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


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:So it runs Doom ? (Score 4, Insightful) 92

by cp5i6 (#47911217) Attached to: Canon Printer Hacked To Run <em>Doom</em> Video Game
You're missing the point.

It's connected to the net. check. It's got enough cpu power to run a proper app. check. It's got no security. check. It's got enough storage for a decently sized program. check.

You know what the next logical step is?

installing DDoS zombies on these printers.

Comment: Re:Correlation is not causation (Score 1) 175

acutally i like this example if you were looking at a case where

a bully beats up a kid and takes his money
the mom feels bad and gives more money back.

the causation case is that when the bully beats up the kid, he gets more money.

without knowing what the mom is doing there is no real correlation (ie, you can't say that everytime a kid gets beaten, a kid gets more money), only that there is causation of one to the other. If however, the mom is known, then you can say that everything this kid gets beaten, this kid will get more money because the mom gives it to him. In which case, yes the cause is related to its correlation.

Comment: Re:Correlation is not causation (Score 1) 175


low income and low test scores have been shown to be a strong correlation with some studies showing a causative factor.

low income and not being able to afford premium services is a definitive causality of one to the other

The correlation is the ACT test scores to premium internet services unless as someone pointed out, the internet was being used to cheat on the ACTs, in which case it becomes causative.

Comment: I think people are really missing the point (Score 1) 390

by cp5i6 (#47485489) Attached to: Verizon's Accidental Mea Culpa

Netflix already pays verizon for DIRECT connection to its customers Netflix did not pay verizon for its interconnect via Level3.
Verizon is basicaly saying that Netflix routes alot of traffic through Level3 (probably because they're cheaper) instead of via their direct verizon line.
Level 3 is saying that the pipe between Verizon backbone and L3 backbone is where the bandwidth gets clogged.
take out verizon and insert (I'm fairly positive) every single US ISP, and I'm pretty sure you'll hear teh exact same story. L3 will probably blame all the ISPs for their lack of bandwidth interconnecting them. And all the other US isps will say, they're not the issue because their internal networks aren't close to full saturation.
So the real question at hand is, who really should pay for upgrading the capacity between the tier 1 interconnects.
Sounds like there was a handshake agreement between the companies originally. This handshake probably didn't include a late comer like level3.

I would argue that if l3 approached these companies and said, we'll install the cards AND maintain these connections on L3's bill, everything will get resolved.

Ie. L3 is pretty much saying, sure we're tryign to compete with you big ISPs, and we're gaining customers to your detriment on the Inet tier1 space, but we can't seem to maintain our client base if you guys at the last mile/end point don't increase your bandwidth with us.

The 6 other major ISPs are saying to the content providers, why bother using L3, sign up with our own t1 bandwidth and we can provide to your customers directly a great service.

Comment: Re:I was born in the wrong era... (Score 1) 163

by cp5i6 (#43899077) Attached to: Managing an Elite eSport Team
You are clearly mistaken

and has been proven that it is entirely possible with today's technology to walk down near every path of a chess game. "Thinking" in this case is merely a parlor trick of computation power of decision trees.

As OP posted, if a computer can play a proper game of Go against an expert, then i'd be impressed.

But until then, his comment is pretty spot on.

Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes. -- Dr. Warren Jackson, Director, UTCS