With fond memories I remember time spent on kronos and nos playing the mainframe 'oregon trail'. So many failed ventures, so many families lost, so many missed deer and buffalo. I was a poor shot.
And, using up the remaining minutes on xtalk and mmt (wait, was that YIM, AIM, or just texting) typing with people from as far away as luvern and worthington - the far reaches of civilization yet as close as a modem. All that time spent on appleseeds (oops, I suppose now I'm busted). And, of course, 'cheating' (no kidding, that was the accusation) on biology homework with just a brief soliloquy of code. *sigh*
It was all fun until the paper ran out. Thank god for crt's.
True enough. It just seems that what he's doing artificially raises the price of domain names, and may prevent others with relevant interest from using a domain name - i.e. if the church of satan wanted to use satan.com, but a devout christian won't sell it to them, and uses it to promote christian propaganda.
Early on, he wrote software to snag expiring names on the cheap.
Since spam introduces meaningless noise in email, isn't what this guy is doing introducing meaningless noise in the DNS system? Maybe an RFC is needed to further and more specifically define such worthless noise and abuse in the DNS system.
Ham is a devout Christian, and he spends $31,000 to add Christianrock.com to his collection, which already includes God.com and Satan.com.
The hypothetical six-node digital network depicted in the box on these two pages can help clarify those options.
I looked at the diagram link in the submission, and for the above referenced diagram that correlated to the example in the sentences that followed, and didn't find them. Anyone else encounter that problem?
Well, it has been going up lately, but MS stock outperformed it (click the Max zoom in the upper right hand area of the graph). A much better investment might be copper. I read an article years ago by an economic geologist (haven't found a link to it though) in which it was stated that at current known copper reserves, there isn't enough copper to wire the third world to the same extent the industrialized nations are wired (power and communications). Wireless may change that, but the third world still wants electricity, and China is building 544 new coal power plants in the foreseeable future. That's a lot of copper, and without some kind of gigantic new source, that's likely to mean higher copper prices in the future.
I'd advise apple to invest in either copper of MS stock.
Isn't there some kind of law, like Godwin's law, regarding the likelihood of invoking the 'soviet' prefix as a way to criticize the sorry lack of free speech in america?
Besides, if its that easy to throw a reactionary scare into a religion, its not much of a religion.
MS thinks they are the greatest, fastest, bestus of all time, and everybody should validate that belief by trying to be like them. This is news how again?
What to people mean by "can't oversubscribe a T1"? Can't put more than 1.44Mbps on it? Isn't that true of any medium - you can't exceed its maximum bits per second? Or do you mean that whoever sells a T1 has only sold as many T1's as their upstream will support at full T1 rates? Isn't that really up to the scruples of the T1 seller?
No shit. All this talk of a T1 having 'guaranteed' bandwidth is confusing. Are they implying that all your uploads/downloads will be 1.44Mbps? Absolutely not. Won't ever happen, because as Xzzy pointed out earlier, the T1 provider can oversell their upstream bandwidth - and often do. As for the guy who 'sells T1s' with fancy 'SLAs', if he sells me one, I hope he's got a good mobile plan, because I'll call him for every errored second (severe or not), every path and line code violation, and every unavailable second. Then lets see his 'SLA' in action. Yes, businesses get SLAs, but they still get outages that you can't get answer one out of them about. Or if you do enforce a reimbursement clause, its just for the cost of the link, and will in no way cover the actual business losses you get by having your web site out of commission. I get such a kick out of all these 'business-heads' flustering about here, as though they've thought this stuff through.
Really the interesting thing is that TW will sell you a 100Mbps link right off a SONET ring for less than Verizon will sell you a T3 - where I work we've got one of each. Could be the days of copper for anything other than ethernet may be numbered.
Quite true. What people often miss is that an ISP can sell a customer a service to mark their web/VOIP/Steaming video traffic with a 'higher priority', but unless absolutely every other carrier/ISP/backbone provider honors those DSCP/Diffserv settings, its mostly meaningless. And, I intentionally put it in terms of what QOS features ISPs might want to sell to (steal from, actually) the Apples, Microsofts, Googles, and Yahoos because the DSCP/Diffserv settings have to be treated similarly on the whole Internet for them to be worth anything in terms of consistently improved traffic. The Googles have more resources with which to sue ISPs for failing to improve traffic to their customers than residential victims. On either end of QOS over the wild Internet, little, if any, consistent improvement will ever practically show up no matter how hard they stamp the DSCP bits onto their packets.
However, what fewer people still realize is that, if the telcos successfully make the case that QOS will actually work consistently on the Internet, the government will inevitably step in to regulate it. After all. who wants their VOIP 911 call to get garbled or disconnected because of the next door neighbor's kid is playing WOW or bittorrenting the latest Ubuntu something-something? What politician will dare oppose legislation calling for standardization of QOS for 911 VOIP calls and other 'critical services'?
Telcos don't know what they're in for by trying to 'tier' the internet. Because the government will at some point have to set up prioritization standards for emergency services on the Internet, if the telcos can successfully sell the government on the idea that QOS will actually work on the internet.
If, on the other hand, the Internet remains neutral (as functionally it should), the government may not be pushed into needing to assure that local ISPs and backbone providers build out and setup to support critical services for their Internet connectivity.
Also detailed in an internal Apple document, here, detailing the Apple Lisa interface appearence, in 1980.
10. Folders
Each folder shows a view of a single document, and provides a structure for manipulating the view of that document by scrolling, moving, growing, and closing the folder down to a tab.
A folder may be used to group together a collection of related documents to be filed away and retrieved together. The filing system is still in design, and the grouping mechanism will be determined by it. Two possibilities are a folder containing other closed folders (only tabs visible), or a folder with a table of contents to select which document is currently visible. In any case, each folder only shows one document at any time.
11. Basic folder appearance
A folder is drawn as a white rectangle (filled in by the application) with a thin (one pixel) black border. Every folder has a tab, which looks like a tab on a standard manilla folder. The tab is always above the upper left corner of the folder. It is called the title tab.
The rectangular portion of the folder that holds the folder's contents is called the body of the folder.
However, its not clear that the polaroids or the apple document are irrefutable evidence of prior art.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder if there's a way to get the names of the people who gave him money, and their contact info.
With fond memories I remember time spent on kronos and nos playing the mainframe 'oregon trail'. So many failed ventures, so many families lost, so many missed deer and buffalo. I was a poor shot.
And, using up the remaining minutes on xtalk and mmt (wait, was that YIM, AIM, or just texting) typing with people from as far away as luvern and worthington - the far reaches of civilization yet as close as a modem. All that time spent on appleseeds (oops, I suppose now I'm busted). And, of course, 'cheating' (no kidding, that was the accusation) on biology homework with just a brief soliloquy of code. *sigh*
It was all fun until the paper ran out. Thank god for crt's.
So much has changed, so much has stayed the same.
And if they out breed us, eventually the majority of society will enforce those values on the rest.
Kind of like in Idiocracy. Whoever breeds the most becomes the most successful.
FTFR:Whereas approximately 31 percent of the students in grades 5 through 12 have the skill to circumvent Internet filter software;
We grown-ups fear them.
True enough. It just seems that what he's doing artificially raises the price of domain names, and may prevent others with relevant interest from using a domain name - i.e. if the church of satan wanted to use satan.com, but a devout christian won't sell it to them, and uses it to promote christian propaganda.
Why does accommodating religion nearly always harm society?
Early on, he wrote software to snag expiring names on the cheap.
Since spam introduces meaningless noise in email, isn't what this guy is doing introducing meaningless noise in the DNS system? Maybe an RFC is needed to further and more specifically define such worthless noise and abuse in the DNS system.
Ham is a devout Christian, and he spends $31,000 to add Christianrock.com to his collection, which already includes God.com and Satan.com.
Why is that not surprising...
Did anyone seriously think for a even a moment that a media package for watching cable TV from microsoft wouldn't try to control everything?
Never hire windows admins brandishing the moniker "network admin".
Will people be able to hear anything he says in the open with a helicopter overhead?
Oh wait that's right - it won't matter.
Well, it has been going up lately, but MS stock outperformed it (click the Max zoom in the upper right hand area of the graph). A much better investment might be copper. I read an article years ago by an economic geologist (haven't found a link to it though) in which it was stated that at current known copper reserves, there isn't enough copper to wire the third world to the same extent the industrialized nations are wired (power and communications). Wireless may change that, but the third world still wants electricity, and China is building 544 new coal power plants in the foreseeable future. That's a lot of copper, and without some kind of gigantic new source, that's likely to mean higher copper prices in the future.
I'd advise apple to invest in either copper of MS stock.
Does that mean google searches by employee are okay too?
Welcome to Soviet America
Isn't there some kind of law, like Godwin's law, regarding the likelihood of invoking the 'soviet' prefix as a way to criticize the sorry lack of free speech in america?
Besides, if its that easy to throw a reactionary scare into a religion, its not much of a religion.
You must be referring to the lawgiver. How dare you.
in that during the 90s Windows was the *only* operating system for the "I just want it to work" crowd
Well for the "I just want it to work for a short time before rebooting" crowd, anyway.
Here.
Got there from a search at their site...
Okay - "bestest". There.
MS thinks they are the greatest, fastest, bestus of all time, and everybody should validate that belief by trying to be like them. This is news how again?
wow. Is that both directions?
You DO NOT oversubscribe T1.
What to people mean by "can't oversubscribe a T1"? Can't put more than 1.44Mbps on it? Isn't that true of any medium - you can't exceed its maximum bits per second? Or do you mean that whoever sells a T1 has only sold as many T1's as their upstream will support at full T1 rates? Isn't that really up to the scruples of the T1 seller?
No shit. All this talk of a T1 having 'guaranteed' bandwidth is confusing. Are they implying that all your uploads/downloads will be 1.44Mbps? Absolutely not. Won't ever happen, because as Xzzy pointed out earlier, the T1 provider can oversell their upstream bandwidth - and often do. As for the guy who 'sells T1s' with fancy 'SLAs', if he sells me one, I hope he's got a good mobile plan, because I'll call him for every errored second (severe or not), every path and line code violation, and every unavailable second. Then lets see his 'SLA' in action. Yes, businesses get SLAs, but they still get outages that you can't get answer one out of them about. Or if you do enforce a reimbursement clause, its just for the cost of the link, and will in no way cover the actual business losses you get by having your web site out of commission. I get such a kick out of all these 'business-heads' flustering about here, as though they've thought this stuff through.
Really the interesting thing is that TW will sell you a 100Mbps link right off a SONET ring for less than Verizon will sell you a T3 - where I work we've got one of each. Could be the days of copper for anything other than ethernet may be numbered.
Quite true. What people often miss is that an ISP can sell a customer a service to mark their web/VOIP/Steaming video traffic with a 'higher priority', but unless absolutely every other carrier/ISP/backbone provider honors those DSCP/Diffserv settings, its mostly meaningless. And, I intentionally put it in terms of what QOS features ISPs might want to sell to (steal from, actually) the Apples, Microsofts, Googles, and Yahoos because the DSCP/Diffserv settings have to be treated similarly on the whole Internet for them to be worth anything in terms of consistently improved traffic. The Googles have more resources with which to sue ISPs for failing to improve traffic to their customers than residential victims. On either end of QOS over the wild Internet, little, if any, consistent improvement will ever practically show up no matter how hard they stamp the DSCP bits onto their packets.
However, what fewer people still realize is that, if the telcos successfully make the case that QOS will actually work consistently on the Internet, the government will inevitably step in to regulate it. After all. who wants their VOIP 911 call to get garbled or disconnected because of the next door neighbor's kid is playing WOW or bittorrenting the latest Ubuntu something-something? What politician will dare oppose legislation calling for standardization of QOS for 911 VOIP calls and other 'critical services'?
Telcos don't know what they're in for by trying to 'tier' the internet. Because the government will at some point have to set up prioritization standards for emergency services on the Internet, if the telcos can successfully sell the government on the idea that QOS will actually work on the internet.
If, on the other hand, the Internet remains neutral (as functionally it should), the government may not be pushed into needing to assure that local ISPs and backbone providers build out and setup to support critical services for their Internet connectivity.
However, its not clear that the polaroids or the apple document are irrefutable evidence of prior art.
although it will react to ultraviolet light by fluorescing a pinkish-orange.
That's the color that turns superman into a metro-sexual.