No, it would imply there is no contextual reason for the link.
Even if you saturated the available 2.4GHz and 5GHz spectrum you'd be lucky to even come close to 1gbps total throughput for all the wireless devices with 2 AP's and that would mostly come from 802.11ac devices on 5GHz.
The pfsense box would presumably be your router so it wouldn't be using any bandwidth itself. If you're trying to say it would be acting as a server then your ISP would have a talk with you if it used any significant traffic.
So that leaves the main computer which isn't going to get 9Gbps from anywhere accept maybe torrents but again they will likely have a problem if you leave it saturated for long.
Residential fiber still comes with typical residential restrictions. Even 1gbps residential connections are sold under the expectation that it will be dormant the majority of time but that when you do use it you will be able to burst as high as the server will provide in most cases.
Most top websites are just running large arrays of cheap hardware behind load balancers and the majority of websites are on shared/virtual hosting. The problem with ultra-fast residential connections is that most servers can't saturate it.
Assuming that you connect to servers that can saturate it, SATA3 is only 6Gbps so it would actually have more throughput than a typical SSD but your latency would be much higher.
How many residential customers even have a nic capable of 10Gbps? My guess is that the >10Gbps residential service is primarily for apartment complexes.
There is no indication of unit confusion prior to your post.
If we play a match of FIFA 2015 there will be absolutely no question as to who the winner is.
Really? What happens if they encounter a bug in the game, especially one previously unknown publicly? What happens if there is a technical problem (mouse stops working, blue screen, fried GPU, etc.)? Even in esports there are circumstances where a person has to make a judgement call. They try their best to reduce those situations with clearly defined rules but when they try to be perfectly strict like KeSPA did in the past then it causes resentment from fans and players alike for being too unreasonable.
Why do I always lose mod points just when I want to actually use them...
That patents are hindering innovation.
It only hinders innovation at companies too small to make these deals. Remember that next time you hear we need patents to protect the mythical lone inventor.
This is so true. Large companies cross license all the time just to end silly patent wars between each other and then sue the shit out of all the small guys or buy them up. When companies reach certain sizes they do whatever they want, if they get told it's illegal then they just change the laws but they don't get punished.
Pretty much anything that needed elevated privileges would fail to run even if you were running on an admin account and gave UAC permission. Even my TV recordings failed while the update was applied and at first I thought it was my video driver update that I did just before manually allowing windows update to install the patch. Because I had manually installed it, I did not automatically get the removal patch and had no idea wtf was going on until I dug through several posts about driver installation problems (that I did not have) to finally find that it was wrecking far more than just driver installation.
Higher encoded bit depths can actually lower file size at a given quality or increase quality at a given filesize regardless if you are outputting at a lower depth.
TLDR: Even though the dit depth is higher, it allows for more of the junk information to be thrown out while keeping more of the important data.
Blocking and banding are very problematic in JPEG and the easiest way to fix it is to just raise the bit depth which is probably why they added 12bit to JPEG 9.1 earlier this year.
It's bad for users but it is neutral to the data as long as you aren't purposely forcing routes to only use that link.
ISPs are forcing Netflix to only use saturated links. Although to be less cynical, it's possible that Netflix is forced there not by explicit policy but because the links haven't been upgraded in ten years.
Peering contracts make it impossible for the public to have any clue what is actually going on with the saturated links since the contracts are secret. Caching servers are a good way to reduce traffic on the backbone links but giving them directly to ISP's is a bad thing for neutrality because the ISP's then get to pick and choose who they accept hardware from or get flooded with hardware from everyone. Competition in Europe has produced a much better ecosystem with many ISP's to choose from and lots of exchanges where they can connect to each other easily and cheaply.
It has lost all of the original meaning and has become a buzzword with a generic "don't do things that I don't like" meaning. Look at all the Netflix shakedowns for instance. Is it neutral for ISP's to accept a caching server from Netflix? Not unless they would be willing to take servers from everybody else. Is it neutral to leave a link saturated? It's bad for users but it is neutral to the data as long as you aren't purposely forcing routes to only use that link. Does anyone care what neutrality is in this case? No, they just want Netflix to be faster.
We're never going to get anywhere by trying to put a bandaid on our current ISP clusterfuck in America. If we want real change then we have to break up the monopolies again and split the physical infrastructure from the service providers. We need competition in order to fix the plethora of problems with ISP's which go far beyond whatever version of "net neutrality" you believe in.
If you don't know what a netmask is, you shouldn't be able to pass CCNA (though could get an MCSE or RHCE). I was just chatting with a server admin here and they don't know the difference between a switch and router (almost all switches are L-3 switches, and almost all routers will bridge ports, so is there a difference?).
The functionality can be very similar and the lines are increasingly blurred but the key difference is that switches have ASIC's to do the majority of the work while routers have general purpose processors that do most of the work.
It says (video) in the title so that's fair warning but they ought to switch over to html5 video tag so that it could actually load on mobile and other platforms without flash.
I'm just waiting for the day when they figure out how to record sound properly.
No this is Google favoring new standards before some browsers are quite ready for it. Firefox supports 60fps if the video is encoded in WebM (VP9) which only happens on Youtube if it has enough views to warrant encoding it in additional formats. Mozilla is still working on Media Source Extensions and MPEG-DASH support which is needed to play back h.264@60fps but afaik it should be in FF36 although it's not ready yet in nightly 36 builds.
Google could have added support in the Flash player but why would they put in the effort for a fairly novel feature when they are trying to replace flash with HTML5? In a few months every browser will support the HTML5 features and nobody will remember this story.
Would you pay to round up all the trolls into troll internment camps that have no internet access so that nobody could troll you on the internet or IRL anymore?