After calling Microsoft technical support many times today, it is obvious they had no clue how many legitimate users No-IP has. They were completely unprepared for the calls to restore service and they were given no information about No-IP. Many times I was referred to their legal and corporate affairs office (425-706-7863). They don't know anything either. Eventually I was transfered to some Azure department where I was told they would offer to sell me a replacement service.
Wow! You would think that if this was a real problem it would have been reported, and killed the network, sometime since it was first deployed in 2006. How is it they've managed to operate all this time without being hindered by the problem you mention?
In space no one can hear you gurgle.
The same happens here. Our officers do most everything on MDT so radio communication is very light. They really do use cell phones for anything sensitive. They also have played with Skype calls on MDT's (but that's usually to talk about wives and girlfriends). Cop to cop meetings along dark sections of road are still the best way to communicate so even the boss doesn't hear.
These idiot "watchdogs" who think they're keeping an eye on local government by listening to their scanner have no clue. They are missing maybe 80% of what's going on. Our cops play with them on a routine basis. The cops know who's listening, they appreciate their audience. So when they do use the radio, they made that choice from several communication options. The end result is that these "watchdogs" are totally suckered in. They should be suspicious of what they do hear, not what they don't.
But a dish made for a 47 MHz wide chunk of the 2 GHz spectrum Dish is allocated would be.....the same size as the one they currently use.
The fact that Clearwire has 133 MHz of bandwidth does not mean that their bandwidth is centered on 133 MHz. It means that they have a 133 MHz wide allocation centered somewhere in the 2 GHz region. Your airplanes are safe from them.
Don't you mean a syfy corridor?
"No, it was about economics, the same as most of the rest of the wars."
How could that possibly be? For the last eight years we've been told that all wars are fought over oil.
Tell your boss that you're interested in relieving him of this hassle. Offer to buy this portion of the business from him, work together on the terms.
The he won't have to worry about bandwidth issues and you can make a few extra bucks while offering quality service to your customers.
Frank Zappa would have had some fun with this.
It reminds me of when Joe gets out of prison and finds that all music is illegal. He's left to imagine guitar solos in his head...but even imagining music is illegal.
This "Guild" will have us doing something like that one day. Perhaps there will be rights that must be purchased to even imagine the story in your mind. Reading is one thing but to imagine....well, that costs extra.
"...go buy a japanese super-mini..."
With what money? Even if you can get credit in today's economy, is that such a wise thing to do?
Although you might get a few more MPG from a new vehicle, why scrap a perfectly good vehicle that you own? In the end you simply alter your life so you require more money to pay for your financing. That requirement is met by you having to work more. And that requirement is often met by you needing to travel more thereby consuming more fuel and doing more damage to the environment.
So if someone has a 13 year old car, like mine, which is more fuel efficient than most new cars on the market, Singapore punishes the owner for this?
Your government seems to be encouraging the disposal of cars as quick as possible. This can't possibly be efficient from an economic or environmental point of view. Worse yet, it encourages the production of cars that are "disposable" rather than something safe, sturdy and as a good long term investment.
I see your Singapore model as the perfect example of what is wrong with the automotive industry, government regulation of that automotive industry and transportation.
I am in the US and own, for all intents and purposes, a European car. My 1996 Ford Contour differs little from the Mondeo they sold at the time in Europe. So the manufacturers could, and did sell the same car in multiple locations. VW did this with the beetle for ages.
It's a good thing for me too. Because my "ancient" car gets 33+MPG on the highway, is well maintained and in good shape, I wouldn't consider trading it in. Most new cars I've looked aren't nearly as efficient. Even as my maintenance costs rise with the age of the vehicle, I'm still paying less than I would for a new car, even with some freshly printed government credit.
Ford did a great job with that car. If/when I have finally run this car to the end of it's life, I'll be looking for another car that was designed to be sold worldwide. I'll avoid cars that are created to squeak by a single governments restrictions.
Rather than changing the "styling" of their models every year, manufacturers should get lean and efficient. Changes should only be made to advance the state of the art, to improve safety and efficiency. Manufacturers would then cut their costs. Consumers would have to pay less, if they can learn to quit buying based on style. I believe there are environmental benefits to this as well.
That said, Ford should bring back the Mondeo/Contour. VW should make a few improvements to that little air cooled four banger and bring back the beetle.