I'm already paying taxes that cover the roads that Fedex uses to deliver my packages, why does Fedex have to pay more money to drive a priority package to my house when they've already flown the package (at their own cost) to within 20 miles of my house?

I've already paid Comcast for 20mbit of bandwidth, why does Netflix have to pay them money to send me data over a pipe that I've already paid for when Netflix is willing to drop that data off at Comcast's front door? If Comcast can't provide 20mbit of bandwidth at the price they sold it to me for, then it sounds like they've overpromised and underdelivered and they should adjust rates accordingly.

My point is that wired gives dedicated bandwidth to the aggregation point. With wireles the bandwidth is shared, so the more users that use it, the more it degrades. I thought that was clear when I made the analogy with Wifi.

Oh, but in many rural areas they *do* use point-to-point wireless for the backhaul. Since it's point-to-point, it's not subject to the same sharing constraints, but it's not the same as a hardwired fiber connection.

It's not ad hominem if there's no "hominem" -- sign in to an account if you want someone to argue the merits of your argument. When you post as an AC, you're just one of many anonymous voices shouting from the back of the auditorium.

Fedex doesn't pay more money to use the roads to deliver an overnight package than to deliver a 5 day ground package.

A more apt analogy to express delivery is that Netflix could opt for a slower service where you choose the movie you want to watch the day before, and they download it to you overnight, reducing their need for peak bandwidth. But that is not the same as paying the carriers more money to get the bits to you.

Actually, CalTrans is not allowed to convert an existing lane to an HOV lane, only "new" lanes can become HOV lanes:

Well, there is one Technical reason -- the same reason that limits every wireless protocol -- there is a limited amount of frequency spectrum available to wireless signals, which puts a cap on the aggregate bandwidth available. Multiple sectors and channels can help, but it's still not the same as wireless -- just like how 300Mbit 802.11n Wifi in the office doesn't give everyone the same quality of service as 100mbit wired connections -- it's great when only a few people are using the Wifi, but when everyone tries to use the fileserver at once, they all have to share the same bandwidth.

Wired infrastructure is also aggregated and shared on the back end, but there are fewer limitations on available bandwidth since the fiber backhaul has a lot more capacity than the limited RF bandwidth available to carriers. Increasing LTE capacity often means installing a new cell site so each site serves fewer users, which can take years from planning to implementation. In comparison, adding additional wired backhaul capacity is often as easy as lighting up another fiber strand (or using faster transceivers).

Mod this insightful! I was tricked and thought that loadable kernel modules were going to be the music distribution format of the future... it seems so convenient! But it turns out that this was just about the publicity. How dissapointing!

When my grandmother died and we cleaned out her attic, we threw away a lot of old photos and 8mm movies because no one alive still knew who was in the pictures.

Someday my thousands of digital photos will suffer the same fate -- when my computer is sold off for scrap and the credit card that pays my dropbox bill is canceled, they will all dissappear except for images that I've specifically chosen to pass on... as they should.

While I don't necessarily consider a non-removable battery to be a "feature" (though maybe it is if manufacturer claims that it lets them create a thinner phone are true), I never removed the battery in my Galaxy Nexus after almost 2 years of use, and while the Nexus 5 battery is "non-removable", that only means that it'll take 20 minutes to change the battery if it fails, it's really not that hard to open the phone. I already carry a USB battery pack for recharging other USB devices, so I don't really need to be able to change batteries on the fly.

Given the choice between a MicroSD card slot and a removable battery, I'd opt for the MicroSD, since I like to load up movies for long trips and would love to be able to just pop in a 64GB MicroSD card with dozens of movies rather than downloading them on the phone.

Who is 'we'? The .01% of consumers that are tech savvy enough to know what a backdoor is and why we don't want one? Meanwhile everyone else will continue to buy routers based on which picture on the box looks better.

Sure.... I've heard that before... rollback fixes everything... When the time clocks lose punches because they can't upload data to the attendance system you can just tell managers to manually reconcile timecards for 10,000 employees since IT didn't bother to test anything.

If you are downloading patches,you are no CIO regardless of the the title you gave yourself. Any company large enough to need a real CIO would have a gone through an extensive testing/qualification process for an emergency out-of-band patch. You would be lamenting the many man hours your teams lost while testing the patch (which, due to the urgency, meant that it could not go through the normal QA process you use before deploying patches). It took Amazon all day to deploy the patch across their load balancers.

If clicking 'like' where I have no way to read to and agree to a contract stands up in court, can I also email them a contract of my own telling them that by accepting my 'like' then they are bound to the terms of my contract?

Of course, the flip side is that if you *want* to do a good code audit for software you're using, you can do it on your own with open source software (and you can review code changes in patches before applying them). However, with closed source software, you can (usually) only take the word of the closed source company and have to trust that they haven't purposely inserted back doors into the code.

And once one company does the audit, they can share it with others (or a group of companies could share the costs of the audit), and all users, no matter how large or small, can validate that the code they are running matches the audited code.

Of course, an audit isn't a guarantee of finding a bug (which is just as true for closed source software as it is for open source software), but at least with open source code, a company that finds a bug can choose to fix it immediately without waiting for it to filter through a large company's release process.

I don't understand this:

There is no Perl language support to remediate cross site scripting. That's all done by the developer and/or framework he's using, so I don't see how it's useful to say that Perl remediates 85% of XSS vulnerabilities when the language itself has no idea what XSS is or how to remediate it.

I'm also having trouble reconciling this statement:

So Perl re mediates 85% of XSS vulnerabilities -- the highest rate of any language, yet it has a 17% higher rate of XSS vulnerabilities?

This study would be slightly more useful if they gave details on web frameworks instead of just languages.

I'm surprised Ruby and Python didn't make the list, I figured that either one of those languages would be more popular than Perl for web development today