Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Productivity Commission Report (Score 3, Interesting) 206

There was a report last year from the Productivity Commission which is "the Australian Government's principal review and advisory body on microeconomic policy and regulation. It is an independent statutory authority in the Treasury Portfolio and responds to references from the Treasurer. "

This specific report is for the Retail industry, but there is a very good chapter on online and price differences, which includes some parts talking about things like Apple's Price Discrimination. For those interested, the report can be found here Economic Structure and Performance of the Australian Retail Industry. The price differences part is Chapter 6.

I'll quote some relevant parts:

Box 6.4 - Apple’s international price discrimination
Costs associated with the distribution of Australian specific content and marketing could mean that higher fixed costs apply to the Australian subsidiary. But given the costs associated with the distribution of music and other media are only likely to be a relatively small share of total costs, this does not fully explain or justify the price differential.

The Commission considers that Australian consumers will buy goods where they feel they get the best deal regardless of retail format and that retailers that do not, or are unable to, respond effectively to competitive pressures will face serious challenges.

Comment Re:8.8.8.8 (Score 2) 193

You're right, I'm in Australia. Google does have a presence here and I get a ping of about 64ms to 8.8.8.8.
8 google-public-dns-a.google.com (8.8.8.8) 82.579 ms 64.420 ms 65.664 ms
I've tried the 8.8.8.8 resolver a couple of times, and in all cases iTunes will give slow downloads, simply due to not optimal resolution of the CDN host. Switch it to another DNS resolver, and everything is fine again. Querying the DNS of our ISP (Internode):

#nslookup a1.phobos.apple.com 192.231.203.132
Server: 192.231.203.132
Address: 192.231.203.132#53

Non-authoritative answer:
a1.phobos.apple.com canonical name = a1.phobos.apple.com.edgesuite.net. a1.phobos.apple.com.edgesuite.net canonical name = a1.da1.akamai.net.
Name: a1.da1.akamai.net
Address: 203.206.129.11
Name: a1.da1.akamai.net
Address: 203.206.129.16

#traceroute 203.206.129.16
[snip]
8 203-206-129-16.deploy.akamaitechnologies.net (203.206.129.16) 81.438 ms 67.101 ms 67.139 ms


This kind of issue isn't exactly Unknown.

In addition, in Australia we have quotas for most of our internet plans. If you were on an ISP such as iiNet, then you could end up using up your quota since iiNet provides "unmetered" downloads from iTunes, on the condition that it comes from their mirror. iiNet mirrors Apple servers, and uses their DNS to redirect to those own mirrors. If you were to use 8.8.8.8 for someone on iiNet, you'd end up with them being charged extra since it probably wouldn't resolve to their mirror.

Comment Re:8.8.8.8 (Score 1) 193

Maybe someone should let Google know that it doesn't work.
nslookup a1.phobos.apple.com 8.8.8.8
Name: a1.da1.akamai.net
Address: 203.106.85.64

tracert 203.106.85.64
7 pos0-3-0.bdr2.nrt1.internode.on.net (203.16.211.6) 180.163 ms 180.985 ms 182.178 ms
8 as4788.ix.jpix.ad.jp (210.171.224.194) 229.548 ms 213.651 ms 214.562 ms
9 * * *
10 203.106.85.64 (203.106.85.64) 230.374 ms 228.848 ms 229.060 ms

nslookup a1.phobos.apple.com
Name: a1.da1.akamai.net
Address: 203.206.129.16
7 te1-4.syd-ult-bdr1.iinet.net.au (203.215.20.31) 77.949 ms 79.208 ms 80.695 ms
8 203-206-129-16.deploy.akamaitechnologies.net (203.206.129.16) 82.029 ms 66.178 ms 66.436 ms

Comment What? (Score 5, Informative) 603

"I can't help wondering just how could a piece of code, which presumable didn't test its' input data for validity before acting on it, become part of a modern jet's onboard software suit?"" - pdcull

What are you? some kind of person that doesn't read the actual articles or documents? Oh wait.. this is slashdot. Here let me copy paste some text for you

If any of the three values deviated from the median by more than a predetermined threshold for more than 1 second, then the FCPC rejected the relevant ADR for the remainder of the flight.

The FCPC compared the three ADIRUs’ values of each parameter for consistency. If any of the values differed from the median (middle) value by more than a threshold amount for longer than a set period of time, then the FCPC rejected the relevant part of the associated ADIRU (that is, ADR or IR) for the remainder of the flight.

So there you go, there actually really was validity checking performed. Multiple times per second in fact, by three separate, redundant systems. Unfortunately all 3 systems had the bug. Here is the concise summary for you:

The FCPC’s AOA algorithm could not effectively manage a scenario where there were multiple spikes such that one triggered a memorisation period and another was present 1.2 seconds later. The problem was that, if a 1.2-second memorisation period was triggered, the FCPCs accepted the next values of AOA 1 and AOA 2 after the end of the memorisation period as valid. In other words, the algorithm did not effectively handle the transition from the end of a memorisation period back to the normal operating mode when a second data spike was present.

Comment Re:this is not reasonable (Score 3, Informative) 108

Wrong. Please read full proposal. Note specifically this section:

3.6 Discovery Notice from ISP to Account Holder

In the event that an Account Holder is sent one Education Notice and [three] Warning Notices, the ISP will match the IP address from its scheme database and then send a Discovery Notice to the Account Holder.

The Discovery Notice will inform the Account Holder that:

  • the Rights Holder may then seek to apply for access to the Account Holders details by way of a preliminary discovery or subpoena application, for the sole purpose of the Rights Holder taking direct copyright infringement action against the Account Holder
  • the ISP will notify the Rights Holder that the Account Holder has apparently failed to address the matters set out in the Notices
  • should the ISP be served with a valid preliminary discovery order (or subpoena) the ISP will be required to comply with the order, which may require the ISP to disclose the Account Holders details to the Rights Holder.

So, in effect, the customer will get 4 warnings, then the ISP will respond to the rights holder, saying this ID number accessed files 4 times. Only then, may the rights holder start a court process to get the name and details of the account holder. Until the time that the court says so, the ISP will not divulge any of their customer details.

Comment Re:Bipartisan support (Score 0) 548

If you are talking Federal Government, then no, that's wrong. A sovereign government issuing it's own currency(fiat) can NEVER become insolvent, run out of money, and it does not need taxes to pay for things. Bill Mitchell says it best:

The orthodox conception is that taxation provides revenue to the government which it requires in order to spend. In fact, the reverse is the truth. Government spending provides revenue to the non-government sector which then allows them to extinguish their taxation liabilities.

Slashdot Top Deals

Thus spake the master programmer: "After three days without programming, life becomes meaningless." -- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"

Working...