Yes, Jobs did something, but by equating Apple with Jobs, you are ignoring the contribution of 500,000+ Apple employees in the US alone. That's ridiculously insulting to everyone who has worked for Apple.

All due respect, but now that the man is deceased, can we finally stop equating everything related to Apple Inc with its former figure head?

Good lord, this entire article is based on one tweet - 107 characters. Surely we could have waited for Carmack to say something more detailed than this??

I still remembering being grumpy when FreeBSD upped the memory requirement from 4MB to 6MB, rendering it uninstallable on my 486 laptop. I win.

You might have a point if the packet was lost in their network. But the packet can also be lost on your wifi, or on someone else's network.

So yes, you probably should be.

Just thought of two more:
- (UDP) DNS traffic
- differing definitions of kilobyte (1000 vs. 1024)

and I'm sure there are still more.

Grossly inappropriate? Please. If you are selling bandwidth, you are going to measure it the way it comes out highest. Not because you are a thieving jerk, but because a) that's what your salespeople want and b) all of your competitors are doing it. Looking at the level 3 bandwidth usage is an error. It fails to account for - at minimum:
- TCP headers
- IP traffic that is hidden from the TCP level (retransmits, dupes, ICMP, etc.)
- session setup and teardown (SYN - ACK - SYN/ACK)
- Physical layer overhead (for example ATM requires multiples of around 50 bytes IIRC)
- PPP overhead (this is DSL after all)
- And certainly other things I've forgotten.

If you've ever looked at an ethernet level dump, it's not surprising in the least that that adds up to about 20-30%.

seriously, though, what does it run? the article doesn't say except to use the nebulous term "open source". or are they planning on schlepping off the initial software development to the open source community too? (good luck with that)

exactly this. what is the point of having a small narrow hot spot of very fast speed? are people really too lazy to plug in a cable when they need to transfer tons and tons of data quickly? what use case is there for cutting the wire but forcing the wifi device to be in the same small area?

I like orangutans!!!! (I don't remember what this thread is about either)

Egads. The least they could have done is print QR codes linking to online versions instead of blank space...

n/t

Right. The horrifying thing wasn't the scale of the disaster. To say the panic was out of proportion with the scale of the disaster misses the point. The horrifying thing was that Tepco and the Japanese government totally mismanaged it, failling to release data, telling people that things were under control when they weren't, releasing bad data, and bumping up their estimates of how bad it was by an order of magnitude more than once. Fukushima was not Chernobyl (catastrophic international disaster), but it wasn't much ado about nothing like Three Mile Island either.

Umm, you do realize that most tsunamis happen with earthquakes, right?

Commercial airplanes use tons (literally) of fuel while taxiing. Idling a jet engine is expensive. And london-amsterdam is about the shortest commercially viable flight possible - only about 200 miles - or to put it in US terms, DC-NYC. So, yes, the concorde guzzled fuel - maybe 5 times what a 737 uses - but its fuel usage was not completely irresponsible - after all, you have to carry most of that fuel at mach 2.2...