Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
What's the story with these ads on Slashdot? Check out our new blog post to find out. ×

Comment Re:Also the Solution to the Last Mile Problem? (Score 1) 159

As for unbundling layer 2 & 3 service*, most areas don't do that - I get ALL my phone service, including long distance, from the local phone company. I don't rent the pipes then pay to have water delivered from a different company, nor with the electric company. I view it as an efficiency thing - is the added competition over layer 3 providers going to improve provision of service more than the efficiency of the local cooperative providing everything? Personally, my thought is that the latter will be more efficient.

The phone service thing is your choice. Unbundled long distance has been a thing in the US for decades, so just because you choose to use the ILEC doesn't make it a good example of something "most areas don't do." With regard to water, I don't know anywhere that offers infrastructure + service provider, so score one for you--but for electricity, the state of Texas DOES do things thing way. We're opening a new office in Houston, and we had nine different companies bid to offer us electrical service, all with different rates (and generation types. If you want to pay more for green power, you can actually do that and be sure that it's going to the wind farm or whatever instead of being sleight-of-handed away). All in all, I was fairly impressed by the whole thing, and I think it's a GREAT model for broadband.

The sad thing is we had this model for DSL two decades ago, but the FCC killed it.

Comment Re:They aren't being sued? (Score 1) 159

You'll be quite happy you posted AC, since you appear to have suffered a major reading comprehension fail: the GP was talking about Longmont, Colorado, where TFA is talking about Salisbury, North Carolina.

I don't know if the claim is true or not (nor do I really care) but righteously calling someone a propaganda spreading cave dweller is really uncalled for in any circumstances, much less when you're doing so from a position of false knowledge.


Comment Re:Actually great UX for everyone else (Score 1) 259

Costco is where you go once a month to buy things cheaply. You don't go to Costco because you're running low on toilet paper. Going to Costco is a planned, methodical, activity that involves making an inventory, determining what will need replacement soon, building a list, viewing the special offers, and then visiting the store.

For you it is. For some people, not so much.

Comment Re:Tough environments (Score 1) 168

I've seen RAID groups fail sort of violently (granted in some tough environments) where one disk crashed and so did the others next two it. Three out of five disks in a RAID 5 gone. Only option was backup. How would any filesystem survive that?

It is not the responsibility of the file system to maintain data integrity in the face of catastrophic failure of the underlying storage hardware.

Comment Re:Always figured it was a honeypot (Score 1) 144

An excellent argument on your part, and your point is well taken.

That said, I'll counter with the idea that your analogy (as all analogies are) is flawed. A more appropriate analogy would be the police leaving the bait car, with the keys in the ignition, the engine running, and a giant sign on it saying, "free car." I think there's a very important distinction between creating the opportunity for a theft to occur (as the police are) and actively encouraging it as a studio or their agent using a honeypot would be. "Please, please, download this movie" is a far cry from an anonymous vehicle in a parking lot.

Comment Re:Demand segmentation 101 (Score 1) 379

Your argument above is easily disproven:

Go to expedia, and price a flight leaving on thursday and returning on friday. Price another flight leaving on the same thursday and returning the next friday. Same route, same airline, same flight number, but one has an intervening saturday.

Example (I did not cherry pick, this was my first attempt): LGA -> IAH on Delta, leaving Sept 3rd, returning Sept 4th: $1,114.20. Leaving Sept 3rd, Returning Sept 11th, $276.20. Lest you think this date may be less attractive to flyers, I chose a return date of Sept 10th, and it was $10 cheaper. Lest you think the Thursday flight from IAH to LGA is less desirable, I chose same day flights, and it was $1,108.60.

This is not a case of directing passengers to flights for load, scheduling, or any other reason other than the perception (likely correct) that the out and back flyer is a business traveler, and likely less price sensitive as a result.

Please note that I am not taking a position on whether or not this is "right" or "wrong," only rebutting the argument that this is some kind of supply/demand issue. It's not, it's price shaping, pure and simple.

Comment Re:Always figured it was a honeypot (Score 1) 144

I don't know about anyone else, but Popcorn Time seems like a trap to me. Make a program that using bit torrent to share the movies between it's users. Let it run for a few years. Start testing the waters will a small lawsuit against a few users. If that succeeds, then use the info you gathered over the last few years to bring a lot of lawsuits against a lot of people.

Laches[1] and, probably, estoppel would apply, the former because the studio waited years to bring a claim despite having the knowledge of an issue for that whole time, and did nothing to prevent it, and estoppel because it's hard to argue that your movie is being pirated when you yourself are the one distributing it across bittorrent.

[1] - Laches may not apply, as the Supreme Court recently eviscerated it with regard to copyright law. That decision did not, however, touch on file sharing, and the reasoning used would be really hard to apply to a file sharing case ("we waited until the lawsuit was worth it" doesn't really work when the person you are suing will never, ever be able to afford to pay the statutory damages).

Comment Re:Demand segmentation 101 (Score 1) 379

Airlines do this all the time. They charge more for last minute purchases or travel over holidays even though the customer is getting the same service -- moving them from point to point. Why? Because they can!!

Because there are fewer seats available at the last minute. When supply goes down, prices go up. Also, there is greater demand over holidays, so again prices go up.

This is true in general, but you're ignoring that airlines absolutely tailor fares based on who you are to maximize revenue, regardless of a route's capacity or load. If your travel pattern indicates that you are a "business flyer" your ticket will absolutely be more expensive than would otherwise be the case (for look at pricing on a round trip flight that does not have a Saturday in the middle of your itinerary, vs one that does. Same flights, same days even, but if you don't stay on Saturday, the ticket is significantly more expensive).

Comment Re:QA process? (Score 1) 234

It didn't get caught in testing because testing is by far the most expensive and time-consuming part of the development process, and is always the first thing to get cut/trimmed/"streamlined". Just like it has been forever.

While what you say is, sadly, how the world actually works, the above should never occur with safety critical systems. "We'll fix the bugs in production" is absolutely unacceptable when your possible failure modes include dead people and hundreds of millions of dollars in damage.

Comment Re:Inject adds in my pron? (Score 1) 278

I do not disagree with your reasoning, or the reasoning of the poster you are replying to. However, the question was "explain to me how Google will MITM my https connection to amazon?" rather than "why would Google, since they have so much to lose?"

As such, neither reply is actually a rebuttal of what I said--it WOULD be child's play for them to do so, regardless of whether or not they would want to.

Comment Re:Inject adds in my pron? (Score 2) 278

Paranoia is strong with you today. Explain to me how a Google router will MITM attack my HTTPS connection to Amazon.com when I am entering my credit card #?

In the case we're discussing, you've actually placed a hardware device on your network, with them in complete control of the firmware, that all of your traffic gets routed through. It is child's play, since your browser (regardless of which browser you use) already trusts their certificates, for them to proxy whatever the hell they want to. Unless you're religious about looking at certificates (or happen to notice that a site you would expect an EV cert from doesn't indicate such in your browser (green address bar, or whatever)) then it's doubtful you'll even notice anything is wrong.

See "DPL-SSL" for an example of how this would work in practice.

"Bond reflected that good Americans were fine people and that most of them seemed to come from Texas." - Ian Fleming, "Casino Royale"