You — a business — paid for your telephone service. For the customers to be able to call you. And your number was listed in the phone book.
Yes, but the person who wants access to that information gets it for free. That's not the situation with internet access as both parties are paying.
To be listed prominently you had to pay the phone book publisher extra — the phone company itself.
That's more in line with SEO so bad analogy there.
The only thing stopping FedEx from quadrupling their fees every week is the fear of competition.
That's the point. There's competition and all of them have equal access to the road network. With the internet there's usually only two choices which is phone company and cable company.
They do have a choice — there is UPS, there is USPS, and a bunch of smaller guys ready to offer themselves as the alternative.
The big ISPs are all doing the same thing. The little ISPs are either resellers of the big ISPs or have to use the last mile of the big ISPs.
What you are about to say is that yes, but ISPs are monopolies!.. Yes, in some places of the country they are — thanks to the Statists like you.
I'm not a Statist. But I do think the government should be involved when massive companies are screwing over the consumers.
Your "solution", to solve a government-created problem [wired.com] with more government intervention is not only laughable, it is also dangerous to our freedoms.
Bullshit. All the small towns that want to run their own internet to their residents get squashed by the big ISPs using the same government that you claim shouldn't be involved.
As for freedom, small town should have the freedom to build their own internet infrastructure. Yet government regulations prevent it in a lot of jurisdictions.
The big ISPs want it both ways. As long as it's in their favour they're either for or against government interference.
As for government intervention, we should abolish copyright and patents by your logic. No government interference as you want. But we can't do that or inovation and competition will be adversely affected. The big companies will squash all the little companies. Yet you think that same protection for the internet is not needed even though we have proof that the big ISPs are doing this to be anti competitive.
your belief in the right to tell others, what they can and can not do with their equipment
With some of their equipment on public land paid for by government subsidies. But that's not what I was arguing about.
I paid for access to the internet. All of the internet at a certain speed. I don't see any of the big ISPs advertising that the speed I'm paying for is going to be artificially slowed down based on the fact that I want data from a company that's competing with my ISPs other business unit.
So damn right I want the government to interfere when my ISP is trying to defraud me.
makes you a bad person. An asshole...
Ah, so having an opinion different from yours makes me a bad person and an asshole. If that's what you call Freedom you can keep it.
You sound like you believe, that anyone in the (bogus) scenario you described — the shipper, the recipient, the delivery company — owe anybody anything. Nobody does. You can pop your lid off in fury, but FedEx still does not owe you a delivery, that was not paid for at the price they choose to set.
What the fuck are you talking about? It's not bogus. It was paid ay the EXACT price they set, by the recipient. If the now ask for extra from the shipper above that set price they are committing theft and/or fraud.
They set a price for the delivery from A to B to be $X. If I as recipient paid
Because Yellow Pages were given to you free but you pay for your internet service.
Here's a better example than Yellow Pages. You set up an account with FedEx and have all deliveries to your address charged to your account instead of to the shipper. Then you start calling a bunch of businesses and start ordering stuff.
Now FedEx starts going to those businesses and telling them "Pay us money or your shipments will take longer to customers where you're not paying the delivery charge".
Since they have no other choice to ship to you they do that and start charging you more money to cover it. So now you're paying twice for the delivery. Now wouldn't you be furious at this?
"I have my cellphone literally only in case of emergency" "So not only do I need to remember where I put it, I also need to charge it enough to turn it on"
Not sure but I think there may be a couple of flaws in your emergency plan.
You are correct. I was referring to NAT + RFC1918 when I said that it doesn't know where to send incoming packets (originally sent to the public IP). That's the mechanism that creates the psudo security of NAT.
As you said, using routable addresses on the inside does not trigger this. Without a firewall they can go direct. Same with NTP and routable addresses on the inside.
Yes, ISPs can send to you using RFC1918. If you're using a tunnel broker for IPv6 that can be intercepted without ISP help and IPv4 injected that way (6to4, IPv4 compatible addresses, IPv4 mapped addresses). I have my firewall blocking all those.
I agree, NAT is not a substitute for a firewall. NAT is also a waste of resources and causes problems when used with routable addresses behind a firewall. People keep saying that it protects you if your firewall is misconfigured. There are so many ways to get around NAT when the firewall is broken that it's a naive view to have.
NPT is 1:1 which doesn't have all but one of the issues that 1:many NAT has. There's no port rewriting, not statetful packet inspection, etc. The only issue is if the internal host needs to tell an external host its IP address. Incoming using DNS would have no issues.
NPT does not block incoming connections like regular NAT does. This is because 1:many NAT has no idea where to send incoming without an explicit rule. NPT which is 1:1 does know where to send incoming connections because each external IP is routed to the appropriate internal IP.
What does me reading something on the internet have to do with my friends???
That was more of a rhetorical question. I was hoping you had seen it. Regardless, the advice is out there and it's being put to use. The routers have that feature and their websites have the instructions on how to use it. I have seen it recommended when upnp and port forwarding fail to work for whatever reason. I've had upnp stop working mysteriously many times.
But that doesn't matter. It's a very common built in feature that will completely bypass the supposed protection from NAT and every other firewall protection feature of the router.
My point is that NAT doesn't give any more protection than the firewall does. And the DMZ is the easiest way to bypass both of them. So NAT doesn't protect the user from themselves.
Right now the DMZ can only have one device in it. That's mainly because people only have one external IPv4 address. No such restriction with IPv6 when end users can get/64s. And end users tend to take the path of least resistance. "My skype, game, whatever doesn't work", "DMZ the computer!"
I have to disagree. The 8086 was well designed when you realize that backwards compatibility was a primary design consideration. It is assembly language backwards compatible with the 8080.
Now the 80286 in my opinion was the poor design. They should have dropped the segmented memory model in protected mode and gone flat 32-bit address space. They fixed this in the 80386 (among other design mistakes) but it still retained the stupid segmented architecture in protected mode most likely for backward compatibility with the 80286.
It wasn't until AMD with x86-64 that eliminated the segmented architecture in 64 bit mode (the FS and GS segment registers are still there in a reduced form as operating systems used them for thread related information).
Actually, the 384k at the top of the 1meg address space was called the upper memory area (UMA). Confusingly enough the commands to load things there were called LOADHIGH and DEVICEHIGH, most likely because the high memory area wasn't "invented" when these commands were created.
The high memory area (HMA) was the first 65520 (65536-16) bytes past the 1meg normal address space. It's 16 bytes less than 64k because the segment used to address it was FFF0. The program would have to turn on the A20 address line to address this memory and turn it off after. The reason for this is that some BIOS code expected the memory to wrap at 1meg like it did on the 8086. Eventually DOS could make use of this area as well for it's own code and data.
Extended memory (XMS) was the stuff above 1meg. Unfortunately you had to copy data between extended memory and conventional memory which slowed things down. Because of this some programs used a trick of the 386. Someone noticed that the Intel documentation for the 386 said to set the segment limits back to 64k before switching from protected mode back to real mode. Why would you need to do this when the hardware could have enforced this? Turns out you didn't need to do it. You'd then be in real mode with 4GB segments instead of 64k segments. Any 32 bit instruction could then access all memory in the system. My favourite name for this mode was unreal mode as it's a word play on real mode.
Then there was Expanded Memory (EMS) which was an add in board for the 8086 which paged extra memory into a 64k window in the upper 384k address range. On a 386 system you could emulate this using extended memory by using the page tables for those programs that needed it.
Useful security? How many times have you seen "just put it in the DMZ" as a solution to many connectivity issues NAT causes? There goes their supposed security.
My IPV6 tunnel is not encrypted. It doesn't have to be as there's no point and all it would accomplish is add more CPU load to my router and the tunnel broker's router.
Any unencrypted traffic like HTTP attackers could mess with after it leaves the tunnel broker to the rest of the internet so waste of effort there. Encrypted traffic like HTTPS would get encrypted twice which is also a waste of effort.
I hope the idea of IPV6 NAT gets taken out back and shot. NAT has been the single most pain in the ass thing to network gaming since forever.
I don't now how much time I've wasted trying to troubleshoot why certain people can't connect to our gaming session. Most of the time it's because of NAT. And when they can connect to the game, the audio chat doesn't work still. Grrrrrr.
Then there's people who have multiple consoles and want to play the same game together online. One of them can and the other can't because the ports are taken.
IPV6 will get rid of all that crap but not if people use NAT or are forced to use NAT by their ISP.
The only thing NAT gives you on IPV6 is protection if you disable the deny inbound for all machines rule. All that router manufacturers have to do is make sure that can't be disabled on a consumer device. Only UPnP and inbound rules for static IP hosts would then be the way to allow inbound, just like with IPV4+NAT.
Opens neighbours unlocked door. "Hello. You left your front door open. This is a really bad neighbourhood and you should lock your doors before someone not nice comes along."
Most theaters around me have reserved seating. I buy the tickets at home on their website and pick the seats I want. Then just print them out. I used to hate having to stand in line and still ending up with crappy seats.
We also have several VIP designated screens. They're don't allow children/teens, have a bar with food and allow food and drinks (including alcoholic) when seated inside. You can even order food and drinks from your seat before the movie starts. And the seats are big leather chairs with lots of room. It costs more but you go there for the experience of it as well.
I agree with you that commercials before movies drive me crazy. I like the movie previews but the commercials are just a slap in the face after paying the ticket price.
Still, I only go to the must see movies and wait for all the others to come to streaming.
Not quite. They way you worded it before made it sound you doubted that a true QD-LED display can deliver on those promises because current QLED TVs don't. Now your saying that if it becomes available you're still doubting it can deliver on those promises.
What I'm saying is that there is no "hype". The technology can do what they say they can. The real question is can they mass market a full sized panel.
Secondly, QLED is just a slightly enhanced LCD TV. So I completely agree with you on which one I would buy right now if I had to. I would not buy an LCD TV and would go OLED instead. Right now I'm perfectly happy with my Plasma TV.
I disagree that it doesn't help anyone. The people (who care about picture quality) deciding to replace an old but still functioning TV can choose to get an OLED now or wait a little longer and see how QD-LED compares to OLED. If they mistakenly think that QLED LCD TVs are QD-LED TVs then they'll go OLED now but will be thinking "I should have waited a little more" when the real QD-LED TVs show up.
TL; DR: Don't compare QLED LCD to OLED right now thinking you're comparing QD-LED to OLED.
QDLEDs would be printed which is cheaper. OLEDs could also be printed instead of the current shadow mask deposition so I think the "cheaper to produce" might be against LCD displays.
It's not easy finding good technical information amid all the marketing cruft.
You probably have stations that send their content at one resolution and switch to their affiliated network's resolution when showing network content. All the stations in my area are either 720p or 1080i and don't switch.
Regardless, no cable company I've heard of sends 24 frames a second for movies. It's either 60 frames for 720p or 30 frames (60 fields) for 1080i. So to send a 24 FPS movie you have to do pulldown.
I wish pulldown was dead as most devices still don't do reverse pulldown properly.
That's because you haven't seen a real Quantum Dot LED TV yet. It's another case where marketing is making a big mess with the technology terminology.
Samsung's current QLED TVs are Quantum Dot colour filters with regular LED backlights. A real QDLED TV does not have a backlight and works like OLED where each subpixel is a Quantum Dot LED that emits light directly.
I'm still using a plasma. Love the contrast ratio on it and would never switch to LCD. OLED also has very good contrast but I'm worried about burn in and colour fade. The upcoming Quantum Dot LED technology looks like it will be the perfect replacement for plasma.
There are two types of quantum dot TV technologies. That wikipedia article talks about both of them but makes it sound like they're talking about the current "so-called Quantum Dot TVs" for the whole article if you skipped over the explanation in the second paragraph at the to of the article.
In the History section they talk about the current TVs which as you also said are just an LCD display with quantum dots in place of the colour filters.
But in the Working principle section onward they talk about Quantum Dot LEDs. These, as they mention, work on the OLED design where each sub pixel emits light directly. These TVs are not out yet.
The GP I believe was talking about Quantum Dot LEDs. These are indeed more power efficient, won't colour fade and cheaper. They also offer higher brightness than LCD (no backlight) and the high contrast ratio that Plasma and OLED are famous for. They also have a faster response time than LCD as they emit light directly instead of having to wait for liquid crystals to realign.
All the current quantum dot LCD TVs offer is better colour gamut which most consumers won't care about.
Yeah, VESA Local Bus was a royal pain. Fortunately I bought a ASUS 486 motherboard that had PCI slots. It had a bridge chip to translate the signals. The version I got also had LAN and SCSI on board. That made it very easy to transition from 486 to Pentium for me.
I had the Orchid Righteous 3D 3DFx card. I went with that one because it had the relays to cut in the VGA signal. I still have that card and the Gravis Ultrasound in my desk as souvenirs.:)
Reading some of the other comments is making me remember more stories about Doom.
Playing two player co-op the first time via null modem cable at a friends house. He goes into a room and a door closes behind him that I can't open. "Get in here!" "I can't! Door wont' open" "Help!" So I switch to his view to see what's going on. A huge horde of monsters is advancing on him and he's cornered. "Yeeeeech" as I switch back. "I don't want to watch the slaughter" We reloaded and this time we both stepped through at the same time.
One level in Hell we got toasted quick. So second attempt we just ran for this central building shaped like a Y. I ran up the stairs and cleared out one branch quick and then the other. Since only the two sides were open to the outside we stayed in there and used it as a shooting gallery. It went on for 15-20 minutes as we slowly depleted each weapon. When all monsters were finally dead I had 5 handgun bullets and my friend has completely out. Had to wait till the adrenaline wore off after that.
I started playing the game keyboard only as I would suck with the mouse because of not being used to it. I'd always switch back to keyboard only. Then one time my friend was circle strafing around me and I could not hit him. I got so mad that I moved my right hand over to the mouse and every singe shot of mine hit him. Never went back to keyboard only after that. My friend asked how I did that and I said, started using the mouse.
Had a friend nearly punch me as every single frag I did on him on one level was with the chainsaw.
My friends could not figure out how my computer would load Doom so fast. I was always the first one done with the loading dots and waiting for the others. And this wasn't a slight speedup, it was significant. One day my secret got out. My friend was standing next to me when I rebooted my computer. "Why is is it taking so long to boot?" "Ummmm. It's copying the doom directory into a ramdisk...." "Oh! You bastard!"
Our favourite map was called dick. Yes, the filename was dick.wad:D It was a very small map. Transporter from one side to the other. Lots of open rooms, a few long corridors. Ammo and health everywhere. I'm mean literally everywhere. If someone fails to kill you quick you just run around and you're back to full health and ammo. But because of the small size we actually wrapped the frag counters really quick. The replaced the respawn sound. First time someone died and respawed all we heard was a choir sing the word "Alleluia". We had to stop playing for a few minutes because the four of us were laughing so hard.
Played this one map where my friend Bill was hiding in a room. Every time I opened the door he'd start shooting out of it so I couldn't come in or fire back. He had ammo in there so was not going to run out soon. Switched to the BFG. Opened the door, he fired through it as usual, door started closing down. Fired the BFG and swung over to face the door while it still had a crack left at the bottom. Shot hit the door. Splash damage made it through the crack.:D
Same map. Fired a shot at Mike across the large central open area. I'm up top he's on the bottom. My shot goes straight. Doh! But he gets on an elevator. As he's going up the shot is moving across. They meet at the other side up top. As he dies he yells "What the hell just got me?" "BFG from across the map!"
Same map yet again. Drop Mike with a rocket. "Hey, meet rocket boy!" My friend Jon frags me from behind with the plasma right after I say that. "Hey rocket boy, meet plasma man!" Laughter erupts in my basement as I just groan.
Two vs two deathmatch. One map had a room with pillars in the middle. They were up normally but when someone came through the lower passage they would drop to let the person go through down below to the other exit on the opposite wall. I was in the room lining up a shot on Mike with the shotgun. Just as I pulled the trigger my te
Like many advanced MP players, I know the trick to fire the BFG directly at a wall you're facing, then strafe out from behind the wall to kill people instantly.
Oh! I loved that trick!
Fired a shot at my friend Mike but he dodged it. Very long corridor. Switch to shotgun and we were having a shotgun duel for a good 10 seconds. Then my friend just dies. "What the hell was that?" "BFG Splash damage, that shot I fired finally hit a wall"
Another time I ran into a room where Mike and Bill were fighting. Fired the BFG and took them both out. Bill respawns in the same room! He bolts for the transporter. I follow and was trying to time it so I fired it after I stepped through because of the initial delay. Goofed the timing and the shot hit the back of the transporter right before I stepped through. As I materialized Bill was already running around the platform around the perimeter of the room and was almost out. My friend Jon was in the pit in the center collecting ammo and armour. Both die instantly as I arrived because of the splash damage. Bill was sitting behind me and slams his keyboard yelling damnit. Jon on the other side of my basement yells "What the hell just happened? I died without a shot fired at me. All I heard was the teleporter and blah, dead!"
Flinch? It scared the crap out of me at one point! I cleared out the level except for one monster. Couldn't find it anywhere. Everything was eerily silent. Went up to one window separating two rooms and got real close to my screen trying to see if there was anything in the distance in the other room.
Damned imp pops up right in front of the window with a roar! I emptied half my chain-gun ammo on that thing. Had to take a break to let my heart rate return to normal.
Slashdot Mirror
You — a business — paid for your telephone service. For the customers to be able to call you. And your number was listed in the phone book.
Yes, but the person who wants access to that information gets it for free. That's not the situation with internet access as both parties are paying.
To be listed prominently you had to pay the phone book publisher extra — the phone company itself.
That's more in line with SEO so bad analogy there.
The only thing stopping FedEx from quadrupling their fees every week is the fear of competition.
That's the point. There's competition and all of them have equal access to the road network. With the internet there's usually only two choices which is phone company and cable company.
They do have a choice — there is UPS, there is USPS, and a bunch of smaller guys ready to offer themselves as the alternative.
The big ISPs are all doing the same thing. The little ISPs are either resellers of the big ISPs or have to use the last mile of the big ISPs.
What you are about to say is that yes, but ISPs are monopolies!.. Yes, in some places of the country they are — thanks to the Statists like you.
I'm not a Statist. But I do think the government should be involved when massive companies are screwing over the consumers.
Your "solution", to solve a government-created problem [wired.com] with more government intervention is not only laughable, it is also dangerous to our freedoms.
Bullshit. All the small towns that want to run their own internet to their residents get squashed by the big ISPs using the same government that you claim shouldn't be involved.
As for freedom, small town should have the freedom to build their own internet infrastructure. Yet government regulations prevent it in a lot of jurisdictions.
The big ISPs want it both ways. As long as it's in their favour they're either for or against government interference.
As for government intervention, we should abolish copyright and patents by your logic. No government interference as you want. But we can't do that or inovation and competition will be adversely affected. The big companies will squash all the little companies. Yet you think that same protection for the internet is not needed even though we have proof that the big ISPs are doing this to be anti competitive.
your belief in the right to tell others, what they can and can not do with their equipment
With some of their equipment on public land paid for by government subsidies. But that's not what I was arguing about.
I paid for access to the internet. All of the internet at a certain speed. I don't see any of the big ISPs advertising that the speed I'm paying for is going to be artificially slowed down based on the fact that I want data from a company that's competing with my ISPs other business unit.
So damn right I want the government to interfere when my ISP is trying to defraud me.
makes you a bad person. An asshole...
Ah, so having an opinion different from yours makes me a bad person and an asshole. If that's what you call Freedom you can keep it.
You sound like you believe, that anyone in the (bogus) scenario you described — the shipper, the recipient, the delivery company — owe anybody anything. Nobody does. You can pop your lid off in fury, but FedEx still does not owe you a delivery, that was not paid for at the price they choose to set.
What the fuck are you talking about? It's not bogus. It was paid ay the EXACT price they set, by the recipient. If the now ask for extra from the shipper above that set price they are committing theft and/or fraud.
They set a price for the delivery from A to B to be $X. If I as recipient paid
Because Yellow Pages were given to you free but you pay for your internet service.
Here's a better example than Yellow Pages. You set up an account with FedEx and have all deliveries to your address charged to your account instead of to the shipper. Then you start calling a bunch of businesses and start ordering stuff.
Now FedEx starts going to those businesses and telling them "Pay us money or your shipments will take longer to customers where you're not paying the delivery charge".
Since they have no other choice to ship to you they do that and start charging you more money to cover it. So now you're paying twice for the delivery. Now wouldn't you be furious at this?
"I have my cellphone literally only in case of emergency" "So not only do I need to remember where I put it, I also need to charge it enough to turn it on"
Not sure but I think there may be a couple of flaws in your emergency plan.
You are correct. I was referring to NAT + RFC1918 when I said that it doesn't know where to send incoming packets (originally sent to the public IP). That's the mechanism that creates the psudo security of NAT.
As you said, using routable addresses on the inside does not trigger this. Without a firewall they can go direct. Same with NTP and routable addresses on the inside.
Yes, ISPs can send to you using RFC1918. If you're using a tunnel broker for IPv6 that can be intercepted without ISP help and IPv4 injected that way (6to4, IPv4 compatible addresses, IPv4 mapped addresses). I have my firewall blocking all those.
I agree, NAT is not a substitute for a firewall. NAT is also a waste of resources and causes problems when used with routable addresses behind a firewall. People keep saying that it protects you if your firewall is misconfigured. There are so many ways to get around NAT when the firewall is broken that it's a naive view to have.
NPT is 1:1 which doesn't have all but one of the issues that 1:many NAT has. There's no port rewriting, not statetful packet inspection, etc. The only issue is if the internal host needs to tell an external host its IP address. Incoming using DNS would have no issues.
NPT does not block incoming connections like regular NAT does. This is because 1:many NAT has no idea where to send incoming without an explicit rule. NPT which is 1:1 does know where to send incoming connections because each external IP is routed to the appropriate internal IP.
So you still need a firewall with NPT.
What does me reading something on the internet have to do with my friends???
That was more of a rhetorical question. I was hoping you had seen it. Regardless, the advice is out there and it's being put to use. The routers have that feature and their websites have the instructions on how to use it. I have seen it recommended when upnp and port forwarding fail to work for whatever reason. I've had upnp stop working mysteriously many times.
But that doesn't matter. It's a very common built in feature that will completely bypass the supposed protection from NAT and every other firewall protection feature of the router.
My point is that NAT doesn't give any more protection than the firewall does. And the DMZ is the easiest way to bypass both of them. So NAT doesn't protect the user from themselves.
Right now the DMZ can only have one device in it. That's mainly because people only have one external IPv4 address. No such restriction with IPv6 when end users can get /64s. And end users tend to take the path of least resistance. "My skype, game, whatever doesn't work", "DMZ the computer!"
You also mixed up high and upper as well. :)
> 15. Text adventures
I had to laugh at this one as I have Zork on my iPad.
I have to disagree. The 8086 was well designed when you realize that backwards compatibility was a primary design consideration. It is assembly language backwards compatible with the 8080.
Now the 80286 in my opinion was the poor design. They should have dropped the segmented memory model in protected mode and gone flat 32-bit address space. They fixed this in the 80386 (among other design mistakes) but it still retained the stupid segmented architecture in protected mode most likely for backward compatibility with the 80286.
It wasn't until AMD with x86-64 that eliminated the segmented architecture in 64 bit mode (the FS and GS segment registers are still there in a reduced form as operating systems used them for thread related information).
Actually, the 384k at the top of the 1meg address space was called the upper memory area (UMA). Confusingly enough the commands to load things there were called LOADHIGH and DEVICEHIGH, most likely because the high memory area wasn't "invented" when these commands were created.
The high memory area (HMA) was the first 65520 (65536-16) bytes past the 1meg normal address space. It's 16 bytes less than 64k because the segment used to address it was FFF0. The program would have to turn on the A20 address line to address this memory and turn it off after. The reason for this is that some BIOS code expected the memory to wrap at 1meg like it did on the 8086. Eventually DOS could make use of this area as well for it's own code and data.
Extended memory (XMS) was the stuff above 1meg. Unfortunately you had to copy data between extended memory and conventional memory which slowed things down. Because of this some programs used a trick of the 386. Someone noticed that the Intel documentation for the 386 said to set the segment limits back to 64k before switching from protected mode back to real mode. Why would you need to do this when the hardware could have enforced this? Turns out you didn't need to do it. You'd then be in real mode with 4GB segments instead of 64k segments. Any 32 bit instruction could then access all memory in the system. My favourite name for this mode was unreal mode as it's a word play on real mode.
Then there was Expanded Memory (EMS) which was an add in board for the 8086 which paged extra memory into a 64k window in the upper 384k address range. On a 386 system you could emulate this using extended memory by using the page tables for those programs that needed it.
Useful security? How many times have you seen "just put it in the DMZ" as a solution to many connectivity issues NAT causes? There goes their supposed security.
My IPV6 tunnel is not encrypted. It doesn't have to be as there's no point and all it would accomplish is add more CPU load to my router and the tunnel broker's router.
Any unencrypted traffic like HTTP attackers could mess with after it leaves the tunnel broker to the rest of the internet so waste of effort there. Encrypted traffic like HTTPS would get encrypted twice which is also a waste of effort.
I hope the idea of IPV6 NAT gets taken out back and shot. NAT has been the single most pain in the ass thing to network gaming since forever.
I don't now how much time I've wasted trying to troubleshoot why certain people can't connect to our gaming session. Most of the time it's because of NAT. And when they can connect to the game, the audio chat doesn't work still. Grrrrrr.
Then there's people who have multiple consoles and want to play the same game together online. One of them can and the other can't because the ports are taken.
IPV6 will get rid of all that crap but not if people use NAT or are forced to use NAT by their ISP.
The only thing NAT gives you on IPV6 is protection if you disable the deny inbound for all machines rule. All that router manufacturers have to do is make sure that can't be disabled on a consumer device. Only UPnP and inbound rules for static IP hosts would then be the way to allow inbound, just like with IPV4+NAT.
Opens neighbours unlocked door. "Hello. You left your front door open. This is a really bad neighbourhood and you should lock your doors before someone not nice comes along."
Most theaters around me have reserved seating. I buy the tickets at home on their website and pick the seats I want. Then just print them out. I used to hate having to stand in line and still ending up with crappy seats.
We also have several VIP designated screens. They're don't allow children/teens, have a bar with food and allow food and drinks (including alcoholic) when seated inside. You can even order food and drinks from your seat before the movie starts. And the seats are big leather chairs with lots of room. It costs more but you go there for the experience of it as well.
I agree with you that commercials before movies drive me crazy. I like the movie previews but the commercials are just a slap in the face after paying the ticket price.
Still, I only go to the must see movies and wait for all the others to come to streaming.
Not quite. They way you worded it before made it sound you doubted that a true QD-LED display can deliver on those promises because current QLED TVs don't. Now your saying that if it becomes available you're still doubting it can deliver on those promises.
What I'm saying is that there is no "hype". The technology can do what they say they can. The real question is can they mass market a full sized panel.
Secondly, QLED is just a slightly enhanced LCD TV. So I completely agree with you on which one I would buy right now if I had to. I would not buy an LCD TV and would go OLED instead. Right now I'm perfectly happy with my Plasma TV.
I disagree that it doesn't help anyone. The people (who care about picture quality) deciding to replace an old but still functioning TV can choose to get an OLED now or wait a little longer and see how QD-LED compares to OLED. If they mistakenly think that QLED LCD TVs are QD-LED TVs then they'll go OLED now but will be thinking "I should have waited a little more" when the real QD-LED TVs show up.
TL; DR: Don't compare QLED LCD to OLED right now thinking you're comparing QD-LED to OLED.
QDLEDs would be printed which is cheaper. OLEDs could also be printed instead of the current shadow mask deposition so I think the "cheaper to produce" might be against LCD displays.
It's not easy finding good technical information amid all the marketing cruft.
You probably have stations that send their content at one resolution and switch to their affiliated network's resolution when showing network content. All the stations in my area are either 720p or 1080i and don't switch.
Regardless, no cable company I've heard of sends 24 frames a second for movies. It's either 60 frames for 720p or 30 frames (60 fields) for 1080i. So to send a 24 FPS movie you have to do pulldown.
I wish pulldown was dead as most devices still don't do reverse pulldown properly.
That's because you haven't seen a real Quantum Dot LED TV yet. It's another case where marketing is making a big mess with the technology terminology.
Samsung's current QLED TVs are Quantum Dot colour filters with regular LED backlights. A real QDLED TV does not have a backlight and works like OLED where each subpixel is a Quantum Dot LED that emits light directly.
I'm still using a plasma. Love the contrast ratio on it and would never switch to LCD. OLED also has very good contrast but I'm worried about burn in and colour fade. The upcoming Quantum Dot LED technology looks like it will be the perfect replacement for plasma.
There are two types of quantum dot TV technologies. That wikipedia article talks about both of them but makes it sound like they're talking about the current "so-called Quantum Dot TVs" for the whole article if you skipped over the explanation in the second paragraph at the to of the article.
In the History section they talk about the current TVs which as you also said are just an LCD display with quantum dots in place of the colour filters.
But in the Working principle section onward they talk about Quantum Dot LEDs. These, as they mention, work on the OLED design where each sub pixel emits light directly. These TVs are not out yet.
The GP I believe was talking about Quantum Dot LEDs. These are indeed more power efficient, won't colour fade and cheaper. They also offer higher brightness than LCD (no backlight) and the high contrast ratio that Plasma and OLED are famous for. They also have a faster response time than LCD as they emit light directly instead of having to wait for liquid crystals to realign.
All the current quantum dot LCD TVs offer is better colour gamut which most consumers won't care about.
Yeah, VESA Local Bus was a royal pain. Fortunately I bought a ASUS 486 motherboard that had PCI slots. It had a bridge chip to translate the signals. The version I got also had LAN and SCSI on board. That made it very easy to transition from 486 to Pentium for me.
I had the Orchid Righteous 3D 3DFx card. I went with that one because it had the relays to cut in the VGA signal. I still have that card and the Gravis Ultrasound in my desk as souvenirs. :)
Reading some of the other comments is making me remember more stories about Doom.
Playing two player co-op the first time via null modem cable at a friends house. He goes into a room and a door closes behind him that I can't open. "Get in here!" "I can't! Door wont' open" "Help!" So I switch to his view to see what's going on. A huge horde of monsters is advancing on him and he's cornered. "Yeeeeech" as I switch back. "I don't want to watch the slaughter" We reloaded and this time we both stepped through at the same time.
One level in Hell we got toasted quick. So second attempt we just ran for this central building shaped like a Y. I ran up the stairs and cleared out one branch quick and then the other. Since only the two sides were open to the outside we stayed in there and used it as a shooting gallery. It went on for 15-20 minutes as we slowly depleted each weapon. When all monsters were finally dead I had 5 handgun bullets and my friend has completely out. Had to wait till the adrenaline wore off after that.
I started playing the game keyboard only as I would suck with the mouse because of not being used to it. I'd always switch back to keyboard only. Then one time my friend was circle strafing around me and I could not hit him. I got so mad that I moved my right hand over to the mouse and every singe shot of mine hit him. Never went back to keyboard only after that. My friend asked how I did that and I said, started using the mouse.
Had a friend nearly punch me as every single frag I did on him on one level was with the chainsaw.
My friends could not figure out how my computer would load Doom so fast. I was always the first one done with the loading dots and waiting for the others. And this wasn't a slight speedup, it was significant. One day my secret got out. My friend was standing next to me when I rebooted my computer. "Why is is it taking so long to boot?" "Ummmm. It's copying the doom directory into a ramdisk...." "Oh! You bastard!"
Our favourite map was called dick. Yes, the filename was dick.wad :D It was a very small map. Transporter from one side to the other. Lots of open rooms, a few long corridors. Ammo and health everywhere. I'm mean literally everywhere. If someone fails to kill you quick you just run around and you're back to full health and ammo. But because of the small size we actually wrapped the frag counters really quick. The replaced the respawn sound. First time someone died and respawed all we heard was a choir sing the word "Alleluia". We had to stop playing for a few minutes because the four of us were laughing so hard.
Played this one map where my friend Bill was hiding in a room. Every time I opened the door he'd start shooting out of it so I couldn't come in or fire back. He had ammo in there so was not going to run out soon. Switched to the BFG. Opened the door, he fired through it as usual, door started closing down. Fired the BFG and swung over to face the door while it still had a crack left at the bottom. Shot hit the door. Splash damage made it through the crack. :D
Same map. Fired a shot at Mike across the large central open area. I'm up top he's on the bottom. My shot goes straight. Doh! But he gets on an elevator. As he's going up the shot is moving across. They meet at the other side up top. As he dies he yells "What the hell just got me?" "BFG from across the map!"
Same map yet again. Drop Mike with a rocket. "Hey, meet rocket boy!" My friend Jon frags me from behind with the plasma right after I say that. "Hey rocket boy, meet plasma man!" Laughter erupts in my basement as I just groan.
Two vs two deathmatch. One map had a room with pillars in the middle. They were up normally but when someone came through the lower passage they would drop to let the person go through down below to the other exit on the opposite wall. I was in the room lining up a shot on Mike with the shotgun. Just as I pulled the trigger my te
Like many advanced MP players, I know the trick to fire the BFG directly at a wall you're facing, then strafe out from behind the wall to kill people instantly.
Oh! I loved that trick!
Fired a shot at my friend Mike but he dodged it. Very long corridor. Switch to shotgun and we were having a shotgun duel for a good 10 seconds. Then my friend just dies. "What the hell was that?" "BFG Splash damage, that shot I fired finally hit a wall"
Another time I ran into a room where Mike and Bill were fighting. Fired the BFG and took them both out. Bill respawns in the same room! He bolts for the transporter. I follow and was trying to time it so I fired it after I stepped through because of the initial delay. Goofed the timing and the shot hit the back of the transporter right before I stepped through. As I materialized Bill was already running around the platform around the perimeter of the room and was almost out. My friend Jon was in the pit in the center collecting ammo and armour. Both die instantly as I arrived because of the splash damage. Bill was sitting behind me and slams his keyboard yelling damnit. Jon on the other side of my basement yells "What the hell just happened? I died without a shot fired at me. All I heard was the teleporter and blah, dead!"
Flinch? It scared the crap out of me at one point! I cleared out the level except for one monster. Couldn't find it anywhere. Everything was eerily silent. Went up to one window separating two rooms and got real close to my screen trying to see if there was anything in the distance in the other room.
Damned imp pops up right in front of the window with a roar! I emptied half my chain-gun ammo on that thing. Had to take a break to let my heart rate return to normal.