Haven't tried disabling the Flash plugin to force the browser to fall back on the HTML5 version (which many of us would probably prefer anyway). Maybe that one will work better for others.

Don't get your panties in a bunch, we're talking about Joss Whedon, not Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
In most of his work you can see the eventual outcome from miles away. It's the ride to get there that makes his work fun.

Your summary still might help some others.

It's a cable modem and regular Vimeo works just fine. It's only the VOD stuff that shows this off behavior (because it loads the video in 40 MB pieces to circumvent most download tools and fails to stitch them back into seamless output).

Won't work in this case, but thanks for the good intention.

Unlike regular Vimeo, where it's easy to work around the basic methods, the VOD site loads parts of the video in 40 MB or so pieces, tries to stitch them together again and in my case it failed miserably at doing so (despite a proven and more than sufficient downlink),

Unless you actually know what was going on, shove your assumptions where the sun don't shine.

This was the first bad HD streaming experience in years and the connection has performed without problems throughout the long easter weekend as well (over here that was an extended weekend from Friday to Monday). HD streams by other sites didn't cause any problems either, the problem was reproducible across tabs and browsers and using the web developer tools you could practically watch the stream arrive too late, piece by piece and with not nearly enough overlap to provide seamless playback.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, ...

Talk about an off-site backup!

The movie was worth the five bucks to watch it on Vimeo, but their Flash-based player (no quick way to switch to an HTML5 version) resulted in such a choppy playback that the constant pauses and buffer attempts added another half hour to the whole thing.

Since it's a 95 minute movie we're talking about a quarter of the time being spent on just waiting for the fucking site to do its job again.
Before anyone asks: The 100MBit connection has never been a problem before and the necessary software was up to date as well.

Hope you'll have more luck. Except for the predictable end it's quite a nice movie.

That joke of a reform is the reason why the people who were in school during that time don't really give a fuck about the topic anymore.

How about this one? It is a little memory-hungry though - 128K of RAM isn't within everyone's budget.

The more relevant questions are "what is the size of the codebase of L4 written in an unmanaged language" and "is that unmanaged codebase small enough to mathematically prove its correctness" .

There is a reason why we layer systems on top of each other, and not just because we like cake.

Well look who natively counts in binary.

Hello Joshua! Give my regards to Dr Falken.

Managed code does one very important thing: it guarantees that elusive quality you've just named 'goodness'. (With respect to memory access, at least).

Goodness or otherwise of arbitrary unmanaged C code is a Turing-complete quality that, we've painfully discovered, cannot be reliably detected by either a compiler, a testing regime, or the entire planet's worth of expert C programmers given unlimited access to the code and up to two years time. That's how many coder-years? A lot.

Goodness of managed code? It has that quality. Period. And we can go on with our lives solving instead of creating problems.

Arguably all the recent security holes in Java are exactly because they wrote extensions and libraries in C/C++ and not in Java.

A real language - like, say, UCSD Pascal in 1978 can compile itself to its own virtual machine just fine...

But admittedly the resource requirements to host a system like that that are pretty steep - you'd need at least 128K of RAM. Still, I like to dream that one day....

Dome kind of Goatse mirror?

Accept no substitutes!!!

Don't forget "Lessons", the last chapter of "The Inner Light".