They got to a search engine, but it was Yahoo!
They got to a search engine, but it was Yahoo!
1/6 of the downstream traffic and 1/3 of the upstream traffic is impactful on an ISP network
Maybe I missed it, where are those numbers coming from?
Also, let's say it is 1/6th or even 1/3rd of the traffic, that doesn't say anything about the capacity.
because it consumes resources that would otherwise be available for other uses
Ignoring the distinction between traffic and capacity, your argument is "if the traffic wasn't being used for what the subscribers wanted to use it for, it could be used for..." what exactly?
and/or requires the ISP to invest in additional infrastructure to prevent that traffic impacting other uses.
Yes, ISPs need to invest in infrastructure to ensure the service level they sell meets the real world wants and needs of the customers they sell it to. And the problem here is? Seems like the fundamentals of running a business to me...
You appear to come from a world that has infinite speed zero latency networks. Welcome to Earth, where we have an internet that requires switches, routers, fibre optics and complex networking.
Ooohhh, it's "complex". Better stop applying independent thought processes and follow the narrative then, like you have.
How exactly is torrent traffic impactful on an ISP network? they're just routing packets around (okay, maybe you need a larger routing table?), it's the nodes that have to do most of the work. Unless they're using carrier-grade NAT, in which case get IPv6 working you lazy b*s.
Also, looking forward to seeing http encapsulated VPNs!
T-Mobile Unlimited plans work like this:
* You can use as much data on your cellphone as you want
* However, there is a limit as to how much data you can use with tethered devices
To be fair to T-Mobile, they make this really clear in their plans. People then install software to bypass the tethering limit by manipulating the tether to look like data from the cell phone.
There is nothing sketchy about what T-Mobile is doing here.
I had the same initial reaction, but realistically I spend so much time on Android/Chrome/Google Docs/GMail/etc. already that avoiding OnHub will do nothing to stop Google knowing far too much about me. In many ways my phone is more sensitive than my router.
My bigger worry is that Google will add whatever features it wants whenever it wants, and who knows how much control we'll have over any of it. Maybe they'll even start sharing your bandwidth to support things like Google Fi. What I've noticed through Android and all the supporting apps is Google just does whatever shit they want to. They don't even particularly seem to care if you like it, even if you're stuck with it for a long time, so long as it supports some long term goal they have, that they might not have even disclosed.
So, if you're willing to spend $200 - the price of a high-end consumer router - to get some nice tech but be at the whim of Google, then maybe this is for you.
... is on one hand the AV companies are flagging PUA, while on the other hand offering toolbars and search changes of their own at every opportunity. Effectively they are doing what they can to force their own search on users and then flagging anything that might change it, a very shady position if you ask me.
Of course, in JS I'm sure there are a lot of ugly hacks due to ugly browsers. Naming no names, but you know, ones that can be used to explore the internet.
I just took a shit. It was kind of average as far as shits go. Maybe it's front-page material now though?
This isn't as unusual as it sounds, Deep Blue always plays this way!
Did you read the first sentence of the summary? Or that the game was being analyzed in an iPhone app?
The fact some program that can change the UAC settings is pretty huge example of why Windows has issues separating userspace from root space. It just simply can't do it right. Who's brilliant idea at Microsoft was it to provide any sort of API that can let any program (besides the control panel widget that lets you adjust UAC settings) adjust UAC settings?
I hope you realize what you are saying here is the equivalent of a Linux user saying "The fact that some program can change permissions after I launched it as root is an example of a huge security hole. Whose brilliant idea was it to provide any sort of mechanism that can let any program I run as root do things a user who is root can do?".
This is an example of why UAC exists, in fact: A program that is not UAC elevated could not change your UAC settings (if you hadn't turned them off already).
Yes, a component in an admin context may not be accessible to a component used by user in a non-admin context. This is called a "security" model, and prevents the non - admin process manipulating the admin-context process to do things it shouldn't be able to do. You make it sound like a quirk, but the entire design is that "non elevated components can't talk to elevated components". Try starting Notepad as admin and dropping a text file on it from the non - elevated explorer view, it won't work by design.
Wrong. Many people, including myself, bought their device directly from Google, and Google themselves create and release the updates for these devices. You can install factory images directly from Google or wait for the over-thr-air updates.
I believe there are also carriers modified versions. For example, I think T-Mo has Nexus devices with proprietary WiFi calling added. In those cases then yes, the carrier must manage the update. Nexus program guidelines suggest how quickly carriers must release such updates.
Nevertheless, many people are on the Google-direct update train.
Google are really hit and miss with updates. They don't offer pre-releases to enthusiasts like they ought to (a pre-5.0 build was an exception and that's only because they were changing the runtime out and literally had to do it for dev support). They announce releases then don't roll them out to their most popular devices for weeks/months, and they release fix versions that don't address some of the worst bugs.
I like Android but my biggest gripe is not being in control of my own updates. When Apple announces a new OS everyone can get it. When Google announces a new OS you better pray you can get it a month later, and that the bug fix version won't be three months behind. That's if your device manufacturer even supports the update.
Corruption is not only a problem when someone actually dies.
Whole device encryption is pretty well handled in Android.
Yes, but it's also useless if you install a compromised app or e.g. a browser-based exploit is leveraged against you or you want to protect a file in transit over the wire and not rely solely on things like SSL.
You need to use the right tool for the job, and while the tool mentioned is obviously the equivalent of a comedy foam hammer, there are legitimate reasons to want to use something other than FDE to protect a file in many situations.
10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0.