Except, in the US, lobbyists propose an "extreme and over the top bill that nobody will accept", and it gets slipped through on the tail of another more benign and not related bill, with little chance for anyone to refute it.
Thus we are left with a completely outrageous law that suits industry and not the consumer.
You could always adjust your rear windshield washer to squirt backwards..... if you do not have a rear windshield washer, adjust one of your front ones to squirt right over the car. Nobody likes being pissed on.
>>>> "Those aviation communication frequencies are for voice communication. A continuous control signal being broadcast would obviously prevent using the frequency for its intended purpose. Those frequencies are clogged enough as it is"
Not quite correct there. The ATC & Aircraft communication channels are not used for control, and not suitable for control as the bandwidth and channel separation is suitable for voice (and sometimes very low speed data). The frequencies used for UAV control are well outside that band, usually in the satellite communication region, up around 200-500MHZ, and 2.2 to 2.3GHz (around the XM satellite and Radio telemetry ranges) see http://www.pacificsites.com/~brooke/FA.shtml
A 2Mbps downlink is typically required for UAV control and a 10Mbps uplink is required to get the data off the UAV to the ground station. You wont get those data-rates down in the VHF range easily.
This appears to be specific to the USA, other places in the world appear to have it sorted.
http://www.aerosonde.com/ "August, 21 1998 the Aerosonde Laima was the first unmanned aircraft to cross the north atlantic. The crossing was completed within 15 minutes of schedule after a flight of 3270 km in a time of 26 h 45 min."
While Aerosonde do work with Military and government agencies world wide (including the National Hurricane Centre, Miami, Florida, they are still a civilian organization who had to negotiate with the Australian CAA (Australian version of the FAA) and FAA's for flight authorisation in civil airspace and it was managed through NOTAMS etc. I visited them a few years ago, and they said the CAA were very welcoming to aligning the flight rules for UAV's.
The spectrum is already allocated for TCAS (Traffic Collsion Avoidance Systems), all the aviation radio communications & satellite comms for control etc, so what additional part of the spectrum makes UAV's difficult?
Attendant: Pork sausages or Spaghetti and Meatballs?
Passenger1: Sausages
Attendant: Pork sausages or Spaghetti and Meatballs?
Passenger2: Sausages
Attendant: Pork sausages or Spaghetti and Meatballs?
Passenger3: Meatballs
....... Some time later.......
Attendant: Pork sausages or Spaghetti and Meatballs?
Passenger n : Sausages
Attendant: Oh, I'm sorry, we are all out, we only have Halal Chicken.
Passenger n: ah no problem, chicken it is.
CIA: Hey, some guy just ate the Halal Chicken. Flag him.
Also, if a single user is moderated down several times in a short time frame, a temporary ban will be imposed on that user... a cooling off period if you will. It lasts for 72 hours, or more for users who have posted a ton.
The same as being sent to GITMO. No meta mods (courts), just 'other peoples opinion' when the victim^H^H^H^H^H^H *cough* terrorist doesn't follow Slashdot groupthink.
If they were really serious they'd submit an article about taking down the stock exchange, and include a link to the stock exchanges webserver to have it Slashdotted...
It looks to me like mikesd81 is trying to take down excite.com. (why do you hate our freedom?)
>>> "You need support. You need techs and installers and troubleshooters on staff. "
You need some level of support agreement with either solution - Windows or Linux. Comparing the costs of a MSFT support agent or a Red-hat/Novell/Ubuntu support agent is another choice (and cost driver) altogether. As is training and converting users.
My guess is it is a similar cost of support with either solution. I also expect the USER training required to migrate to Vista is similar cost to migrating to Linux. This then falls back to the cost of acquisition. Is it cheaper to pay $100,000 to train your sys admins in Linux so you have an 'organic' capability for OS upgrade and acquisition, or intall XP, then have to buy Vista in a year, then MSoffice 2008, Outlook server 2009, Explorer 2010 etc...
This reminds me of the "You can teach a man to fish" saying...
In this case the fishing classes cost some money, sure. And the report basically said the would have saved money by purchasing some fish... well duh. - but how long would that fish have lasted?
They now know how to get unlimited fish themselves and are free from the stinking fish market.
In real life there Dude B wouldn't care. In all this effort to make yourself seem cool the best you can do is make yourself as part of the crowd. So stop trying to be cool it takes to much effort just try to blend in and you are all set.
If he really wanted to be cool, he would have taken up smoking.
>>>"nor is Freedom free for that matter, it must be fought for constantly and vigilantly lest we lose it..
Freedom isn't free
It costs folks like you and me
And if we don't all chip in
We'll never pay that bill
Freedom isn't free
Now there's a have to hook'in fee
And if you don't throw in your buck 'o five
Who will?
You don't throw in your buck 'o five. Who will?
Oooh buck 'o five
Freedom costs a buck 'o five
Gizmodo are correctly reporting the same story, but from the angle that your content is being sensored and you are paying for it.
FTA:
Verizon To Censor YouTube For Cellphones
Watching YouTube videos on your Verizon Wireless cellphone will cost $15 per month, according to the New York Times. The deal is expected to be officially announced later today and launch next month but it's important to note that you won't be paying $15 per month for the YouTube you know and love. Nope, the video service will be a part of V Cast, Verizon's multimedia hub, and won't be a replication of the content you get on the actual YouTube Web site.
The videos you'll actually be able to see are ones that have been "selected and approved by the companies...that [have] the broadest appeal and highest entertainment value." Um, isn't that the very definition of censorship? And what are the odds that some of the selected videos you'll see are ads for soap?
I would think that the massive popularity of YouTube can be attributed to videos that might not exactly meets Verizon's "editorial and taste" guidelines. Translation: don't expect too many video saying, "Verizon Sucks!"
Both Google, the new owners of YouTube, and Verizon are just thrilled to be offering us an anemic version of the popular video sharing Web site. But fear not, non-Verizon Wireless users: YouTube will only remain exclusive to Verizon for a "limited period of time."
So, who's willing to pay $15 per month for a censored, anemic version of YouTube that you can enjoy on a 1-inch screen? - Nicholas Deleon
>>> "they are just a carrier and probably won't be doing any the filtering of the videos "
That is not how I read it. They appear to be charging the consumer $15 a month for a heavily 'filtered internet'. If Verizon wish to remain free from infringement they should be a 'common carrier' and should not be providing restricted content. IANAL, but it appears that if they restrict some content, they are liable for all the content that gets through.
Why don't they just offer 'common carrier' data service to the Internet? Their self imposed restrictions will hurt them in the long run.
>>"If no patents existed, everything would become a "trade secret". Essentially, every factory would become a Willy Wonka factory, where no one knows how a product is created - it just pops out. Key technologies could be lost if a person dies or a factory burns down."
Once that first product 'pops out', reverse engineering kicks in. Take the 3M approach - they know their product will be copied so aim to be first and fasted to market to make their cash quickly by being innovative ahead of their competition. This gives the OEM a window in which to maximize their sales/profits, and promotes competition and technical innovation.
Slashdot Mirror
Except, in the US, lobbyists propose an "extreme and over the top bill that nobody will accept", and it gets slipped through on the tail of another more benign and not related bill, with little chance for anyone to refute it.
Thus we are left with a completely outrageous law that suits industry and not the consumer.
>>>>"Did you miss the part about road rage?"
Um no. that is why you'd never catch me doing it.
You could always adjust your rear windshield washer to squirt backwards..... if you do not have a rear windshield washer, adjust one of your front ones to squirt right over the car. Nobody likes being pissed on.
What country are you in?
I'm with you on the Linux Live CD. I also find the alternate CD good also seeing as it has some extra features.
(I suggested ubuntu to get rid of that zango thing in my last post and got a -1 troll for my problems. - LOL)
You can download the patch here
>>> I've never understood the logic of using a glue that is stronger than the material it is intended to seal.
I need to introduce you to the people in the marketing department.....
>>>> "Those aviation communication frequencies are for voice communication. A continuous control signal being broadcast would obviously prevent using the frequency for its intended purpose. Those frequencies are clogged enough as it is"
Not quite correct there. The ATC & Aircraft communication channels are not used for control, and not suitable for control as the bandwidth and channel separation is suitable for voice (and sometimes very low speed data). The frequencies used for UAV control are well outside that band, usually in the satellite communication region, up around 200-500MHZ, and 2.2 to 2.3GHz (around the XM satellite and Radio telemetry ranges) see http://www.pacificsites.com/~brooke/FA.shtml
A 2Mbps downlink is typically required for UAV control and a 10Mbps uplink is required to get the data off the UAV to the ground station. You wont get those data-rates down in the VHF range easily.
This appears to be specific to the USA, other places in the world appear to have it sorted.
http://www.aerosonde.com/ "August, 21 1998 the Aerosonde Laima was the first unmanned aircraft to cross the north atlantic. The crossing was completed within 15 minutes of schedule after a flight of 3270 km in a time of 26 h 45 min."
While Aerosonde do work with Military and government agencies world wide (including the National Hurricane Centre, Miami, Florida, they are still a civilian organization who had to negotiate with the Australian CAA (Australian version of the FAA) and FAA's for flight authorisation in civil airspace and it was managed through NOTAMS etc. I visited them a few years ago, and they said the CAA were very welcoming to aligning the flight rules for UAV's.
The spectrum is already allocated for TCAS (Traffic Collsion Avoidance Systems), all the aviation radio communications & satellite comms for control etc, so what additional part of the spectrum makes UAV's difficult?
Attendant: Pork sausages or Spaghetti and Meatballs?
Passenger1: Sausages
Attendant: Pork sausages or Spaghetti and Meatballs?
Passenger2: Sausages
Attendant: Pork sausages or Spaghetti and Meatballs?
Passenger3: Meatballs
....... Some time later.......
Attendant: Pork sausages or Spaghetti and Meatballs?
Passenger n : Sausages
Attendant: Oh, I'm sorry, we are all out, we only have Halal Chicken.
Passenger n: ah no problem, chicken it is.
CIA: Hey, some guy just ate the Halal Chicken. Flag him.
From the Mod FAQ: The same as being sent to GITMO. No meta mods (courts), just 'other peoples opinion' when the victim^H^H^H^H^H^H *cough* terrorist doesn't follow Slashdot groupthink.
Exactly,
If they were really serious they'd submit an article about taking down the stock exchange, and include a link to the stock exchanges webserver to have it Slashdotted...
It looks to me like mikesd81 is trying to take down excite.com. (why do you hate our freedom?)
>>>"Stop giving them ideas! (not that they can't already do that via other means...)"
you mean from that huge database of "ideas" of which they are trying to stop people from copying?
>>> "You need support. You need techs and installers and troubleshooters on staff. "
You need some level of support agreement with either solution - Windows or Linux. Comparing the costs of a MSFT support agent or a Red-hat/Novell/Ubuntu support agent is another choice (and cost driver) altogether. As is training and converting users.
My guess is it is a similar cost of support with either solution. I also expect the USER training required to migrate to Vista is similar cost to migrating to Linux. This then falls back to the cost of acquisition. Is it cheaper to pay $100,000 to train your sys admins in Linux so you have an 'organic' capability for OS upgrade and acquisition, or intall XP, then have to buy Vista in a year, then MSoffice 2008, Outlook server 2009, Explorer 2010 etc...
This reminds me of the "You can teach a man to fish" saying...
In this case the fishing classes cost some money, sure. And the report basically said the would have saved money by purchasing some fish... well duh. - but how long would that fish have lasted?
They now know how to get unlimited fish themselves and are free from the stinking fish market.
Can I store my MP3 collection there? I wouldn't want to to get lost.
>>>"nor is Freedom free for that matter, it must be fought for constantly and vigilantly lest we lose it.. Freedom isn't free
It costs folks like you and me
And if we don't all chip in
We'll never pay that bill
Freedom isn't free
Now there's a have to hook'in fee
And if you don't throw in your buck 'o five
Who will?
You don't throw in your buck 'o five. Who will?
Oooh buck 'o five
Freedom costs a buck 'o five
Sry, couldnt resist.
Did you work for Stefan?
FTA:
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/cellphones/verizon
>>> "they are just a carrier and probably won't be doing any the filtering of the videos "
That is not how I read it. They appear to be charging the consumer $15 a month for a heavily 'filtered internet'. If Verizon wish to remain free from infringement they should be a 'common carrier' and should not be providing restricted content. IANAL, but it appears that if they restrict some content, they are liable for all the content that gets through.
Why don't they just offer 'common carrier' data service to the Internet? Their self imposed restrictions will hurt them in the long run.
>>"If no patents existed, everything would become a "trade secret". Essentially, every factory would become a Willy Wonka factory, where no one knows how a product is created - it just pops out. Key technologies could be lost if a person dies or a factory burns down."
Once that first product 'pops out', reverse engineering kicks in. Take the 3M approach - they know their product will be copied so aim to be first and fasted to market to make their cash quickly by being innovative ahead of their competition. This gives the OEM a window in which to maximize their sales/profits, and promotes competition and technical innovation.
>>>"I cannot possibly imagine what they want you to work on.
But it does sound like he has access to copious amounts of softcore at work.... so what is his problem again?
>>>...."is to make it last 50 years OR until the death of the creator of the work"
I'm sure the record company will argue they are the creator of the work... and they'll never die.
You may also wish to append "whichever is greater" (You have to think of the children)
http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html sez:
U.S. population 300,280,905
World population 6,559,255,288
(@ 19:34 GMT (EST+5) Nov 25, 2006)
And Google sez: (300280905 / 6559255288) * 100 = 4.57797253%
So yeah, Why are we even considering catering for 4.6% of the worlds population?