It's a tough debate. I like many would prefer to pay for a good service then receive a sub-par service for free. However, I'd also rather receive a crappy service for free then pay for it. Do you think the Playstation network will be good if it is subscription based? Then I for one don't mind paying for it...
March 2007. Call me a pessimist but I'm predicting late October 2007 just in time for the holiday season
Yes, but when?
on
A Look at IPTV
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Saying it will work on the "next-gen optical network" doesn't provide a time line for someone as uneducated as myself. Could someone please put a rough time line on this?
Honestly, the same issues this article is shedding light on apply to any major purchase you make online. A lot of cars being sold online have small defects in them, they state the cars year and mileage, but fail to mention that it was abused for several years and doesn't quite shift properly, etc. Caveat Emptor applies to every major situation - and it's harder to be fully aware of what you're purchasing when you're riding 100% on how someone else describes it.
Half of my is laughing because I'm picturing the comic book guy saying "Worst Hack Ever" - the other half is genuinely a little frightened at the lack of security guarding my finances:(
The RSA cryptographic technique was known to have been developed by GCHQ but credit for making the technique applicable went to Diffie, Hellman and Merkle. This article makes it seem like GCHQ received no credit until the late 90s which is simply incorrect. They received credit for their ideas, but they simply were not the first to apply these ideas.
but can someone please explain why Google is so big on the "invite only" idea. Isn't Gmail technically "invite only" right now - and everyone and their dog has an account there.
Microsoft is so evil for branching into pretty much everything, yet Google appears to be following suit. Of course, this is nothing but a prediction (for those who skim the article)
OK - I see all these people asking "why the heck would someone pay to advertise on that?"
I paid for an advertisement to my http://www.mac-poker.net/Mac Poker site early on - and it brought in TONS of traffic. Mind you the traffic was "silly traffic" (aka it was not targetted and most of it was "browsers" clicking a random pixel) but it was still worth it. Now, I got in at about 80K when the site was still hot hot hot. After about 200K there were two many pixels to click and my clicks went down, and after 500K the sites traffic dropped drastically.
Slashdot Mirror
The real question is, how does Microsoft & Apple feel about this?
It's a tough debate. I like many would prefer to pay for a good service then receive a sub-par service for free. However, I'd also rather receive a crappy service for free then pay for it. Do you think the Playstation network will be good if it is subscription based? Then I for one don't mind paying for it...
March 2007. Call me a pessimist but I'm predicting late October 2007 just in time for the holiday season
Saying it will work on the "next-gen optical network" doesn't provide a time line for someone as uneducated as myself. Could someone please put a rough time line on this?
Honestly, the same issues this article is shedding light on apply to any major purchase you make online. A lot of cars being sold online have small defects in them, they state the cars year and mileage, but fail to mention that it was abused for several years and doesn't quite shift properly, etc. Caveat Emptor applies to every major situation - and it's harder to be fully aware of what you're purchasing when you're riding 100% on how someone else describes it.
Half of my is laughing because I'm picturing the comic book guy saying "Worst Hack Ever" - the other half is genuinely a little frightened at the lack of security guarding my finances :(
The RSA cryptographic technique was known to have been developed by GCHQ but credit for making the technique applicable went to Diffie, Hellman and Merkle. This article makes it seem like GCHQ received no credit until the late 90s which is simply incorrect. They received credit for their ideas, but they simply were not the first to apply these ideas.
"For those who love eye-candy but don't want to mess with their existing installs" Isn't that everyone :P
Formal contracts & documents should be written in Internet slang. "If you fail to pay your credit card debt we will take your car lol"
The complexity of the parallax mapping in the X1000 is simply mind blowing - thumbs up to the engineers who designed it!
Are there ever class action lawsuites filed over large scale vunerabilities like this?
It's like the fall of the Roman empire - when everyone is fighting the same corporation it's tough even for the biggest corporations to hold ground
but can someone please explain why Google is so big on the "invite only" idea. Isn't Gmail technically "invite only" right now - and everyone and their dog has an account there.
that could be dangerous couldn't it - I heard they were designed using floating point arithmetic ;)
what about DVDs?
I wonder how it will react when I look at Internet porn? The wonders...
It is little known, but Emmett was a pioneer in several other industries as well! RIP
you mean to tell me Microsoft isn't the only software company effected by worms???
I wonder how many of these ideas while eventually some day be implemented.
Microsoft is so evil for branching into pretty much everything, yet Google appears to be following suit. Of course, this is nothing but a prediction (for those who skim the article)
I don't know - I still don't trust it ;)
you didn't know the /. & Zonk were both part of the Illumaniti?
They can't be behind this - it's not in Seattle, it's in Tokyo :P
Well, at least it's one of the last ones of the year :P
OK - I see all these people asking "why the heck would someone pay to advertise on that?" I paid for an advertisement to my http://www.mac-poker.net/Mac Poker site early on - and it brought in TONS of traffic. Mind you the traffic was "silly traffic" (aka it was not targetted and most of it was "browsers" clicking a random pixel) but it was still worth it. Now, I got in at about 80K when the site was still hot hot hot. After about 200K there were two many pixels to click and my clicks went down, and after 500K the sites traffic dropped drastically.