The difference between Al Michaels and Mike Tirico in terms of viewer recognition, which leads to ratings and advertiser confidence, which leads to money, is significant. Al Michaels is a fixture. Mike Tirico is a nobody. ESPN was banking on Michaels to give their broadcast national credibility as this is the first year MNF is being broadcasted on their network after 30+ years on ABC.
Al led ESPN to believe he would do the job, even after John Madden left. When people like Al Michaels change their mind, it's a big deal. This is big money. He can't just go work at NBC and have ESPN say "Ok, go ahead, have fun, we understand." Part of the reason they paid so much money for this contract was with the understanding that he'd stay. Believe me, they're pissed.
Almost makes you think they did it just to piss Michaels off, hmm? They could have just as easily asked them for nothing.
ESPN (parent company -- Disney, to the chagrin of all sports fan with a soul) paid $8.8 billion for the rights to broadcast football games on Monday night for the next eight years. Al Michaels, one of the preeminent broadcasters in sports, agreed to announce the games, then decided he didn't want to.
That devalued Disney's investment significantly. My guess is this is Eisner's way of telling Michaels what he really thinks of his talents.
I rented a movie from them a few years ago and mistakenly returned a Rolling Stones CD in the envelope. The DVD player went unused for months. When I went to do something with it, I found their DVD and wondered what the deal was. They had processed the return as if nothing happened. One of those mysteries of life... this is what I figured.
About a year later, I got an envelope from them in the mail. It had the Stones CD in it. My guess is the DVD I rented wasn't that popular, and had just then been sent to someone, who subsequently discovered my Stones CD and sent it back to Netflix. I thought it showed something they actually bothered to return it.
It seems reasonable to me to want roomates of the same religion.
Hey Einstein, this does not apply to roomates. This applies to landlords who are leasing out property. But rest assured, even if you are leasing out property, you can discriminate all you want. Build your own Jesus fantasy land. Call it "Head In The Sand Villas." Just do it quietly.
I am a vehemoth opponent of Jim Crow laws (that is when a city or state uses government power to restrict freedoms of certain people), and I do not support the types of discrimination enumerated in the various anti-discrimination laws
Of the two culprits, myRedbook is more grossly egregious in facilitating prostitution.
There's no such law as "facilitating prostitution." There's prostitution itself and there's pandering, both of which profit directly from the sex-for-money transaction. You might be thinking of conspiracy, but that's a stretch. Remember, there have been hooker ads in yellow pages and classifieds (look under Massage, Escort Services, Adult Entertainers) for decades.
Besides all that, vice cops love those websites. Makes it real easy to target their prey... they don't even have to get out of their chair to make their mark.
I don't believe that "a fast track through the FDA" is ever advisable for any new drug meant for human consumption.
The term "fast track" suggests that thoroughness is compromised for sake of expediency. That's not the case. It's more like putting certain drugs at the top of the review list, prioritizing based on the lethalness of the disease in question. This doesn't even come into play until Phase 3 of human trials. I'm currently waiting on a Hep C drug that has shown a lot of promise and am very pleased that the FDA has decided to fast track it, as my liver will eventually fail and I will eventually die.
As for this drug, they're about a million miles away. These results were produced in test tubes. I can kill HIV in a test tube with a cup of bleach. They haven't even started animal trials yet, let alone human. This kind of reporting is terribly irresponsible.
For starters, people don't send men into space. Not yet at least. Governments do.
Secondly, governments throw money into the trash can all the time. Witness Iraq. We could have sent men to Pluto for that kind of money.
Third, all the money in the world adds up to exactly squat on the surface of another planet. Money is nothing but a means to an end. We are innovators and explorers, animals trying to overcome our own limitations by pushing our limits. Going to Mars is something the entire species can take pride in. Why should any individual, organization or government deny us that opportunity so they can hoard money for their own selfish purposes?
Maybe if we all stopped thinking about money for a little while and started thinking about our existence from the perspective of space, which makes all our our petty politics look... well... petty, we'd be a little better off than we are today./me dodges bullet from Republicans.
Peering is typically done when both parties will be dumping about the same amount of traffic onto each other's network. Since Google probably sends a lot more data than it receives, it doesn't seem likely that anybody would peer with them for free.
Most places I've worked will peer with anyone, especially someone they like. You have to realize that most peering decisions are made by the kind of guys who read slashdot. "Cool, we're peering with Google." Obviously this doesn't extend to companies without a soul, like Verizon.
From the above comments it would appear Google is peering with Speakeasy (probably at a Bay Area NAP) and either buying transit from or peering with Level3. Level3 has a ton of cheap colo space near Mountain View; maybe they have a datacenter there.
...and here I thought Google paid for their bandwidth like everybody else.
More likely than not, Google and Verizon are peering with one another via a private line (which Verizon as a LEC would purchase for exactly $0). I seriously doubt either of them purchase transit via a third party. If anyone on Verizon could do a traceroute to google.com, that would shed some light.
Verizon's probably worried that Google's on-demand video is going to usurp their own offering to their customers and that all the hard-earned cash they're putting into HDSL and video delivery systems is going to go to waste. If I can watch such-and-such on Google for $5, then why would I buy it from Verizon for $10? Google will likely follow Microsoft's lead here and price gouge, being they already have a superior delivery infrastructure that can service customers on all networks while Verizon's market is just their own.
Depends on what you mean by improvement... I don't know how you would quantify that. Rightfully or not, mayors take the credit when their city improves.
New York was better off when Giuliani left than when he started. Thus, he was a good mayor. Before he took office, New York was a mess. Dinkins was dirty. The cops were a mess. The whole city was borderline. I understand what you're saying. Like Clinton, Giuliani benefitted greatly from the rise of the Internet economy. He had more resources to play with. Plus, like most conservatives, Giuliani's elitism and ninnyness annoys the piss out of me. However, I don't hate him anymore. With this neofascist regime in DC and the way he handled the city during 9/11, it's hard to.
Giuliani and McCain... your 2008 Republican ticket.
It sounded like EMC came out with a product in a small footprint, as it was compared to a high capacity product, but not so much. From TFA:
The Insignia line consists of a basic, low-cost version of the VisualSRM management package, an SMB edition of the eRoom collaboration software, an SMB edition of the RepliStor replication package, and an SMB edition of Storage Administrator for Exchange.
How can we get more from our customers who already shelled out top dollar for our storage? With a variety of cleverly-named software packages, of course. Ugh, I *despise* EMC.
Once you know what makes you happy in life, choices like this are trivial.
For example, what's important to me is having free time, a great apartment and interesting places to walk and have dinner. I don't care if someone offers me double what I make now, if it costs me time or the city I enjoy living in, it's not worth it.
Yes, but if his pay really is that good, he could keep it, invest the extra pay like mad, and once he has enough invested to lived off the dividends, he can then do WHATEVER work he wants REGARDLESS of pay in a completely stress-free life.
Trading happiness in your twenties/thirties for freedom in your fifties/sixties is hardly a good trade. The whole "work hard while young so you don't have to work anymore" idea is a great way of getting people to trade in their youthful energy for a few extra bucks. I wouldn't be surprised if one of the monopoly kings thought that up.
This is deus ex machina. All they ever had to do to justify their attack is find something, anything that qualified as dangerous (and if they had you know it would be on the scrolling headline of Fox News 24 hours a day for months) and all they've come up with is "well there used to be something there, but the Russians took it." What crap.
You want to go back to Dinkins New York? No, thank you. It's pretty cool to ride subways at night. Times Square is annoyingly Disney, but it's better than hookers and knives and bums over burning trash cans. Your other points -- the ERC, potholes, strip clubs -- please. Deal with it.
Giuliani may be a ninny, but he did a fine job. The city's a better place.
Here in Japan (and I'm sure it's the same in S. Korea), we don't have any such tranfer caps. Bandwidth is also a non-issue here with 50MB ADSL and 100MB (up and down) FTTH.
I spent the better part of four weeks attempting to get a transfer working at line rate between Tokyo and California. Ultimately, I found the problem was within TCP, window size and the like. Tuning it didn't provide enough throughput so we went with a UDP-based file transfer utility.
This is not a problem you can fix at the client end, I don't think. You can tune your stack in Linux and so forth, but I think the server has a say in the matter. So you can have as big a pipe as you want, but you're not downloading anything from North American servers very quickly, at least not over TCP.
Honestly, I'm surprised anyone can max their connection for any measurable duration.
How often do you peg your circuit? For how long is it pegged when you peg it? At 5 Mb/s, a minute will get you will get you in the neighborhood of 30 megabytes. Peaks are so short with broadband you can oversubscribe to your heart's content, pretty much.
The ISPs who are the most troubled by P2P depend on a "big fat pipe" of transit from a Tier1. Unfortunately, they are bound to disappear. The larger ISPs offload most of their traffic via direct peering, which costs them nothing but a circuit. So they can absorb the P2P hit.
it can also perform such malicious tasks as gathering personal data or using your modem to dial costly toll numbers.
They're referring, of course, to the infamous XXX dialer malware which installs itself if you try to get your jollies via certain videoconferencing activities. That's at least five years old at this point.
What qualifies as journalism nowadays?
Re:Missing topic: when browsers weren't free
on
A History of Firefox
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Definitely true, but it goes further.
Netscape took their share because IE was practically unusable. Once Microsoft geared up development internally, which Netscape should have anticipated, Netscape still had the opportunity to maintain their edge and leveraged themselves as a "cool app" company which would have suited the market fine for years after their decline. They could have done any number of things to counter the fact they'd have to give the product away free, using the Opera model for example. I mean they had market share. People didn't migrate to IE en masse simply because it was free and netscape wasn't.
If netscape had targeted user experience as aggressively as the firefox project has, instead of just resting on their laurels and thinking being first was good enough, they'd probably still be in business. Instead they just let it slide and spent their time and energy trying to convince everyone how unfair Microsoft was.
How about going one step further than just blogging about it and actually submitting a documentation update to the ps man page. That way future confusion of the ps output could be avoided.
Because what ps reports is the truth, from a certain point of view.
The nose of the ball broke the plane of the goal line. It doesn't matter where the ball actually ends up. The goal line extends invisibly upwards to infinity. Or at least to the roof.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't have to. Listen to WFAN four hours a day.
The difference between Al Michaels and Mike Tirico in terms of viewer recognition, which leads to ratings and advertiser confidence, which leads to money, is significant. Al Michaels is a fixture. Mike Tirico is a nobody. ESPN was banking on Michaels to give their broadcast national credibility as this is the first year MNF is being broadcasted on their network after 30+ years on ABC.
Al led ESPN to believe he would do the job, even after John Madden left. When people like Al Michaels change their mind, it's a big deal. This is big money. He can't just go work at NBC and have ESPN say "Ok, go ahead, have fun, we understand." Part of the reason they paid so much money for this contract was with the understanding that he'd stay. Believe me, they're pissed.
ESPN (parent company -- Disney, to the chagrin of all sports fan with a soul) paid $8.8 billion for the rights to broadcast football games on Monday night for the next eight years. Al Michaels, one of the preeminent broadcasters in sports, agreed to announce the games, then decided he didn't want to.
That devalued Disney's investment significantly. My guess is this is Eisner's way of telling Michaels what he really thinks of his talents.
Install BitTorrent and go to PirateBay, ISOHunt or some other wonderful web site.
About a year later, I got an envelope from them in the mail. It had the Stones CD in it. My guess is the DVD I rented wasn't that popular, and had just then been sent to someone, who subsequently discovered my Stones CD and sent it back to Netflix. I thought it showed something they actually bothered to return it.
Hey Einstein, this does not apply to roomates. This applies to landlords who are leasing out property. But rest assured, even if you are leasing out property, you can discriminate all you want. Build your own Jesus fantasy land. Call it "Head In The Sand Villas." Just do it quietly.
Vehement * Behemoth = Vehemoth?
There's no such law as "facilitating prostitution." There's prostitution itself and there's pandering, both of which profit directly from the sex-for-money transaction. You might be thinking of conspiracy, but that's a stretch. Remember, there have been hooker ads in yellow pages and classifieds (look under Massage, Escort Services, Adult Entertainers) for decades.
Besides all that, vice cops love those websites. Makes it real easy to target their prey ... they don't even have to get out of their chair to make their mark.
The term "fast track" suggests that thoroughness is compromised for sake of expediency. That's not the case. It's more like putting certain drugs at the top of the review list, prioritizing based on the lethalness of the disease in question. This doesn't even come into play until Phase 3 of human trials. I'm currently waiting on a Hep C drug that has shown a lot of promise and am very pleased that the FDA has decided to fast track it, as my liver will eventually fail and I will eventually die.
As for this drug, they're about a million miles away. These results were produced in test tubes. I can kill HIV in a test tube with a cup of bleach. They haven't even started animal trials yet, let alone human. This kind of reporting is terribly irresponsible.
Secondly, governments throw money into the trash can all the time. Witness Iraq. We could have sent men to Pluto for that kind of money.
Third, all the money in the world adds up to exactly squat on the surface of another planet. Money is nothing but a means to an end. We are innovators and explorers, animals trying to overcome our own limitations by pushing our limits. Going to Mars is something the entire species can take pride in. Why should any individual, organization or government deny us that opportunity so they can hoard money for their own selfish purposes?
Maybe if we all stopped thinking about money for a little while and started thinking about our existence from the perspective of space, which makes all our our petty politics look ... well ... petty, we'd be a little better off than we are today. /me dodges bullet from Republicans.
Most places I've worked will peer with anyone, especially someone they like. You have to realize that most peering decisions are made by the kind of guys who read slashdot. "Cool, we're peering with Google." Obviously this doesn't extend to companies without a soul, like Verizon.
From the above comments it would appear Google is peering with Speakeasy (probably at a Bay Area NAP) and either buying transit from or peering with Level3. Level3 has a ton of cheap colo space near Mountain View; maybe they have a datacenter there.
More likely than not, Google and Verizon are peering with one another via a private line (which Verizon as a LEC would purchase for exactly $0). I seriously doubt either of them purchase transit via a third party. If anyone on Verizon could do a traceroute to google.com, that would shed some light.
Verizon's probably worried that Google's on-demand video is going to usurp their own offering to their customers and that all the hard-earned cash they're putting into HDSL and video delivery systems is going to go to waste. If I can watch such-and-such on Google for $5, then why would I buy it from Verizon for $10? Google will likely follow Microsoft's lead here and price gouge, being they already have a superior delivery infrastructure that can service customers on all networks while Verizon's market is just their own.
The advancement of the species.
Not everything has to have an "end game."
New York was better off when Giuliani left than when he started. Thus, he was a good mayor. Before he took office, New York was a mess. Dinkins was dirty. The cops were a mess. The whole city was borderline. I understand what you're saying. Like Clinton, Giuliani benefitted greatly from the rise of the Internet economy. He had more resources to play with. Plus, like most conservatives, Giuliani's elitism and ninnyness annoys the piss out of me. However, I don't hate him anymore. With this neofascist regime in DC and the way he handled the city during 9/11, it's hard to.
Giuliani and McCain ... your 2008 Republican ticket.
The Insignia line consists of a basic, low-cost version of the VisualSRM management package, an SMB edition of the eRoom collaboration software, an SMB edition of the RepliStor replication package, and an SMB edition of Storage Administrator for Exchange.
How can we get more from our customers who already shelled out top dollar for our storage? With a variety of cleverly-named software packages, of course. Ugh, I *despise* EMC.
For example, what's important to me is having free time, a great apartment and interesting places to walk and have dinner. I don't care if someone offers me double what I make now, if it costs me time or the city I enjoy living in, it's not worth it.
Trading happiness in your twenties/thirties for freedom in your fifties/sixties is hardly a good trade. The whole "work hard while young so you don't have to work anymore" idea is a great way of getting people to trade in their youthful energy for a few extra bucks. I wouldn't be surprised if one of the monopoly kings thought that up.
This is deus ex machina. All they ever had to do to justify their attack is find something, anything that qualified as dangerous (and if they had you know it would be on the scrolling headline of Fox News 24 hours a day for months) and all they've come up with is "well there used to be something there, but the Russians took it." What crap.
Giuliani may be a ninny, but he did a fine job. The city's a better place.
I spent the better part of four weeks attempting to get a transfer working at line rate between Tokyo and California. Ultimately, I found the problem was within TCP, window size and the like. Tuning it didn't provide enough throughput so we went with a UDP-based file transfer utility.
This is not a problem you can fix at the client end, I don't think. You can tune your stack in Linux and so forth, but I think the server has a say in the matter. So you can have as big a pipe as you want, but you're not downloading anything from North American servers very quickly, at least not over TCP.
How often do you peg your circuit? For how long is it pegged when you peg it? At 5 Mb/s, a minute will get you will get you in the neighborhood of 30 megabytes. Peaks are so short with broadband you can oversubscribe to your heart's content, pretty much.
The ISPs who are the most troubled by P2P depend on a "big fat pipe" of transit from a Tier1. Unfortunately, they are bound to disappear. The larger ISPs offload most of their traffic via direct peering, which costs them nothing but a circuit. So they can absorb the P2P hit.
That's a pretty flowery description.
it can also perform such malicious tasks as gathering personal data or using your modem to dial costly toll numbers.
They're referring, of course, to the infamous XXX dialer malware which installs itself if you try to get your jollies via certain videoconferencing activities. That's at least five years old at this point.
What qualifies as journalism nowadays?
Netscape took their share because IE was practically unusable. Once Microsoft geared up development internally, which Netscape should have anticipated, Netscape still had the opportunity to maintain their edge and leveraged themselves as a "cool app" company which would have suited the market fine for years after their decline. They could have done any number of things to counter the fact they'd have to give the product away free, using the Opera model for example. I mean they had market share. People didn't migrate to IE en masse simply because it was free and netscape wasn't.
If netscape had targeted user experience as aggressively as the firefox project has, instead of just resting on their laurels and thinking being first was good enough, they'd probably still be in business. Instead they just let it slide and spent their time and energy trying to convince everyone how unfair Microsoft was.
Because what ps reports is the truth, from a certain point of view.
Touchdown! Woo Hoo!
That holding call was a little bogus.