Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Translation... (Score 1) 183

by jellomizer (#47918597) Attached to: WSJ Reports Boeing To Beat SpaceX For Manned Taxi To ISS

The Government Bidding process for services is corrupt by design.
You can make bid for service.
Then you have stipulations which weigh it in a companies favor, not because they are required for the job, but to write the contract for the company.

I have seen State Bids for services for a Web Site. Which has odd requirements, such as 20+ years in COBOL, 10+ Years in RPG, 3 Years of HTML, 2 Years of ASP.NET
When you see these contracts you know they are for a particular person they want to keep on board.

Comment: Re:You mean... (Score 1) 225

by Archangel Michael (#47917623) Attached to: AT&T Proposes Net Neutrality Compromise

QOS doesn't give any stream preferential treatment. QOS guarantees certain level of bandwidth at all times for certain streams. Typically, it is reserved for things like VOIP where buffering causes issues. I don't think Netflix is deserving of QOS, but rather it deserves better guaranteed base because it can adjust with larger buffers, taking care of intermittent studdering due to temporary spikes in bandwidth usage.

The problem here, is that total aggregate bandwidth is simply being manipulated at peering points due to greedy ISPs like Comcast and AT&T. The congestion at peering points is simply a means to an end, and Comcast (et al) are taking advantage of stupid consumers. I can assure you that both Netflix (and similar) and the ISPs know exactly where the problem lies, AND how to solve it. And seeing what Netfix has offered the ISPs in terms of peering, and the lack of acceptance by the ISPs, the problem lies with ISPs and only ISPs.

Netflix has capacity, the ISPs have Capacity, but they can't agree on peering, which is simply the bridging of the two capacities. And knowing that they both have Routers in the same COLO facility with capacity, but the fiber connection between the two routers is missing, due to ISPs unwillingness to play fairly, is criminal.

From what I've heard, Netflix is willing to buy Comcast the router, fiber and all the bits needed to add additional peering bandwidth, and Comcast has refused, instead is trying to bully Netflix. Netflix needs to put up advertising "don't blame us" with a simplified version of what is happening. 30 Seconds is all it will take.

Comment: Re:Negotiation (Score 1) 225

by Impy the Impiuos Imp (#47916981) Attached to: AT&T Proposes Net Neutrality Compromise

Here's my solution: AT&T can have their fast lanes and extort Netflix, but the. top of their monthly bill has to print "Of your $10/month Netflix bill, we are extorting from them $2 (or whatever) a month or we will slow them down. Also, we told you a particular speed for you in your contract with us but we are miserable, fraudulent liars."

Comment: Re:What I like ... errrm, respect about Apples Swi (Score 1) 171

by jellomizer (#47916927) Attached to: Why Apple Should Open-Source Swift -- But Won't

My main issue is we are entering a post desktop world. (No the desktop isn't dyeing, but it isn't the center of our computing world)
So we need the following.
1. A platform to create moble apps.
2. Being able to create these apps on different systems.

It is actually very lame to have to have a Mac to build an iOS app. You really should be able to do it on at least the Big three OS Windows,Mac,Linux. Because we are not desktop centrist anymore and people will go around with different Desktops and OS's freely.

Comment: Writing code isn't always fun. (Score 4, Interesting) 51

by jellomizer (#47916855) Attached to: Industry-Based ToDo Alliance Wants To Guide FOSS Development

The biggest issue with a lot of of the home grown Open Source Apps, is getting past the dreaded 80% complete mark.
This is the point in the program where all the interesting proof of concepts and interesting algorithms are all set. However that last 20% is a lot of the detail fine tuning that really puts all the pieces in play.
This last 20% mark when it no longer becomes fun, is where the project looses steam and sometimes dies off.
Having a company putting money towards development with management and direction and all those MBA Buzzwords basically means we push the developers to get that last 20% done.
But of course if they are pushing to get that set done, and are putting in resources to help that, it is going to be their vision of 20% not necessary yours.

I know a lot of the Open Source people have this Anti-Corporate everything mind set... However to make it in the world there needs other sources of motivation other then just feeling good.

Comment: Re:Never been a fan of multiplayer. (Score 1) 271

by Impy the Impiuos Imp (#47916357) Attached to: The Growing Illusion of Single Player Gaming

> At least before voice chat you could close the text box or put it out of your
> mind. Now, if I decided to partake, I'd have to deal with 8-year-olds telling
> me how they fucked my mother in the ass and how she moaned

How would an 8 year old kn...say, what's your mother's address anyway?

Comment: Re:Remind me of Quake 3 (Score 1) 271

by Impy the Impiuos Imp (#47916301) Attached to: The Growing Illusion of Single Player Gaming

Eh, Quake II single player had jumped the shark anyway, abandoning the fantasy monster model for a dreary grey-and-brownmetal sci-fi affair. Screw up the cool grappling hook so it's a mealey-mouthed humming POS. Get rid of rocket jumping because it's "wrong", then half-assedly add it back under protest with a hack rather than it falling out naturally from the physics. Turn the grenade launcher grenade from a cool thing that bonk bonk bonked around into a horrible orange sweet potato that bounced precisely twice then stopped for "easier placement".

Whoever was in charge obviously got lucky with Quake I in spite of their best efforts.

Bringing computers into the home won't change either one, but may revitalize the corner saloon.