So basically they want to compete with the Sidekick? Sounds like a losing proposition to me. I still think that the Samsung i730 I used to have was about the best mobile phone out there. It ran Windows Mobile. Had WiFi support. Had a full keyboard. Accepted standard SDRAM cards that you could load your MP3s onto. Had a built in headphone jack. Did ActiveSync with Exchange. With the mobile version of Opera web browsing was actually alright. Most importantly, I could use it on Verizon and didn't have to deal with Cingular/AT&T. That may not be good outside of LA, but in Los Angeles, Verizon pwnz AT&T, no ifs, ands or butts about it.
They want to classify people who spend a lot of time playing video games as addicts. By classifying them as addicts, they are basically making it so that they can diagnose them and prescribe treatment for them. The treatment will obviously consist of various high grade pharmaceuticals. So... I play lots of video games, I get access to good drugs. Tell me where the down side is here? =) I predict hard core WoW raiders giving up their speed and Mountain Dew in exchange for whatever addiction mitigating chemicals Dow and Pfizer are pushing.
That competition that is currently ongoing over the copper? It's not going to be allowed on the fiber. Verizon lobbied for and was granted exclusive use - why do you think they are suddenly so hot to roll it out?
Now I understand what the big deal is. Thanks for sharing that information.
Preach on brother man! =) If anyone reading this is interested in the subject of marketting and how to recognize the ploys, I highly recommend "Influence, the Psychology of Persuasion" by Robert B. Cialdini.
Exactly. My old boss was telling me about a client that he got. The guy had someone come in and setup a Linux box (Redhat I think) for him. The box got owned because the guy who set it up didn't secure it right. My boss sold the guy a Windows 2003 Server, firewall, AV and the whole deal. As far as that guy knows, Linux = unsecure, Windows = okay.
Despite the proliferation of computers these days, you still need some specialized knowledge to make them run properly. There isn't a sure fire, bullet proof by default OS out there, although OSX comes pretty damn close. I can pretty much guarantee that if OSX had 90% market share, there would be more exploits for it. People would be breaking iChat wide open, and looking for vulnerabilities in Safari. Before the flames start, I'm not saying that obscurity is the only security that OSX. It has a well designed security model. But no security model is bullet proof. There will always be some coder out there who thinks outside of the box and ponders, "I wonder what will happen if I ask the computer to execute this.."
I see things from the other side and perhaps I'm biased because of my experience. I've had DSL from Verizon/GTE since the days of 384k in 1997. It used to cost me $50 a month. At one point it was up to $80 a month. These days I'm getting 3mb/768k from Verizon for $29 a month. That's certainly an improvement. The only problem I had is when I moved and my service didn't get provisioned right. I called them, they identified the problem and had it fixed the next day. The service wasn't even down. I was just stuck at 256k down when it should have been 1.5MB.
How is FiOS a monopoly? Even if it is, what is so bad about fiber? I read complaints on here quite frequently about how the US is lacking high speed internet and how countries like Japan and South Korea have these fat pipes. They get those fat pipes because they have fiber to the premises. Here in America, we are stuck with a legacy, POTS system. There are copper lines that have been there for longer than most of the people who post on/. have been alive, myself included. They need to be phased out at some point. I wonder if the Pony Express customers got mad at the monopoly the telegraph customers had over getting their messages delivered more quickly, and how dare Western Union dare to charge more for it?!
I'm having a hard time coming down on Verizon for re-investing their profits in an infrastructure that will take us to the next level. At work we have a multi-site WAN running on Verizon (MCI/UUNet) MPLS. Before that we had frame relay (at 128k). Am I mad about Verizon pushing us into MPLS and doing it for about what the frame circuits cost us? Hell no I'm not. Do I care that they might let their frame circuits degrade because they understand that MPLS is the better technology? Hell no I don't.
You can expect all that you want. The reality of the situation is that the Internet picture here in America kind of blows. It blows because we had to ramp everything up. The rest of the world got to watch us do it and then cherry pick the best parts of it. I remember hearing about these new "DSL line cards" on SS7 equipped 5ESS switches in 1994. Where the hell were Korea's fat pipes back then?
What expectation do you care more about? The expectation that the companies that provide the internet service to you are going to do what they can to improve their infrastructure, or the expectation that they should give you what you want at a price that you think is fair?
The "monopoly" that you are so against brought you the technology in the first place. They spent millions and millions of dollars and lord only knows how much R&D time, and installation time and maintenance time to give you the ability to get on the internet at all, period, end of story. But that's not good enough? You want it less expensively? You want competition? Where is that competition going to come from? Maybe the goverment should subsidize a whole new parallel infrastructure so that we can all have more choice?
I had a very informative conversation with a Qwest rep at Inter-Op, that God awful, buzzword ladden cesspool of marketting hype. The upshot of that conversation is that the lines are deregulated. Qwest can go into Verizon territory and sell DSL. AT&T can go into Qwest territory and sell T1 service. Any company can go into any market and sell their product. Small companies like Covad can offer DSL and T1 services to people who don't want to go with a "major" provider. Hell, even AOL and Earthlink will sell you a T1 if you want it. There is choice out there, there are options. The fact of the matter is that people don't want to pay for the options. The local providers often times are the best option because they can compete on *gasp* price due to the volume of business that they do.
Take all of the above with a grain of salt. I live in southern California where we have two cable companies and two phone companies. However where I live specifically, my only option for internet conn
I don't understand what your complaint is. I read two things. One is that you're upset about the quality of telephony and digital access. On the other hand, you're upset that Verizon is prioritizing their FIOS rollout. I for one wish that Verizon would fast track FIOS in my neighborhood.
I thought the same thing. The coffee table books are those ridiculously big books that try to consume as much real estate on the table as possible to make it nearly impossible to actually fit a cup of coffee, or anything else for that matter on the table.
You're right, there isn't much that any single person can do to stop it. Change requires groups of like minded individuals working together. Our society here in America is setup to encourage division and numerous sub-cultures that are opposed to each other. Unfortunately the reality of life is that it is always easier to defend an entrenched position than it is to take that position from the defenders. Having said all that, I'd suggest considering Ron Paul as a viable alternative candidate for 2008.
locked into it, though, because of a variety of special applications they need, particularly the document imaging, OCR, and document management software that they need to pursue the complex cases their lawyers work with
I recently had to find a document imaging solution for a client of mine. The solution needed to integrate with their current accounting package and also their custom waste management software. I ended up settling on docLink from Altec. There weren't any Linux/OSS solutions that came even close to offering the same functionality and product maturity.
ANYway, my point is that Google would have a much harder time making a case that Apple should be prevented from bundling spotlight because they haven't previously been found to have engaged in Anti-competitive behavior (found guilty in court).
But on the other hand Microsoft can point to Apple and tell the court, "See, they are doing the exact same thing that we are doing. In fact, Google seems to be okay with what they are doing."
Isn't it on Google to take care of this? Malware often times installs services and disables other services. Google should add some code to the installer routine and then prompt the user, "We are going to disable the Microsoft search feature. Okay?"
I suspect there will be a licensed version of WiFi at some point where you buy a license for a geographic area and a channel.
This is antecdotal at best and coming twice removed from the source, but I will offer it up anyway. A client of mine is in a business that involves running trucks from southern California up into the central valley as far north as Madera/Dinuba. They wanted constant radio communication with the trucks but realized that they couldn't do it with what was publicly available. What they had to do was license a portion of the spectrum from the FCC. Now they are allowed to broadcast on that spectrum over most of southern California and out to the channel islands (Catalina, etc). To offset part of the cost of owning the spectrum they are selling wireless internet to boats. They are also getting real time data feeds from the trucks. They are using Motorola radios and the guys who are building out the infrastructure for them are a big government contractor who also happen to do radio stuff for oil companies down in Africa. So the technology is there to do long distance, high speed wireless if you have the money. It's just slowly trickling down into the public sector via 802.11n and what not.
For the House, you'd have a revolving door where the incoming representatives largely wouldn't know where to begin.
From my understanding of things, that is pretty much how things are already. The offices are really run by the Congressional staffers, the people who aren't up for reelection. The representatives may actually cast the votes, but they do so based on information fed to them by their staff.
People will always find a way around content blocks faster than those blocks can adapt.
People who have the technical know how will get around the blocks. The problem is that the masses don't have access or knowledge of those technologies. Access to knowledge of those technologies can be controlled. Here in America the "main stream media" is really just a group of a couple of very large media conglomorates who control what the public thinks is "news". The same thing is threatening to happen to the Internet. Companies like Google, Yahoo! and MSN are the Rupurt Murdocks et al of the online world. Just like the guy in the next state over isn't going to have any idea what is written in your local newspaper, the guy using a censored Google as their search engine isn't going to know about the thoughts of a like minded dissident living in the same city.
I misspoke and I apologize. I went and checked with the guy actually made the quote. The price for the Mac, plus monitor, plus software plus warranties was about $6500.
Mmm, I take it that came off the latest talking points fax? Have fun with it.
It seems to me to be more like inbred, deeply ingrained, implanted knee-jerk asshattery of the kind that comes from constant exposure to all the wrong "sources" of "information".
Is it a stretch for someone to put two and two together when they have problem with mouse not focusing on the desired window?
When a program behaves differently in two seperate environments, it's a big stretch for a person to put two and two together. And yes, Gimp should alter a global system preference if that is what is required to maintain the user experience.
Slashdot Mirror
So basically they want to compete with the Sidekick? Sounds like a losing proposition to me. I still think that the Samsung i730 I used to have was about the best mobile phone out there. It ran Windows Mobile. Had WiFi support. Had a full keyboard. Accepted standard SDRAM cards that you could load your MP3s onto. Had a built in headphone jack. Did ActiveSync with Exchange. With the mobile version of Opera web browsing was actually alright. Most importantly, I could use it on Verizon and didn't have to deal with Cingular/AT&T. That may not be good outside of LA, but in Los Angeles, Verizon pwnz AT&T, no ifs, ands or butts about it.
They want to classify people who spend a lot of time playing video games as addicts. By classifying them as addicts, they are basically making it so that they can diagnose them and prescribe treatment for them. The treatment will obviously consist of various high grade pharmaceuticals. So... I play lots of video games, I get access to good drugs. Tell me where the down side is here? =) I predict hard core WoW raiders giving up their speed and Mountain Dew in exchange for whatever addiction mitigating chemicals Dow and Pfizer are pushing.
Now I understand what the big deal is. Thanks for sharing that information.
I propose using fnord 23 bit keys.
Preach on brother man! =) If anyone reading this is interested in the subject of marketting and how to recognize the ploys, I highly recommend "Influence, the Psychology of Persuasion" by Robert B. Cialdini.
Despite the proliferation of computers these days, you still need some specialized knowledge to make them run properly. There isn't a sure fire, bullet proof by default OS out there, although OSX comes pretty damn close. I can pretty much guarantee that if OSX had 90% market share, there would be more exploits for it. People would be breaking iChat wide open, and looking for vulnerabilities in Safari. Before the flames start, I'm not saying that obscurity is the only security that OSX. It has a well designed security model. But no security model is bullet proof. There will always be some coder out there who thinks outside of the box and ponders, "I wonder what will happen if I ask the computer to execute this.."
How is FiOS a monopoly? Even if it is, what is so bad about fiber? I read complaints on here quite frequently about how the US is lacking high speed internet and how countries like Japan and South Korea have these fat pipes. They get those fat pipes because they have fiber to the premises. Here in America, we are stuck with a legacy, POTS system. There are copper lines that have been there for longer than most of the people who post on /. have been alive, myself included. They need to be phased out at some point. I wonder if the Pony Express customers got mad at the monopoly the telegraph customers had over getting their messages delivered more quickly, and how dare Western Union dare to charge more for it?!
I'm having a hard time coming down on Verizon for re-investing their profits in an infrastructure that will take us to the next level. At work we have a multi-site WAN running on Verizon (MCI/UUNet) MPLS. Before that we had frame relay (at 128k). Am I mad about Verizon pushing us into MPLS and doing it for about what the frame circuits cost us? Hell no I'm not. Do I care that they might let their frame circuits degrade because they understand that MPLS is the better technology? Hell no I don't.
You can expect all that you want. The reality of the situation is that the Internet picture here in America kind of blows. It blows because we had to ramp everything up. The rest of the world got to watch us do it and then cherry pick the best parts of it. I remember hearing about these new "DSL line cards" on SS7 equipped 5ESS switches in 1994. Where the hell were Korea's fat pipes back then?
What expectation do you care more about? The expectation that the companies that provide the internet service to you are going to do what they can to improve their infrastructure, or the expectation that they should give you what you want at a price that you think is fair?
The "monopoly" that you are so against brought you the technology in the first place. They spent millions and millions of dollars and lord only knows how much R&D time, and installation time and maintenance time to give you the ability to get on the internet at all, period, end of story. But that's not good enough? You want it less expensively? You want competition? Where is that competition going to come from? Maybe the goverment should subsidize a whole new parallel infrastructure so that we can all have more choice?
I had a very informative conversation with a Qwest rep at Inter-Op, that God awful, buzzword ladden cesspool of marketting hype. The upshot of that conversation is that the lines are deregulated. Qwest can go into Verizon territory and sell DSL. AT&T can go into Qwest territory and sell T1 service. Any company can go into any market and sell their product. Small companies like Covad can offer DSL and T1 services to people who don't want to go with a "major" provider. Hell, even AOL and Earthlink will sell you a T1 if you want it. There is choice out there, there are options. The fact of the matter is that people don't want to pay for the options. The local providers often times are the best option because they can compete on *gasp* price due to the volume of business that they do.
Take all of the above with a grain of salt. I live in southern California where we have two cable companies and two phone companies. However where I live specifically, my only option for internet conn
I don't understand what your complaint is. I read two things. One is that you're upset about the quality of telephony and digital access. On the other hand, you're upset that Verizon is prioritizing their FIOS rollout. I for one wish that Verizon would fast track FIOS in my neighborhood.
I thought the same thing. The coffee table books are those ridiculously big books that try to consume as much real estate on the table as possible to make it nearly impossible to actually fit a cup of coffee, or anything else for that matter on the table.
You're right, there isn't much that any single person can do to stop it. Change requires groups of like minded individuals working together. Our society here in America is setup to encourage division and numerous sub-cultures that are opposed to each other. Unfortunately the reality of life is that it is always easier to defend an entrenched position than it is to take that position from the defenders. Having said all that, I'd suggest considering Ron Paul as a viable alternative candidate for 2008.
I recently had to find a document imaging solution for a client of mine. The solution needed to integrate with their current accounting package and also their custom waste management software. I ended up settling on docLink from Altec. There weren't any Linux/OSS solutions that came even close to offering the same functionality and product maturity.
But on the other hand Microsoft can point to Apple and tell the court, "See, they are doing the exact same thing that we are doing. In fact, Google seems to be okay with what they are doing."
Isn't it on Google to take care of this? Malware often times installs services and disables other services. Google should add some code to the installer routine and then prompt the user, "We are going to disable the Microsoft search feature. Okay?"
This is antecdotal at best and coming twice removed from the source, but I will offer it up anyway. A client of mine is in a business that involves running trucks from southern California up into the central valley as far north as Madera/Dinuba. They wanted constant radio communication with the trucks but realized that they couldn't do it with what was publicly available. What they had to do was license a portion of the spectrum from the FCC. Now they are allowed to broadcast on that spectrum over most of southern California and out to the channel islands (Catalina, etc). To offset part of the cost of owning the spectrum they are selling wireless internet to boats. They are also getting real time data feeds from the trucks. They are using Motorola radios and the guys who are building out the infrastructure for them are a big government contractor who also happen to do radio stuff for oil companies down in Africa. So the technology is there to do long distance, high speed wireless if you have the money. It's just slowly trickling down into the public sector via 802.11n and what not.
Only on /. will comments about giving females messy facials gain you negative karma.
Does it hurt to be so anal rententive? Do you get clogged up, or does the shit you spew here on /. help keep it flowing?
I'm glad I read through the comments before making my own. I had the same thoughts. Now Microsoft has a Linux Czar.
The face is a much safer target. No baby daddy payments that way. =)
From my understanding of things, that is pretty much how things are already. The offices are really run by the Congressional staffers, the people who aren't up for reelection. The representatives may actually cast the votes, but they do so based on information fed to them by their staff.
People who have the technical know how will get around the blocks. The problem is that the masses don't have access or knowledge of those technologies. Access to knowledge of those technologies can be controlled. Here in America the "main stream media" is really just a group of a couple of very large media conglomorates who control what the public thinks is "news". The same thing is threatening to happen to the Internet. Companies like Google, Yahoo! and MSN are the Rupurt Murdocks et al of the online world. Just like the guy in the next state over isn't going to have any idea what is written in your local newspaper, the guy using a censored Google as their search engine isn't going to know about the thoughts of a like minded dissident living in the same city.
I misspoke and I apologize. I went and checked with the guy actually made the quote. The price for the Mac, plus monitor, plus software plus warranties was about $6500.
It seems to me to be more like inbred, deeply ingrained, implanted knee-jerk asshattery of the kind that comes from constant exposure to all the wrong "sources" of "information".
What might it have been besides a G5? It was a huge silver tower. I'm just a database guy these days and I don't know much about Macs.
I wish I had mod points today because you seem to be one of the few who read the article AND comprehended it.
When a program behaves differently in two seperate environments, it's a big stretch for a person to put two and two together. And yes, Gimp should alter a global system preference if that is what is required to maintain the user experience.