Is it just me or is this article just total nonsense? What does arrow-proofing a car have anything to do with computer security? And I doubt this guy will have a job much longer if he's going around claiming that 100% security isn't the goal and that he only tries to keep out the 11 year old script kiddies
Very secure. Think about it- that means that every scummy admin on the internet doesn't have access to your password. You don't need a "junk websites that probably sell my username/password" tier, since authentication is handled by openid and not the scummy web server itself.
Not only do I not have an OpenID, I've never even seen an OpenId login! Until it really starts getting around, I seriously doubt the quarter billion number.
Terrible is a serious understatement. Unless you're on a rented satellite dish trying to connect to satellite internet in the middle of the jungle deep in the Congo, that's an outrageous price.
Yes I do think that. 95% of people don't use nearly that much of the service they're paying for, and the difference is lost to obscene profit and corruption. We can cut that away and still have viable service, as demonstrated by the rest of the entire world.
Yes, exactly. Obviously $50/month for everyone is enough because telecoms are still obscenely rich and very much in the black. Bandwidth surcharges are just a way to justify charging even more.
Well if you want to talk about how things should be.. internet should cost that much in the aggregate. Everyone should be paying $5 a month, or the heavy users should be paying $9.99 and everyone else $1. Look at Korea or Europe or Japan.
Problem is, you can't go on just personally knowing people. Buy a plane ticket, nab the window seat, fly somewhere an hour or more away.. then you'll appreciate just how many people there are in America. It's tempting to extrapolate from the sample of people you know from your town or (even more dangerously) from the Internet, but that's just not what we see demographically from America.
I get pricing of $1 per GB on my web host (nearlyfreespeech.net), though presumably that's cheaper because they don't have to run cable out to my house..
Yes it is bad that an ISP charges by bandwidth. They justify it by saying that 5% use 50% of the network.. but the other 95% of users aren't even using the internet- 95% of americans only use it for checking yahoo webmail once every 2 weeks and automatic windows updates. The 5% of us shouldn't be penalized- we're the reason jacked-up American broadband has to cost $50 a month, and it makes absolutely no sense to penalize us for that when Americans are already paying the premium! They should be exploring new plans to offer broadband at $5/month for that 95% of people and the same old $50/month for high bandwidth users.
Do I like them? Hell no but it was the ONLY company that would play ball.
The only company desperate enough to listen to a first-foray phone manufacturer and cede to its outrageous demands just so that it can put the phones out on the market?
it was still a half hour before I was installing software
I have endless headaches with ALL my PCs.
I bet you're the kind of person that gets spyware. The simple matter is that you don't have problems unless you're stupid. Yes, I'm not going to try to be more polite- that's the simple fact. Unless you are stupid, you will have no problems whatsoever. Don't install smiley toolbars, you will not get spyware. I've never known a single Windows user who actually knew what he was doing to have any problems with his machine. Apple does do a very good job at designing computers that are hard for idiots to break (ironic since Windows brought PCs to the masses) but if you don't go swinging a sledgehammer around the OS, you. will. not. have. problems.
Activate at home? Oh, you mean by installing a proprietary music store application (btw why on earth does a music store have to be an application instead of a website?) which has nothing to do with the phone on the computer you might not own? Right.
perhaps they don't want customers of their phones to have to wade through a sea of bizarre contracts and options
Perhaps my point is exactly that it doesnt matter what Apple thinks. They make phones, not offer cell service, and it's none of their business what contracts and options the customer has to deal with. Apple just has to have its tentacles wrapped around every little detail of every industry in which they have absolutely no control.
Slashdot Mirror
Not so insane.. who cares how they do it on the backend, as long as they share accounts instead of separate ones?
mm, yeah none of those
Is it just me or is this article just total nonsense? What does arrow-proofing a car have anything to do with computer security? And I doubt this guy will have a job much longer if he's going around claiming that 100% security isn't the goal and that he only tries to keep out the 11 year old script kiddies
GameBurnWorld?
Very secure. Think about it- that means that every scummy admin on the internet doesn't have access to your password. You don't need a "junk websites that probably sell my username/password" tier, since authentication is handled by openid and not the scummy web server itself.
Not only do I not have an OpenID, I've never even seen an OpenId login! Until it really starts getting around, I seriously doubt the quarter billion number.
Ugh, it's "hear hear" not "here here".
That's actually a good idea, just mail home a manila envelope with the whole computer inside.
Hijacked. What's the deal with "3/4 to 4"? ... 3/4/4 = 3/16 = .1875?
3.2 is 16/5.
Terrible is a serious understatement. Unless you're on a rented satellite dish trying to connect to satellite internet in the middle of the jungle deep in the Congo, that's an outrageous price.
Yes I do think that. 95% of people don't use nearly that much of the service they're paying for, and the difference is lost to obscene profit and corruption. We can cut that away and still have viable service, as demonstrated by the rest of the entire world.
Yes, exactly. Obviously $50/month for everyone is enough because telecoms are still obscenely rich and very much in the black. Bandwidth surcharges are just a way to justify charging even more.
Oops, shouldNT cost that much in the aggregate >_<
Well if you want to talk about how things should be.. internet should cost that much in the aggregate. Everyone should be paying $5 a month, or the heavy users should be paying $9.99 and everyone else $1. Look at Korea or Europe or Japan.
Problem is, you can't go on just personally knowing people. Buy a plane ticket, nab the window seat, fly somewhere an hour or more away.. then you'll appreciate just how many people there are in America. It's tempting to extrapolate from the sample of people you know from your town or (even more dangerously) from the Internet, but that's just not what we see demographically from America.
I get pricing of $1 per GB on my web host (nearlyfreespeech.net), though presumably that's cheaper because they don't have to run cable out to my house..
Yes it is bad that an ISP charges by bandwidth. They justify it by saying that 5% use 50% of the network.. but the other 95% of users aren't even using the internet- 95% of americans only use it for checking yahoo webmail once every 2 weeks and automatic windows updates. The 5% of us shouldn't be penalized- we're the reason jacked-up American broadband has to cost $50 a month, and it makes absolutely no sense to penalize us for that when Americans are already paying the premium! They should be exploring new plans to offer broadband at $5/month for that 95% of people and the same old $50/month for high bandwidth users.
SAME PERSON DETECTED
Well now I see they're rolling out the million-plus UID model.
What's the big deal with Ron Paul? And what kind of libertarian votes?