Howso? Domain A sends mail to domain B, domain B forwards mail to domain C in a new "envelope" just as currently happens. If domain B doesn't have a proper SPF record then yes, that's a problem, but it's a problem right now anyway.
Given that computers, and my ability to make them do precisely what I want, have been my security blanket since I was 5, such an event may drive me into a deep depression. I've started focusing on the other engineering disciplines I was raised around, as I do see the writing on the wall where many others refuse to even look; hoefully I can remember as much EE as I knew whem I was 10, then go back to school for the rese (and the requisite degree).
Hardware's plenty beefy for a VM or ten, the problem then becomes workflow an I'm still not happy; I've tried it. Regarding Adobe, they promised Linux support years ago, then locked the forum thread in which the promise was made and have refused to comment in threads requesting Linux support for any of their creative tools (Flash Player is not a tool) ever since. Apple has pissed them off and, as a result, Windows versions of their apps now get more optimization. I think it would take Microsoft pissing them off to even get the ball legitimately rolling on Linux versions, and I think Microsoft knows that Adobe is one of the main reasons many web dev types even touch Windows (or OS X, for that matter) and they aren't retarded (enough to piss off Adobe, at least). And even then, that ball has some considerable distance to roll if its destination is a usable and stable suite of professional creative applications running under Linux. I may only be in my 30's, but I'll be retired before we possibly see that, unless they've been working on it, in earnest, since the day it was promised.
Well, sadly, I'm not happy with it. I miss the POSIX shell environment OS X provided and a Linux desktop is not an option as I have clients that send me PSDs and Fireworks PNGs that I need to be able to work with. Unless OS X returns to its former work-friendly state, Windows gains a proper POSIX shell (cygwin sort-of works), or Adobe releases their suite on Linux, I might find myself seeking a new field of work in order to maintain work-life happiness, as this is affected directly by the quality of the tools available to me and, sadly, that quality is lacking across the board lately.
I certainly hope that you, as one of the few remaining slashdotters for whom I hold some amount of respect, give a rat's ass (to use your own terminology) about the direction of computing, in general.
How bad is it that, as bad as Windows 10 is, I switched to it from OSX after 5 years using that, having come from a split Linux/Windows environment previously? OSX used to fit my needs nicely, a desktop OS that stayed out of the way, was stable, provided a decent WM and a Unix-like shell, and generally just let me get work done; it's fallen far in the past few years.
You must be new around here, I haven't seen noticed your posts until today and, now, I've seen several and replied to two. You seem very well grounded, which is not a good fit for what Slashdot has become lately; I welcome you to stick around despite that and, maybe, help turn things around.
With that out of the way, I'd also like to point out that it happens to men, as well. Hell, it happens to men in front of their wives! So yeah, it's not just an "issue" women have to deal with, it's a societal "problem" (quotes because really?) that only seems to get attention when it happens to a woman. I mean, I'm nothing special to look at; if I'm getting the attention, I can only imagine it's fairly common.
My reply would've been "I'll hide all my weapons and bondage gear just out of sight, so you have no idea what's coming before it happens. That way, you'll at least feel safe. Does that work?" or something along those lines. If she still wanted to drop by and pick up the couch, I'd be sure to let her know what an idiot she was for wanting to feel safe rather than be safe, and for expecting me to take responsibility for the safety of another grown adult who isn't willing to take responsibility for themselves.
If, by that, yku mean why do theh have to spout off about thungs they don't understand, that's a question for you to answer. I've grown tired of trying to educate people and getting shit on for it, so this has become my approach: the pre-emptive attack. Blame your fellow slashdotters for making me this way, because it's a relatively recent development.
Uhm... It's Linux, the hardware layer is abstracted, it does use drivers, and hardware manufacturers need only provide drivers. Also, whether the hardware layer is abstracted from the OS or not has nothing to do with whether or not providers can block distribution of firmware; the manufacturers work out their own contracts under which the carrier sells their devices and the carrier often demands this. Google has no say in a carrier's negotiations with a device manufacturer. My pipe is empty, can you please share some of whatever it is that you're smoking? Seems like some good stuff and I could use a good day trip.
that's like like saying my average commute speed wasn't reduced, i was just delayed in getting to work.
No, that's like saying "I got stopped at a red light but still got to work just as fast"
i think the statement said they reserved the right to do such such throttling, not that they absolutely do it.
Okay, so you're complaining about something they reserve the right to do, eventually, at some point in the future, but are not doing yet? You know, with any other provider I'd be right there alongside you, but this is T-Mobile we're talking about and they've backpedaled on every single "we reserve the right" network management measure they've announced since Simple Choice became available.
That said, how would you propose they manage bandwidth over the airwaves? They've already got way more bandwidth to each tower, via fiber, than is available over the air, where that bandwidth is available to them (e.g. obviously they don't in areas where there is no provider with infrastructure to deliver it; what to do about that is another question altogether), so widening the pipe coming from the tower isn't a viable option. I mean, sure, they could do it, but, really, there would be zero benefit to it; they'd just need larger buffers to avoid dropping packets that don't fit in the finite amount of wireless bandwidth available. Certainly you're not proposing that they add more airspace?
You see, every device that connects to a given tower reduces the amount of available bandwidth on that tower. So, why not just add more towers, then? I know that's your next question, or what you'd suggest they do, so let me answer that. Every device that connects to a tower within range of a given tower creates interference, which reduces effective bandwidth even further (by way of causing retransmits and requiring checksumming schemes with even higher payload overhead), so that's really not an option either. And it is not the users' packets which are being delayed, as T-Mobile will pass those along as quickly as they are received; it is packets coming in the other direction, from the fatter pipe to the tower, then over the airwaves to the user, which are potentially being delayed. That is, download, not upload. Given that, personally, I hope they don't backpedal on this, as it would mean utilizing no network management whatsoever, and a lot of dropped packets requiring retransmits over the longer (e.g. slower round-trip) link, and an overall worse experience.
Now that I know where your head is, might I suggest some toilet paper and an air freshener?
They're not reducing the speed, though; they are delaying packets when another user who has not been deprioritized attempts to use the last available bit of the pipe, but that doesn't necessarily slow down the connection over the course of a second. This is especially true given that the tower has much more bandwidth available than a single phone can use. So, in that frame, your packets might be held back but they'll go out in the next, along with any new packets you've sent to the tower in that time. Let me clarify that 23-24Mbps is about average for me, sitting on my couch, in my home, with my phone, regardless of how much data I've used during my billing cycle; sometimes I see as low as 15mbps, sometimes 50Mbps or more, very rarely it'll dip down to 10Mbps if there are a lot of people downloading crap on their phones at that moment. Depending on where I happen to be, that average speed can be higher or lower; one place I frequent, i see speeds ranging from 40-60Mbps consistently, even when I've used several dozen GB so far in my billing cycle.
Where's the throttling? Where's the limiting? I'm simply not seeing it in practice, so why are we talking about theory?
Which is interesting, since YouTube isn't participating and, yet, I'm able to stream 1080p (one of their 1080p demo videos, which won't kick down to a lower bitrate) with Binge-on on and no buffering or stuttering. I said this elsewhere in the thread, but I'm seriously wondering if they're really only throttling video in areas where there is congestion.
They aren't throttling, though. Hell, it's not even a subtle difference! Throttling means slowing transmission to a predetermined rate; what they're doing here is reducing priority (internally, they actually use QoS tagging to deprioritize this traffic) while still allowing access to as much of the pipe as is available. That's why I'm sitting at nearly 60GB used this billing cycle and just downloaded a file at 22.96mbps over LTE.
Except that T-Mobile doesn't sell a committed speed, they sell access to whatever bandwidth is available and not in use by other subscribers. Meanwhile, what you describe is a limit of 5Mbps.
In fact, Google didn't have such a policy until August 2015.
I'll take your word, given that you're a Google engineer, but I seem to recall reading the policy before I bought my Nexus 6 in November 2014. I was under the impression that they had simply rewritten the policy and issued a few press releases in August 2015.
Except that it's not a limit! It's network management, so that the network remains usable, and only takes effect when there is congestion. Perhaps your view of network management practices has been tainted by the likes of AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and pretty much every other major data provider (wireline or mobile, doesn't really matter) throttling "heavy" users at all times, regardless of congestion, but the honest facts here are that T-Mobile is not doing this. Binge-on would be the exception, except that they openly state what the limits for that particular class of service are, so they're not offering anything unlimited in that respect; and if you do want unlimited still, you turn Binge-on off and you get it.
Also, I don't know what everyone is talking about with this 5mbps cap bullshit on T-Mobile. I'm sitting at around 54GB used this billing cycle and have speeds ranging from 15Mbps to 50Mbps depending on signal strength and tower utilization.
Or, install Chroma (6.0.1 on an over 4 year old phone FTW) or CM (not sure what Android version the current release the the Galaxy Nexus is based on) and get on with your life. Chroma even includes a few additional features like split-screen windowing.
Slashdot Mirror
Howso? Domain A sends mail to domain B, domain B forwards mail to domain C in a new "envelope" just as currently happens. If domain B doesn't have a proper SPF record then yes, that's a problem, but it's a problem right now anyway.
I don't have a basement; therefore, your statement is false.
Given that computers, and my ability to make them do precisely what I want, have been my security blanket since I was 5, such an event may drive me into a deep depression. I've started focusing on the other engineering disciplines I was raised around, as I do see the writing on the wall where many others refuse to even look; hoefully I can remember as much EE as I knew whem I was 10, then go back to school for the rese (and the requisite degree).
Hardware's plenty beefy for a VM or ten, the problem then becomes workflow an I'm still not happy; I've tried it. Regarding Adobe, they promised Linux support years ago, then locked the forum thread in which the promise was made and have refused to comment in threads requesting Linux support for any of their creative tools (Flash Player is not a tool) ever since. Apple has pissed them off and, as a result, Windows versions of their apps now get more optimization. I think it would take Microsoft pissing them off to even get the ball legitimately rolling on Linux versions, and I think Microsoft knows that Adobe is one of the main reasons many web dev types even touch Windows (or OS X, for that matter) and they aren't retarded (enough to piss off Adobe, at least). And even then, that ball has some considerable distance to roll if its destination is a usable and stable suite of professional creative applications running under Linux. I may only be in my 30's, but I'll be retired before we possibly see that, unless they've been working on it, in earnest, since the day it was promised.
Well, sadly, I'm not happy with it. I miss the POSIX shell environment OS X provided and a Linux desktop is not an option as I have clients that send me PSDs and Fireworks PNGs that I need to be able to work with. Unless OS X returns to its former work-friendly state, Windows gains a proper POSIX shell (cygwin sort-of works), or Adobe releases their suite on Linux, I might find myself seeking a new field of work in order to maintain work-life happiness, as this is affected directly by the quality of the tools available to me and, sadly, that quality is lacking across the board lately.
I certainly hope that you, as one of the few remaining slashdotters for whom I hold some amount of respect, give a rat's ass (to use your own terminology) about the direction of computing, in general.
How bad is it that, as bad as Windows 10 is, I switched to it from OSX after 5 years using that, having come from a split Linux/Windows environment previously? OSX used to fit my needs nicely, a desktop OS that stayed out of the way, was stable, provided a decent WM and a Unix-like shell, and generally just let me get work done; it's fallen far in the past few years.
Not when you know all the cops in your town ;)
You must be new around here, I haven't seen noticed your posts until today and, now, I've seen several and replied to two. You seem very well grounded, which is not a good fit for what Slashdot has become lately; I welcome you to stick around despite that and, maybe, help turn things around.
With that out of the way, I'd also like to point out that it happens to men, as well. Hell, it happens to men in front of their wives! So yeah, it's not just an "issue" women have to deal with, it's a societal "problem" (quotes because really?) that only seems to get attention when it happens to a woman. I mean, I'm nothing special to look at; if I'm getting the attention, I can only imagine it's fairly common.
Obviously they should probably stay out of certain areas at night
But, then, statistically, so should men.
My reply would've been "I'll hide all my weapons and bondage gear just out of sight, so you have no idea what's coming before it happens. That way, you'll at least feel safe. Does that work?" or something along those lines. If she still wanted to drop by and pick up the couch, I'd be sure to let her know what an idiot she was for wanting to feel safe rather than be safe, and for expecting me to take responsibility for the safety of another grown adult who isn't willing to take responsibility for themselves.
Same here in the US, 29 years ago.
It'll keep taking quarters like it already does. Multiple fucking quarters, as a matter of fact.
Likewise. You know, for spouting off about shit you don't understand.
If, by that, yku mean why do theh have to spout off about thungs they don't understand, that's a question for you to answer. I've grown tired of trying to educate people and getting shit on for it, so this has become my approach: the pre-emptive attack. Blame your fellow slashdotters for making me this way, because it's a relatively recent development.
Uhm... It's Linux, the hardware layer is abstracted, it does use drivers, and hardware manufacturers need only provide drivers. Also, whether the hardware layer is abstracted from the OS or not has nothing to do with whether or not providers can block distribution of firmware; the manufacturers work out their own contracts under which the carrier sells their devices and the carrier often demands this. Google has no say in a carrier's negotiations with a device manufacturer. My pipe is empty, can you please share some of whatever it is that you're smoking? Seems like some good stuff and I could use a good day trip.
Well, yes, if you by the cheap shoddy ones, they are. Here's a tip: don't buy cheap shoddy crap.
that's like like saying my average commute speed wasn't reduced, i was just delayed in getting to work.
No, that's like saying "I got stopped at a red light but still got to work just as fast"
i think the statement said they reserved the right to do such such throttling, not that they absolutely do it.
Okay, so you're complaining about something they reserve the right to do, eventually, at some point in the future, but are not doing yet? You know, with any other provider I'd be right there alongside you, but this is T-Mobile we're talking about and they've backpedaled on every single "we reserve the right" network management measure they've announced since Simple Choice became available.
That said, how would you propose they manage bandwidth over the airwaves? They've already got way more bandwidth to each tower, via fiber, than is available over the air, where that bandwidth is available to them (e.g. obviously they don't in areas where there is no provider with infrastructure to deliver it; what to do about that is another question altogether), so widening the pipe coming from the tower isn't a viable option. I mean, sure, they could do it, but, really, there would be zero benefit to it; they'd just need larger buffers to avoid dropping packets that don't fit in the finite amount of wireless bandwidth available. Certainly you're not proposing that they add more airspace?
You see, every device that connects to a given tower reduces the amount of available bandwidth on that tower. So, why not just add more towers, then? I know that's your next question, or what you'd suggest they do, so let me answer that. Every device that connects to a tower within range of a given tower creates interference, which reduces effective bandwidth even further (by way of causing retransmits and requiring checksumming schemes with even higher payload overhead), so that's really not an option either. And it is not the users' packets which are being delayed, as T-Mobile will pass those along as quickly as they are received; it is packets coming in the other direction, from the fatter pipe to the tower, then over the airwaves to the user, which are potentially being delayed. That is, download, not upload. Given that, personally, I hope they don't backpedal on this, as it would mean utilizing no network management whatsoever, and a lot of dropped packets requiring retransmits over the longer (e.g. slower round-trip) link, and an overall worse experience.
Now that I know where your head is, might I suggest some toilet paper and an air freshener?
They're not reducing the speed, though; they are delaying packets when another user who has not been deprioritized attempts to use the last available bit of the pipe, but that doesn't necessarily slow down the connection over the course of a second. This is especially true given that the tower has much more bandwidth available than a single phone can use. So, in that frame, your packets might be held back but they'll go out in the next, along with any new packets you've sent to the tower in that time. Let me clarify that 23-24Mbps is about average for me, sitting on my couch, in my home, with my phone, regardless of how much data I've used during my billing cycle; sometimes I see as low as 15mbps, sometimes 50Mbps or more, very rarely it'll dip down to 10Mbps if there are a lot of people downloading crap on their phones at that moment. Depending on where I happen to be, that average speed can be higher or lower; one place I frequent, i see speeds ranging from 40-60Mbps consistently, even when I've used several dozen GB so far in my billing cycle.
Where's the throttling? Where's the limiting? I'm simply not seeing it in practice, so why are we talking about theory?
Which is interesting, since YouTube isn't participating and, yet, I'm able to stream 1080p (one of their 1080p demo videos, which won't kick down to a lower bitrate) with Binge-on on and no buffering or stuttering. I said this elsewhere in the thread, but I'm seriously wondering if they're really only throttling video in areas where there is congestion.
They aren't throttling, though. Hell, it's not even a subtle difference! Throttling means slowing transmission to a predetermined rate; what they're doing here is reducing priority (internally, they actually use QoS tagging to deprioritize this traffic) while still allowing access to as much of the pipe as is available. That's why I'm sitting at nearly 60GB used this billing cycle and just downloaded a file at 22.96mbps over LTE.
Except that T-Mobile doesn't sell a committed speed, they sell access to whatever bandwidth is available and not in use by other subscribers. Meanwhile, what you describe is a limit of 5Mbps.
And Google can do approximately...nothing about it. Google isn't the one realeasing, then not updating, devices.
In fact, Google didn't have such a policy until August 2015.
I'll take your word, given that you're a Google engineer, but I seem to recall reading the policy before I bought my Nexus 6 in November 2014. I was under the impression that they had simply rewritten the policy and issued a few press releases in August 2015.
Except that it's not a limit! It's network management, so that the network remains usable, and only takes effect when there is congestion. Perhaps your view of network management practices has been tainted by the likes of AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and pretty much every other major data provider (wireline or mobile, doesn't really matter) throttling "heavy" users at all times, regardless of congestion, but the honest facts here are that T-Mobile is not doing this. Binge-on would be the exception, except that they openly state what the limits for that particular class of service are, so they're not offering anything unlimited in that respect; and if you do want unlimited still, you turn Binge-on off and you get it.
Also, I don't know what everyone is talking about with this 5mbps cap bullshit on T-Mobile. I'm sitting at around 54GB used this billing cycle and have speeds ranging from 15Mbps to 50Mbps depending on signal strength and tower utilization.
Or, install Chroma (6.0.1 on an over 4 year old phone FTW) or CM (not sure what Android version the current release the the Galaxy Nexus is based on) and get on with your life. Chroma even includes a few additional features like split-screen windowing.