Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:Interesting argument (Score 1) 124

Yes, and it was Kevin Martin who classified Cable service as an information service to relieve them from having to open up their networks to all competitors as the telephone companies had been reluctantly doing.

I need a cite for this.

FCC Classifies DSL as Information Service []

BTW, you do realize the cable service is not the same as internet service right? So if you do understand this, I'm not sure we are in disagreement. If not, there is our problem.

In what respect do you believe is cable service different from DSL in this context? And while I do disagree with you in this assertion, I have a somewhat awkward assurance of your error that Kevin Martin also disagrees with you as can be seen in the link I supplied above.

Without it, all that would happen is a little inconvenience and a few companies would have to limit who they sell to or find another way to reach people.

Yes, that entire common carriage thing was such a nuisance what with those regulated utilities having to open up their networks to allow for competition. And we can all see exactly how well this decision has worked our given that most of us here in the US pay more for crappy service than most of the rest of the developed world. And while we're resting on our laurels, let's not forget Comcast, who has achieved the distinction of being recognized as having the worst customer service out of any corporation in our country.

The FCC has basically ignored 47 years of precedence in order to enact some political agenda. Read the filing. It lists all it's supporting evidence near the beginning. It is huge.

Given that the internet, as we think of it today, hasn't been around for 47 years, what are you talking about? In fact, it was the common carriage rules which made it possible for all of those independent ISPs to exists.

On another note, how is it that you can make all these assertions without knowing who Kevin Martin was, what his leadership over the FCC did and what effect it had over this entire process?

Comment Re:Interesting argument (Score 1) 124

I cannot find any reference to Kevin Martin outside of some basketball player for some team I frankly have never heard of before. I couldn't say if you are right or wrong about the creation of the term itself. I can however tell you that the terminology was placed in the telecommunications law (1996) to model after the computers II paper published by the FCC. Before that, it was largely refereed to as enhanced services. I don't know if that is connected or not.

Kevin Martin

Here is the problem. Telecommunications and information services are legally defined.

Yes, and it was Kevin Martin who classified Cable service as an information service to relieve them from having to open up their networks to all competitors as the telephone companies had been reluctantly doing.

But hey, should I be allowed to just come into anything you own and make it for the better without your permission or any specific act or law created by your elected officials?

I think you've got it backwards. This is infrastructure, critical infrastructure, and it needs to be regulated. In fact, it was regulated until an unelected official unilaterally enacted the changes this FCC Chair is trying to reverse. Truth be told, this was a horrific decision and screwed all of us. Now the question of why this isn't a case where we just "come into anything you own and make it for the better without your permission" is because all of these companies use publicly owned properties (rights of ways) to deliver these services. The telephone companies have Central Offices in many of the most expensive zip codes without ever having paid for them or having to pay taxes on those properties. The same for the MSOs (cable companies) who traverse tens of thousands of miles using the rights of ways our utility poles are located on without compensating any of us. Then there's all that money we have given them in the form of tax breaks and subsidies.

First, I think an actual law should be passed instead of unelected appointed officials reversing over 47 years of precedence (the first FCC reference that I know of about computer communications being an enhanced service and not telecommunications is circa 1968) and pushing their own agenda.

Except that the law is already in place and the FCC has been challenged before as to whether it did have the power to make these decision. That power was upheld by the Supreme Court on more than one occasion.

Comment Re:Interesting argument (Score 2) 124

As memory serves, it was Kevin Martin who created the informational service distinction in as far as the current internet is concerned. I believe he did so thinkng that this would allow free enterprise the opportunity to build out our networks to which I would point out has been only partly successful.

And yes, I do see the FCC as "trying to change" the dynamics here so we can agree on that aspect of the discussion.

At the same time, to suggest that the Internet isn't rapidly taking over telecommunication is patently absurd. Next year, the POTS network will likely be scrapped and we have seen times when portions of our telecommunications network has been taken down due to weather incidents leaving people without the ability to call for help when they needed to.

More to the point, we have seen what was once considered to be the gold standard in the world for telecommunications become an embarrassment where one of our larger carriers actually ran advertisements asking "Can you hear me know?" Is this the communications network you believe our country should have?

Where we disagree (apparently) is that I believe the Internet is an infrastructure built for the common good and not as a cash delivery system for commerce. And while I have no issues with people using the net for business (I do so myself) the idea that corporations should have the ability to do whatever their profit margins tell them to do with our net is past absurd as far as I'm concerned.

Comment Protect the children - but not from this or that. (Score 5, Interesting) 381

Kids are getting access to disturbing images, you say? You want to ensure that children are prevented from seeing these kinds of images by passing a law if necessary? But will the children still be able to see people being blown up or otherwise being ripped to shreds during prime time TV? Because otherwise, I'd hate to think we'd be putting people out of work in our "legitimate" entertainment industry.

As an aside, anyone else enjoying the irony in the British government which for decades had gone to great lengths to protect the identity of people they knew were repeatedly sexually assaulting children now claiming that this measure it to protect children? Exactly when will those prosecutions be beginning, Mr Cameron?

Comment Re:Linux Desktop coming in 2015/2016 (Score 1) 737

I think calling Windows and/or Microsoft dead is a bit premature but I do agree with your assessment of what Valve is going to do to them. One of the main reasons people give me as to why they can't leave Windows for Linux is because of gaming. Take away that lock and the Windows installed base will drop.

Let me also point out that Libre Office/Open Office is also seeing wider acceptance. If Microsoft continues to believe that moving different functions from one menu branch to another is an improvement as well as adding features that nobody ever asked for - the revenue generated from Office sales will fade away over time.

Comment WISPA (Score 1) 239

Head on over to WISPA, read through their discussion lists, sign up and introduce yourself. DSLReports also has a WISP forum which is pretty friendly and you would be well-served to check out that resource. Having lived the life you're looking at getting into, License Exempt Wireless is probably the only readily available technology that is within your reach unless you have very deep pockets.

Comment A few thoughts (Score 2) 200

I can see several applications that would make this type of network incredibly useful. Having the ability to distribute situational awareness video in real time would be awesome. This could be useful independently from internet connectivity and a tablet with a decent amount of storage could keep the video for later review. If it were within the budget, wouldn't a head's up display in the firefighters helmet of something built into the brim of a law enforcement officer's hat be pretty slick? The ability to Wifi locate any of your team could also be quite useful. Perhaps more to the point are disasters like Katrina or 9/11, where the telecommunications network may be down for extended periods of time. This kind of backup network could very well be the difference between life and death. If enough of these radios could be dropped in place with solar and battery backup as entire area could be brought back online in a very short period of time. Year's ago there was mention of a completely independent group of license exempt wireless pros forming an instant adhoc network on the the upcoming anniversary of September 11th to drive this exact point home. As a suggestion, you might want to look if the 4.9GHz band in available in your location. Among others, Motorola's Motomesh uses this band. It's clean, licensed for this use, and some Wifi adapters can be switched to work in that band, lowering the cost for equipment. Certainly, challenges exist and need to be worked through but if the opportunity to experiment is presented, why not go for it?

Submission + - Where Is Firefox OS? 1

adeelarshad82 writes: Microsoft's very simple, yet grace concept raises a very big question. The way Microsoft is planning out Windows 8, developers will be able to write one HTML 5 app which will run across every Windows 8 form factor, from desktops to laptops, to ARM netbooks and tablets. Given the concept, if you remove the operating system — or at least make it transparent enough that the browser becomes the platform — then suddenly every piece of software works across every piece of hardware which raises the question that why Mozilla hasn't considered a Firefox OS?
The Almighty Buck

Submission + - Oracle Ignored Facts While Claiming Damages->

sfcrazy writes: Cockburn ignored prior negotiations between Sun and Google in which Google was offered the opportunity to license these and other patents for a fraction of Cockburn's present estimate;

Cockburn ignored other licensing transactions in which Sun licensed these patents for a fraction of Cockburn's present estimate (and these other licensing transactions will almost certainly become a limiting factor on any royalties Oracle may be awarded); and

Cockburn bases his estimate on worldwide sales of Android devices and Google revenue, despite the fact that the devices are made and used (and thus the infringement occurs) outside the U.S. and is not subject to a U.S. patent claim.

All of this serves to indicate that the Cockburn report, while sensational, has little or no bearing on a likely outcome of this case."

Link to Original Source
United States

Submission + - State Dept. Voice Scorns Manning Torture, Resigns-> 4

traindirector writes: U.S. State Department chief spokesman P.J. Crowley resigned today under pressure from the Obama White House after expressing concern about the Department of Defense's excessively harsh treatment of Bradley Manning, the alleged leaker of a significant cache of State Department cables. In response to a question at MIT on Friday regarding the U.S. Government's apparent torture of the soldier, Crowley responded that the harsh handling of Manning was "ridiculous, counterproductive and stupid". He stood by his remarks in his statement of resignation today: 'My recent comments [...] were intended to highlight the broader, even strategic impact of discreet actions undertaken by national security agencies every day and their impact on our global standing and leadership. The exercise of power in today's challenging times and relentless media environment must be prudent and consistent with our laws and values. Given the impact of my remarks, for which I take full responsibility, I have submitted my resignation.'
Link to Original Source

Submission + - Survey: 41% of Facebook Users Total IDiots->

plastick writes: In an experiment, 41% of Facebook users were willing to divulge highly personal information to a complete stranger. This according to IT security firm Sophos, which invited 200 randomly selected Facebookers to befriend a bogus Facebook user named "Freddi Staur" (an anagram of "ID Fraudster"). Of those queried, 87 responded to the invitation, among them 82 people whose profiles included personal information such as their email address, date of birth, address or phone number. In total:
  • 72% of respondents divulged one or more email address
  • 84% listed their full date of birth
  • 87% provided details about their education or workplace
  • 78% listed their current address or location
  • 23% listed their current phone number
  • 26% provided their instant-messaging screen name

Link to Original Source

As of next Thursday, UNIX will be flushed in favor of TOPS-10. Please update your programs.