Why are you being belligerent?
Belligerent? Are you sure you know what that word means?
UDP is a subset of TCP/IP.
Maybe it's the word "subset" that you don't understand?
UDP and TCP are completely different protocols, and the only thing they really have in common is that they are (usually) built on IP (the "IP" in TCP/IP and UDP/IP).
I think if they deliver on the promise, this will change the way people view their mobile devices. Motherboard replacements and case replacements will gain traction just like in the assemble your own PC era.
It will have quite a hard doing what you claim when only a fraction of a fraction of 1% of phone buyers will ever hear of its existence.
It looks too big and clunky to take significant market share -- replaceable components mean larger size and less integrated "fit and finish". There may be a niche market for something like this, but it seems unlikely to reach the mainstream -- I'd rather pay $400 every few years for a brand new phone that's (relatively) small and compact and works reliably with a warranty than spend $200 every year or two to upgrade components and then am on my own with making sure those components work well together. "If I replace the LCD with the new one, will my GPU still work? If I upgrade the GPU, do I need a new motherboard? I'd like a new 802.11ac wifi module, but it's not compatible with my GSM module"
What an absolute waste of resources and money.
Do you consider everything that you don't want to be a waste of resources and money? Does the existence of this project deprive you of something that *you* need? Do you assume that the developers would work on your pet project if they weren't working on this? Do you think that the money that people are investing in this would somehow benefit you if it weren't spent on this project?
TCP/IP is a suite of protocols that includes UDP. http://www.protocols.com/pbook...
UDP isn't TCP, but UDP is one of the many protocols in the TCP/IP suite.
Ok, if you're going to make up some ephemoral "TCP/IP Suite" that includes 6 of the 7 OSI layers, then sure, TCP and UDP fall into that group.
But the point remains that UDP is not part of TCP, they are completely independent.
TCP/IP is the name of the protocol suite that includes UDP. UDP is a subset of TCP/IP. TCP is a subset of TCP/IP. UDP/IP doesn't exist.
There's no UDP in TCP -- UDP is a completely different (and much simpler) protocol.
Here's the UDP RFC:
https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc76...
One possible UDP/IP interface would return the whole internet datagram
including all of the internet header in response to a receive operation.
Both UDP and TCP are transport layer protocols built on top of the IP Network Layer, you can have UDP without TCP, and TCP without UDP. They don't even require IP, you could build them on top of a different network layer.
The name "Logjam" is not a good one, especially for those of us working in Silicon Valley.
Due to our proximity to San Francisco and its demographic (read: lots of homosexual males), that term has a very different meaning here than it does in most places.
"Logjam" refers to fecal compaction: that is, when a penis thrusting into an anus repeatedly compacts the feces in a way that causes severe constipation.
All day I had to listen to the dev/QA/ops team cackling about "logjams".
It was a not a pleasant day.
As someone who lives in San Francisco and has many openly gay friends and coworkers, I can honestly say that I've never heard that definition of "logjam", and I wonder if anyone out of middle school uses the term.
Except, you know, saying that they are all using the same IP.
Yes, that doesn't 100% lock in the use of TCP, but in 2015? You can pretty well assume that we're dealing with TCP/IP, and the asker can offer additional information if this isn't the case.
Lots of devices still use TFTP for firmware updates, so the pumps could be using UDP/IP rather than TCP/IP.
If you talk to people over the internet, latency is an issue. Like, you say something in Skype. The person at the other end hears it and replies. By the time you hear the reply, a regime change has taken place and there's a new president in power. Currently internet video chatting over long distances is an unpleasant experience due to the lag.
http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/...
Callers usually notice roundtrip voice delays of 250ms or more. ITU-T G.114 recommends a maximum of a 150 ms one-way latency. Since this includes the entire voice path, part of which may be on the public Internet, your own network should have transit latencies of considerably less than 150 ms
I'm already getting cross country ping times of 65ms (round trip), so to be compliant with ITU-T G.114, my codec has 235 ms to do its work. I regularly talk on the phone with colleagues on the other side of the country using a VOIP system hosted here, and haven't noticed any latency problem. Even video calls using our Polycom have good latency (but not great, there's still a noticable lag, even when connected to local users)
I find voice latency on cell phones (even local calls) to be far more noticable and annoying than with cross country VOIP calls. I suspect the lag you're seeing is due to client side buffering and codec compression more than network latency.
Who in America does not benefit from roads?
The wildlife that is increasingly pushed out of its habitat as humans expand into former rural/wilderness area?
Are not public schools subsidized by the childless? Oil is subsidized, you mean not subject to confiscatory taxes, and again, who does not benefit from oil?
But you'll note that I didn't say roads should not be subsidized, but that it's not fair point to a transportation service operating on subsidized roads burning subsidized oil and claiming "Hey look, that service runs at a profit with no subsidy at all!", when in reality, it is subsidized.
Does anyone besides gamers and high frequency traders care about latency? I manage a server farm on the other side of the country, and latency is not an issue at all for interactive use whether typing at the command line using ssh or using RDP to connect to a Windows server. For the general internet user, I don't see much utility in cutting round-trip latency in half from the current 60ms I'm getting now to the 30 ms a speed of light connection would give. (though there'd be additional latency from all of the microwave repeaters along the way). The current "fix" of using anycast DNS servers, CDN's to bring content closer to you, and protocols that minimize the need to make multiple round-trips for content seem like a far better solution since they provide redundancy, reduce long-distance bandwidth needs, and reduce the load on the network and servers.
Perhaps this tends to drive research into making planes safer more so than with trains. I mean, how hard could it be to have someone at the controls of a train who is paying attention and isn't at risk of falling asleep at the wheel?
That's actually a hard problem to solve -- and one that airlines are running into - so much is automated that it's hard to keep pilots focused on flying the plane -- by the time the autopilot decides it can't control the plane, the pilots are thrust into the middle of a bad situation and if they haven't been paying attention, they have little awareness of what led to it. This "startle effect" contributed to the Air France Flight 447 crash.
As you say, much of operating a train (at least between stations/terminals) is controlling speed and watching for obstructions -- the kind of monotonous task that humans aren't well suited for, but computers are *very* well suited for.
Dude, seriously? Nearly every subway, bus and light-rail system in the US already operates under heavy government subsidization, and fares are well below cost.
Put this way: If fares reflected the actual cost of operation (forget profit), they would IMHO just barely compete with Uber. Chuck in a profit margin for future expansion and improvements, and taxicabs could compete.
It's only a fair comparison if Uber were paying the full unsubsidized cost of roads. Fuel taxes and registration fees pay only a portion of road costs, and there are hidden subsidies in the oil that fuels most cars,
I see you know nothing at all about it. I have experienced a sonic boom from the ground and it's no big deal.
I suggest you learn about the subject by reading and not watching movies.
It's no big deal when it happens once a month, but if you live under a busy flight path and have to hear the rumbling of sonic boom hundreds of times a day (and night) then you may not be so understanding.
Mexico has, er, "had" a satelite?? I found that surprising.
I was surprised too and wondered why they just didn't contract out to buy time on someone else's satellite since a billion dollars over the 15 year projected lifetime of the satellites will buy a lot of satellite time. Turns out it's for "National Security Needs", which I guess means they don't trust anyone else to provide service, though if the USA reneges on a deal to provide national security satellite services to them, Mexico has far bigger problems to worry about.
The NSA is going to intercept their data whether they have their own satellite or not -- it was bought from Boeing, so the NSA will certainly have full access to the Satellite during construction.
I checked out Rockbox, because I'm keen on custom firmwares, but seriously?
Work has begun on porting Rockbox to these players...Creative: Zen Mozaic...
Haven't even got it working on this 7 year old player yet?
Mind you I have got a 1st gen iPod, I might give it a try...
Given that they have to reverse engineer every platform they support, there aren't a whole lot of new MP3 players on the market these days, and more modern devices that have a single SoC that does everything are a lot harder to reverse engineer than older systems where there were more discrete components, it's not really surprising that they don't support more modern devices.
But even a 7 year old device still makes a fine mp3 player.
To the systems programmer, users and applications serve only to provide a test load.
