protection? Or for identity protection? Any advice?
In pre-democratic Russia, the beer drinks you!
really? Not in my experience. Torrent 1 has files a, b, and c. Torrent 2 has files c, d, and e. Torrent one has 100% of file c complete, while Torrent 2 is still trying to download file c with 94% remaining. File c has same size, name, hash, etc in both torrents. Thus the client mis-allocates resources, no?
In Russia, the hardware patches YOU?
Actually, there is a fourth type. It's called 'trade secret.' And most companies are probably more paranoid about these than any other, as these give on the ground competetive advantage. (I think it's easier to steal trade secrets and use them without getting caught than any of the others.) And if you don't believe me, then check out what these guys say: http://www.abanet.org/intelprop/4types.html
No way. That bridge I walked across this morning was sturdy enough. It's just that I'm never going to walk on that bridge again. Not for those historical, "can't cross the same stream twice" reasons either. I just don't trust engineers.
I agree. Shady, yet market-efficient ethics at best. I don't like making extra clicks to get to vacuous articles with minimal, obvious commentary (although this sounds alot like articles from wired, computerworld, pcmag, and many others). Does /. have a policy on this? Shouldn't the poster be require to link directly to actual vacuous article in question? Can't we use the power of the unfunded mandate to legislate the actions of posters? Perhaps we should take this to SCOTUS. Does Groklaw have anything on this?
When I read the headline, I mistook it as vocabulary related, as in "is the word 'paper' dead", or, "the death of hard copy." Methought I would run into some ebook, cybermarketing gimmick-laced futurismo. That death might have concerned me; this death, not as much.
wow. first time in a long while I have read something /.'d and put it to *immediate* use.
congrats.
"...and while it may take you some TIME to code a data transform, and testing to get it correct, it's a heck of a lot simpler than say, coming up with a new algorithym to break the latest DRM attempt from the RIAA. At least you HAVE business rules. Anything that has business rules to transform one set of data to another is easy money, as far as I'm concerned."
Value added.
Time = money. Time for testing, time for programming = more money. All to get a transform that is doing about the same thing that you're already doing on old iron? Run the numbers.
"Easy money" ? When your boss figures out that you're wasting time and accomplishing nothing, then 'easy money' => 'involuntary job seeker.' And yes, you can check the math.
This is crap. Installing/patching/upgrading stupid boxes is not a skill, and doesn't help people learn how to think abstractly--it's a simple procedural task, steps 1,2,3..n. No abstract thinking going on, simply read and click. Think car analogy, fixing cars is so helpful for abstract thinking that everybody is doing it. This is not to say that understanding, diagnosing problems, and fixing them doesn't require thinking, only that patching/installing in it's simplified form doesn't cut it for higher ed. Not after such processes have been industrialized with tools like SUS. People use SUS so they can think about harder problems that have yet to be completed efficiently by silicon chipsets. Think security policy, user training, platform management (which is what he's doing)--he could only ask this question because he's not helping 1000 students figure out how to install a patch. This whole question is going to expose problems /.ers have of relating back to real world problems and not getting stuck in cool techy solutions.
First mantra: understand the client.
Second mantra: understand their IT.