Hey, blackC0pter: How much would I have to pay you to configure 2 more of these routers (like your in-laws') for me? $200?
Totally serious, please contact me at creeble at yahoo dot com if you get this; I don't know
The last paragraph of this article ( from *2002*: http://www.shirky.com/writings/domain_names.html ) says it best:
"There are no pure engineering solutions here, because this is not a pure engineering problem. Human interest in names is a deeply wired characteristic, and it creates political and legal issues because names are genuinely important. In the 4 years since its founding, ICANN has moved from being merely unaccountable to being actively anti-democratic, but as reforming or replacing ICANN becomes an urgent problem, we need to face the dilemma implicit in namespaces generally: Memorable, Global, Non-political -- pick two."
So please, let's quit with all this talk about "replacing" the DNS. Get real, kids.
However, an Air Force Institute of Technology study [dtic.mil] seems to indicate that simulated Iridium end-to-end latency works out, on average, to 178 ms...
You misread the report. That's modeled with 36 failed satellites.
485 miles is a lot closer than 22,236 miles.
Yes, my 9500 handset is large, with a huge phallic antenna. Yes, minutes are expensive ($1.49). But I have coverage where literally nobody else does. That's what it's for.
No, the business plan worked as designed. Motorola conceived Iridium as a way to sell a lot of equipment, for which they made a huge profit, while at the same time they had very little financial stake in Iridium actually succeeding.
That's utterly incorrect. Motorola lost about three $billion on Iridium: http://www.heavens-above.com/iridiumdemise.asp
Understanding is always the understanding of a smaller problem in relation to a bigger problem. -- P.D. Ouspensky