__aatmkh9910 - Slashdot User

Comment Re:So who gets rationed? (Score 1) 395

by __aatmkh9910 on Monday April 13, 2009 @01:06PM (#27558663) Attached to: ISP Capping Is Becoming the New DRM

This is right, ISPs pay a lot for the loop(whether it's a DSL, T1, T3, or OC-1) but then they cram lots of people on a single loop and promise them more bandwidth then they will ever get, that's why the price is so much lower.

If you want your own T1 loop, you have to pay much more, but then you are guaranteed all the bandwidth you paid for.

Comment Re:So who gets rationed? (Score 5, Insightful) 395

by __aatmkh9910 on Monday April 13, 2009 @08:56AM (#27555253) Attached to: ISP Capping Is Becoming the New DRM

ISPs just need to upgrade their backhauls to accommodate more traffic, they are selling people bandwidth that doesn't exist and hoping people don't use it, ISPs need to fess up about exactly how much bandwidth each customer will get. Here in the US, at least where I live, Verizon is one of the only ISPs left that doesn't do any sort of throttling or capping, and I've seen more than a few people switch to them for that exact reason.

Comment Re:Bottom LIne (Score 1) 214

by __aatmkh9910 on Saturday March 21, 2009 @12:14AM (#27276951) Attached to: Phenom IIs, Core I7-920 Win Out In Value Analysis

First, equating clock frequency with performance makes me cry (I'm an Electronic Engineer with an interest in computer architecture).

Second, you should consider value per buck and not just bang per buck.

For example, suppose that I could get 5% better capacity/dollar with a 400GB HD than with a 200GB HD. Since 200 GB is enough for me, buying the 400GB would basically mean paying 90% without enough benefit. Buying the 400GB is more bang per buck but less value per buck.

And the justification that I should buy the 400GB because "I will need it in the future" is just a shallow excuse for consumerism. When/if I need the additional 200GB, it will be cheaper, faster, and more reliable (due to being less used) than now.

I know GHz != FLOPS, and that Hz/FLOPS in CISC processors can vary a lot, but I find that lot of the time, hertz are still a decent measurement of power.
Also, with respect to bang for your buck, I'm talking within reasonable bounds(a few hundred MHz difference)

Comment Re:Bottom LIne (Score 2, Insightful) 214

by __aatmkh9910 on Friday March 20, 2009 @12:39PM (#27269887) Attached to: Phenom IIs, Core I7-920 Win Out In Value Analysis

I agree, me(and most other consumers) will buy whichever chip gives them the most GHz for their buck, it doesn't matter who makes it.

Comment Re:Uh, not exactly a voting machine security flaw (Score 1) 494

by __aatmkh9910 on Friday March 20, 2009 @09:49AM (#27267539) Attached to: Kentucky Officials "Changed Votes At Voting Machines"

This is partially the fault of the voting machines(no paper trail) and partially the fault of the stupid people who didn't look at the next screen after they hit "Vote".
Election fraud will always exist, no matter how people vote.

Slashdot Top Deals