The summary says "WISPs - terrestrial (not cellular or satellite) Wireless broadband Internet Service Providers". For fucks sake, if you're bitching about a summary not explaining an acronym, at least read the summary. Granted it's not until the second sentence, but it's still there. Wireless ISP. WISP.
Gosh, slashdotters these days...it is expected that nobody would RTFA...but now they don't even RTFS? GP's UID is lower than mine, he really should know better.:)
You have it sadly backwards. The Bloods were the activist wing of the Trekkie division of the Los Angeles Linux User Group.
In the Denver LUG, infiltrating convenience stores has provided a reliable supply of Mountain Dew. But I fear this infighting may unravel the whole sweet deal.
No, they didn't spend millions, since copying a CD only costs a few cents. Of course, Microsoft counts the donated software at the full market price, but they just provide cheap copies.
Microsoft is just counting on the fact that they are the first ones, but we'll see if this strategy will continue to work once everybody will be more fluent with computers.
Does that work for corporate tax writeoff purposes? Yuck.
No, by law you are required to continue supporting a product for 5 years after you pull it from sales. This is to prevent companies from releasing a car/software and then discontinuing support "it's no longer economically feasible to support this product" 2 years later. This is why Microsoft continues to provide security patches for operating systems (like WinXP) that can no longer be bought through retail (shrinkwrap software box, not the OEM installs that come on EeePCs) for 5 or 7 years or whatever it is.
Now before someone clicks the link and says "but they don't have that menu anymore in Windows 7, the display settings page has been changed", let me say there are other areas (like the LAN connection status window, among about 5 others) where they still chose this lazy/bad design route.
I'm not one to fuss much about UI design (I'm perfectly happy with the Windows standard theme from way back in '95), but there are still parts of the OS where they simply split apart a window with tabs in it, didn't even bother removing the tabs, and dumped it into it's own window. The result is something like this.
Ugly. If they would fix that, I would be perfectly happy with 7.
(On an unrelated note, my friend playing WoW, who would get about dips to ~30FPS on XP in Dalaran, gets dips only to ~45 in Windows 7, with the exact same visual settings. Impressive!)
> The last issue is traffic caps. I don't think there should be a law against it as long > as the company is upfront about it. Putting caps on traffic allows ISP's to maximize > their over subscription and cater to people that want low cost Internet service.
I don't think that caps should be illegal either but metered service would be much better.
You think they're going to cut do something that would cut the monthly bills of 80% of their subscribers? All the Joe Sixpacks and grandmas that check their email and visit CNN.com once a day? No, for them, metered service would mean $5/month (or $20 perhaps). That's down from the $50/mo they already pay.
On the contrary, what happens usually is I won't actively go and buy the album I already possess, but when I'm at Walmart checking out the electronics section, I will see a new album that they put out, and if the album is less than $13, I will simply buy it right away.
So it doesn't retroactively increase sales for them, but it does going forward.
I think most people are more likely to function like this than go buy albums they already now have (digitally).
If the RIAA wants more money and wants to curb teen piracy, they would do well to lobby for minimum wage increases. When I was working McD for $5.50/hour, or construction for $8/hour, do you think I'm going to go spend more than 3 hours of work money on a lousy CD that might only have 4 good songs I like? Now that I make much more, the time ratio is much smaller so I'm not so concerned about only getting 4 songs I like.
If genocide becomes likely then the UN should step in
I think if I had modpoints today I would give that a "+1, Funny" right there. The UN is a joke, this has been proven time and again. Leaving it to them would be an end to the Christians in Egypt. But hey, they're just Christians, so that's ok, right?
Preventing violence is as important as picking up after it.
...overall it has been estimated that the global loss due to proprietary software is "in excess of $1 trillion a year."
That's the same kind of lame-ass no-evidence silly figure pushing that the RIAA and MPAA uses to sell their Anti-Piracy measures. I love Linux and I'd love to see it spread even more but this way of propagating it is just retarded. You get Microsoft software for your money, be that a good investment or not is your decision. It's clearly not a "loss" it's merely a costly under-utilization of alternatives.
I tend to praise Linux and rant against Microsoft but this OSI guy Tiemann just blew the frame by using the same silly and faulty means of propaganda rhetoric. One thing I try to learn and live by is "Just because THEY do it doesn't mean we have to or even should do it too". By pulling figures out of his ass to make himself look more interesting he's not a single notch better than Microsoft with it's installbase or the supposed piracy figures by the media companies. That is just NOT the way to convince people of the right thing.
On the contrary (and to back what you said), I could argue that OSS CREATES prosperity by freeing funds from inefficient allocation. Instead of a business having to spend $XXYY/user on expensive proprietary software (Windows, Maya, etc), those funds are freed (due to using OSS) to hire more workers. (A nice side effect then is that a few of those workers decide they could be more productive at work if their software had feature XYZ; they petition their boss to spend 1 month writing a patch; submit it, it gets implemented, and their efficiency improves.)
The alternative is that a regular factor of the company's operational costs goes to software licenses. The cash exchange here is perhaps an increase on the nation's GDP, at least initially, but it takes away jobs. Let's say a company is started to fulfill a market need for some software. To produce that software, 100 workers are initially needed. They hire these workers, write the software, and the company releases it as version 1.0. Then they fire 90 of those workers, and have the last 10 work on version 1.1. Through vendor lock in and yearly licenses, the consuming company buying said software still has to shell out every couple of years for the new version/license. That money goes to the software company, which hands it out in very high bonuses for execs, or pays out to the shareholders. There really isn't a market requirement/need for new features; the income revenue is stable and there are no competitors. To do what this software company has done would require a new company with 80 smart workers; but no 80-employee company can compete with the now 10-employee software company. Because of this, the software company can sell their software at a cost which would enable them to employ 85 workers (IE, at $1/worker, the market equivalent of the investment required to fund a new startup to do what the first company has done is $80 (to employ 80 workers), +$5 in interest). But because the software company only has to pay for 10 workers, they can compete with any new startups (who have to sell their competing product at a high enough cost to cover debt + interest used to employ those 80 workers) down to the software cost they currently pay-- $10 (to employ 10 workers). So, assuming no insanely efficient new method of meeting that market need (that the now-10-employee-software-company now meets) is developed, money in the economy (businesses in need of the software) will go to a company that could employ 85 workers, but that now only has to employ 10 workers.
Let's take a look at where the rest of the money goes-- lets assume nice executive packages, and shareholder returns.
Now the majority of the company is tied up in the stakes of a few (millionaire) shareholders. That money goes to them through the shareholder returns; and like the money that goes to the execs, may continue to be of benefit to the economy through extra fu
It seems it's never done right when we do privatize it. The 50% against it use those examples to prove it's a bad thing-- but if the government would just privatize it the right way, it would be fine.
Government is wonderfully good at producing paperwork....I'd just like to stay away from that. On the other hand the BritRail system would be enough for anyone to run from privatization full speed.
No one denies that. Part of how we fix it though is by raising a stink. There's no other option. Government doesn't go out of business-- it just taxes more, as we've seen with NY during this recession.
If government were a for profit business they'd either have died years ago, or they'd be constantly working on weeding out and scaling back. That would be amazing. Come to think of it, is there any way we could run government as a business? With the exception of the defense sector and public transit. Why can't it be done?
So because they did this one thing, they must have been pro-big-government? Nevermind the bill of rights? Ha. Your post may be informative but it is anything but a rebuttle to the GP's post.
Means little, when the current cable speeds can basically be infinite. You know how you have all those TV channels traveling through the same wire? They can do the same with the internet communications as well-- just use multiple channels in parallel.
Yes, and I have a mild case of it. But I've learned that more and more of it is just a lack of my self-control in sitting down to study and stay focused to complete it.
Sigh, more ADHD/ADD. This isn't a rant at the game/article but more just the whole idea of ADHD/ADD. Overconcerned mommies wondering why their child would rather be at recess playing outside, living an adventure in the woods than sitting on his butt from 8-3 every day with 2 minute breaks in between classes where he gets to stand up from his desk, go get his textbook from the shelf, and sit back down...
HELLO! He's a kid! And he's a boy! We've always known girls are naturally predisposed to sitting still in class learning. Why don't we medicate the girls for no interest in proving themselves manly like the boys like to prove themselves worthy? Girls play the relational games, boys like to play competitive games, see if they have what it takes, if they stack up against the odds.
I'm telling you this is a war against men. The ladies then ask "Where have all the men gone, why doesn't my man sweep me off my feet with emotion?" Well, you asked them to be "nice". If all a man can aspire to in his life is to be a "nice" guy who sits down for his wife when he pees, is it any wonder where they've all gone?
What the hell, I got karma out the ass, so I'll answer your question.
Slashdot continues to moan because the average commenter has neither ran the beta or used Vista for longer than 5 minutes. Its more fun to bitch about Microsoft than to actually use the product.
Its also fun to sit and read some of the bitch comments and see how many Slashdotters overlooked the "beta" part, bitch about missing features, and apparently thought they were downloading the final RTM code.
I've never had a lick of trouble running Vista. Nor have I had a lick of trouble in the two weeks I've been running this beta. But then I made sure to put it on a modern PC built with Vista in mind, not my grandfather's Packard-Bell 486 with 4 meg of ram.
Yes that's nice. It's clear MS didn't finish the OS. Because of things like this. They didn't even bother making the Aero UI that they hyped up for so long mesh with the rest of the OS. They took the Desktop Properties window (right click->Properties) in Windows XP, and just separated the tabs and provided a link to each one. Boy that's an improvement.
Or how about having to click 3x more than XP just to get to the network connection status or, Bill Gates forbid, make changes to the TCP/IP settings. Jeez it feels like 15 clicks. I have to STOP doing what I'm doing and concentrating on, and figure out which of the 5 buttons to click, and do that for about 5 more windows that come up before I get there. With WinXP I just double click the little computer on the taskbar and it opens it for me. Or I right click it and can get to the TCP/IP settings with one more click.
Personally, I've always had good experiences with NVIDIA cards on Linux. Lenovo builds good, reasonably-priced laptops with NVIDIA or ATI cards these days.
This will be changing very soon now that AMD has released the full hardware specs (3d and everything). I give it 6 months and the AMD/ATI chips will work a lot nicer than even the Nvidia ones.
Slashdot Mirror
The summary says "WISPs - terrestrial (not cellular or satellite) Wireless broadband Internet Service Providers". For fucks sake, if you're bitching about a summary not explaining an acronym, at least read the summary. Granted it's not until the second sentence, but it's still there. Wireless ISP. WISP.
Gosh, slashdotters these days...it is expected that nobody would RTFA...but now they don't even RTFS? :)
GP's UID is lower than mine, he really should know better.
You have it sadly backwards. The Bloods were the activist wing of the Trekkie division of the Los Angeles Linux User Group.
In the Denver LUG, infiltrating convenience stores has provided a reliable supply of Mountain Dew. But I fear this infighting may unravel the whole sweet deal.
No, they didn't spend millions, since copying a CD only costs a few cents.
Of course, Microsoft counts the donated software at the full market price, but they just provide cheap copies.
Microsoft is just counting on the fact that they are the first ones, but we'll see if this strategy will continue to work once everybody will be more fluent with computers.
Does that work for corporate tax writeoff purposes? Yuck.
No, by law you are required to continue supporting a product for 5 years after you pull it from sales. This is to prevent companies from releasing a car/software and then discontinuing support "it's no longer economically feasible to support this product" 2 years later. This is why Microsoft continues to provide security patches for operating systems (like WinXP) that can no longer be bought through retail (shrinkwrap software box, not the OEM installs that come on EeePCs) for 5 or 7 years or whatever it is.
Now before someone clicks the link and says "but they don't have that menu anymore in Windows 7, the display settings page has been changed", let me say there are other areas (like the LAN connection status window, among about 5 others) where they still chose this lazy/bad design route.
I'm not one to fuss much about UI design (I'm perfectly happy with the Windows standard theme from way back in '95), but there are still parts of the OS where they simply split apart a window with tabs in it, didn't even bother removing the tabs, and dumped it into it's own window. The result is something
like this.
Ugly. If they would fix that, I would be perfectly happy with 7.
(On an unrelated note, my friend playing WoW, who would get about dips to ~30FPS on XP in Dalaran, gets dips only to ~45 in Windows 7, with the exact same visual settings. Impressive!)
That's exactly my point. They are not going to decrease anybody's monthly rate. It's only going to go up. $50/month + $x/GB extra.
> The last issue is traffic caps. I don't think there should be a law against it as long
> as the company is upfront about it. Putting caps on traffic allows ISP's to maximize
> their over subscription and cater to people that want low cost Internet service.
I don't think that caps should be illegal either but metered service would be much better.
You think they're going to cut do something that would cut the monthly bills of 80% of their subscribers? All the Joe Sixpacks and grandmas that check their email and visit CNN.com once a day? No, for them, metered service would mean $5/month (or $20 perhaps). That's down from the $50/mo they already pay.
That's exactly why we should switch now-- they'll have nothing better to do but work since they won't have TV anymore!
I'm not arguing with the idea, just the results--> Saddam Hussein being a prime example.
So a lot of these limeriks are puns on some song. But without the tune, I can never figure out why it's so funny.
You guys should start linking a clip to youtube so I can sing along with your rhyme and understand why it's so funny.
On the contrary, what happens usually is I won't actively go and buy the album I already possess, but when I'm at Walmart checking out the electronics section, I will see a new album that they put out, and if the album is less than $13, I will simply buy it right away.
So it doesn't retroactively increase sales for them, but it does going forward.
I think most people are more likely to function like this than go buy albums they already now have (digitally).
If the RIAA wants more money and wants to curb teen piracy, they would do well to lobby for minimum wage increases. When I was working McD for $5.50/hour, or construction for $8/hour, do you think I'm going to go spend more than 3 hours of work money on a lousy CD that might only have 4 good songs I like? Now that I make much more, the time ratio is much smaller so I'm not so concerned about only getting 4 songs I like.
It's simple risk/reward economics.
If genocide becomes likely then the UN should step in
I think if I had modpoints today I would give that a "+1, Funny" right there.
The UN is a joke, this has been proven time and again. Leaving it to them would be an end to the Christians in Egypt.
But hey, they're just Christians, so that's ok, right?
Preventing violence is as important as picking up after it.
Yes but I have sig's turned off so I don't see that stuff. I believe that is why he does it.
Don't most others have sigs turned off?
It's not even that.
ext4 functions as an enabled flag on ext3.
So you can transition without formatting, or anything.
From TFA:
...overall it has been estimated that the global loss due to proprietary software is "in excess of $1 trillion a year."
That's the same kind of lame-ass no-evidence silly figure pushing that the RIAA and MPAA uses to sell their Anti-Piracy measures. I love Linux and I'd love to see it spread even more but this way of propagating it is just retarded. You get Microsoft software for your money, be that a good investment or not is your decision. It's clearly not a "loss" it's merely a costly under-utilization of alternatives.
I tend to praise Linux and rant against Microsoft but this OSI guy Tiemann just blew the frame by using the same silly and faulty means of propaganda rhetoric. One thing I try to learn and live by is "Just because THEY do it doesn't mean we have to or even should do it too". By pulling figures out of his ass to make himself look more interesting he's not a single notch better than Microsoft with it's installbase or the supposed piracy figures by the media companies. That is just NOT the way to convince people of the right thing.
On the contrary (and to back what you said), I could argue that OSS CREATES prosperity by freeing funds from inefficient allocation. Instead of a business having to spend $XXYY/user on expensive proprietary software (Windows, Maya, etc), those funds are freed (due to using OSS) to hire more workers. (A nice side effect then is that a few of those workers decide they could be more productive at work if their software had feature XYZ; they petition their boss to spend 1 month writing a patch; submit it, it gets implemented, and their efficiency improves.)
The alternative is that a regular factor of the company's operational costs goes to software licenses. The cash exchange here is perhaps an increase on the nation's GDP, at least initially, but it takes away jobs. Let's say a company is started to fulfill a market need for some software. To produce that software, 100 workers are initially needed. They hire these workers, write the software, and the company releases it as version 1.0. Then they fire 90 of those workers, and have the last 10 work on version 1.1. Through vendor lock in and yearly licenses, the consuming company buying said software still has to shell out every couple of years for the new version/license. That money goes to the software company, which hands it out in very high bonuses for execs, or pays out to the shareholders. There really isn't a market requirement/need for new features; the income revenue is stable and there are no competitors. To do what this software company has done would require a new company with 80 smart workers; but no 80-employee company can compete with the now 10-employee software company. Because of this, the software company can sell their software at a cost which would enable them to employ 85 workers (IE, at $1/worker, the market equivalent of the investment required to fund a new startup to do what the first company has done is $80 (to employ 80 workers), +$5 in interest). But because the software company only has to pay for 10 workers, they can compete with any new startups (who have to sell their competing product at a high enough cost to cover debt + interest used to employ those 80 workers) down to the software cost they currently pay-- $10 (to employ 10 workers). So, assuming no insanely efficient new method of meeting that market need (that the now-10-employee-software-company now meets) is developed, money in the economy (businesses in need of the software) will go to a company that could employ 85 workers, but that now only has to employ 10 workers.
Let's take a look at where the rest of the money goes-- lets assume nice executive packages, and shareholder returns.
Now the majority of the company is tied up in the stakes of a few (millionaire) shareholders. That money goes to them through the shareholder returns; and like the money that goes to the execs, may continue to be of benefit to the economy through extra fu
It seems it's never done right when we do privatize it. The 50% against it use those examples to prove it's a bad thing-- but if the government would just privatize it the right way, it would be fine.
Government is wonderfully good at producing paperwork....I'd just like to stay away from that.
On the other hand the BritRail system would be enough for anyone to run from privatization full speed.
No one denies that. Part of how we fix it though is by raising a stink. There's no other option. Government doesn't go out of business-- it just taxes more, as we've seen with NY during this recession.
If government were a for profit business they'd either have died years ago, or they'd be constantly working on weeding out and scaling back. That would be amazing. Come to think of it, is there any way we could run government as a business? With the exception of the defense sector and public transit. Why can't it be done?
So because they did this one thing, they must have been pro-big-government? Nevermind the bill of rights? Ha.
Your post may be informative but it is anything but a rebuttle to the GP's post.
Means little, when the current cable speeds can basically be infinite. You know how you have all those TV channels traveling through the same wire? They can do the same with the internet communications as well-- just use multiple channels in parallel.
8-channel cable DOCSIS spec
Or maybe they aren't talking about cable-internet specifically; I only skimmed TA :)
Yes, and I have a mild case of it. But I've learned that more and more of it is just a lack of my self-control in sitting down to study and stay focused to complete it.
Sigh, more ADHD/ADD. This isn't a rant at the game/article but more just the whole idea of ADHD/ADD. Overconcerned mommies wondering why their child would rather be at recess playing outside, living an adventure in the woods than sitting on his butt from 8-3 every day with 2 minute breaks in between classes where he gets to stand up from his desk, go get his textbook from the shelf, and sit back down...
HELLO! He's a kid! And he's a boy! We've always known girls are naturally predisposed to sitting still in class learning. Why don't we medicate the girls for no interest in proving themselves manly like the boys like to prove themselves worthy? Girls play the relational games, boys like to play competitive games, see if they have what it takes, if they stack up against the odds.
I'm telling you this is a war against men. The ladies then ask "Where have all the men gone, why doesn't my man sweep me off my feet with emotion?" Well, you asked them to be "nice". If all a man can aspire to in his life is to be a "nice" guy who sits down for his wife when he pees, is it any wonder where they've all gone?
What the hell, I got karma out the ass, so I'll answer your question.
Slashdot continues to moan because the average commenter has neither ran the beta or used Vista for longer than 5 minutes. Its more fun to bitch about Microsoft than to actually use the product.
Its also fun to sit and read some of the bitch comments and see how many Slashdotters overlooked the "beta" part, bitch about missing features, and apparently thought they were downloading the final RTM code.
I've never had a lick of trouble running Vista. Nor have I had a lick of trouble in the two weeks I've been running this beta. But then I made sure to put it on a modern PC built with Vista in mind, not my grandfather's Packard-Bell 486 with 4 meg of ram.
Yes that's nice. It's clear MS didn't finish the OS. Because of things like this. They didn't even bother making the Aero UI that they hyped up for so long mesh with the rest of the OS. They took the Desktop Properties window (right click->Properties) in Windows XP, and just separated the tabs and provided a link to each one. Boy that's an improvement.
Or how about having to click 3x more than XP just to get to the network connection status or, Bill Gates forbid, make changes to the TCP/IP settings. Jeez it feels like 15 clicks. I have to STOP doing what I'm doing and concentrating on, and figure out which of the 5 buttons to click, and do that for about 5 more windows that come up before I get there. With WinXP I just double click the little computer on the taskbar and it opens it for me. Or I right click it and can get to the TCP/IP settings with one more click.
Feh. We don't whine for stupid reasons.
Personally, I've always had good experiences with NVIDIA cards on Linux. Lenovo builds good, reasonably-priced laptops with NVIDIA or ATI cards these days.
This will be changing very soon now that AMD has released the full hardware specs (3d and everything). I give it 6 months and the AMD/ATI chips will work a lot nicer than even the Nvidia ones.
Nail. Head. You're right on the money.
Houston: "Then you're got it turned around the wrong way! Rotate by 180 degrees!"