Is this just static building up along the lining, or is there actual photonic/electrical conversion going on?
There's a sufficient amount of "shit happens" that isn't benign neglect, rather the pernicious pursuit of profits without examining consequences, and they're huge.
Jail is forensic. This poster needs solutions. Are there filtration methodologies available? Ways of mitigating the pollutants? Something learned from tech fab by products that can help solve the problem? PHBs are now after the fact. Cool heads and geek examinations are what's needed. My advice: find a recovery methodology financed by the sale of assets or Crown Lands so as to rapidly build the infrastructure necessary to stanch the flow. How? With what? Good questions.
Should you try to take an objective view of 1080i, p, 720i, p, and rate them with a high quality source media, some eyes will notice the difference, dramatically. 1080i rarely delivers a poorer raster than 720anything, and it's usually under extreme circumstances like poor tuner re-rasterizing/conversion often inside a poorly designed tuner.
The gradients are subtle, but the differences in bandwidth utilization, when you're cramming a thousand+ channel allocations into copper cable can be obviously stark-- when compared to high quality media sources playing on decent quality ATSC-equipped TVs.
But it's not HDTV. It's EDTV, as in Enhanced Definition. ATSC can be a transport, but that doesn't make this sow's ear into a silk purse.
I realize this. 720p is the lowest upgrade to NTSC. This is what Comcast shot for. Everyone must upgrade, and they get the minimum.
When you rent or buy a 1080p(or i) and player to watch a video, after having seen the same in 720, the difference makes people go crazy. They feel robbed. That's how I feel. This isn't a screed about customer service, monopolies, etc. It's about resolution, and Comcast and others are delivering the bare bottom media.
Not so frivolous.
This sort of deception is endemic. Comcast/xFinity creeps most "HD-TV" down to 720p. Not HD in my mind. If Sony says: 1080p, and they lied, then the litigation seems warranted to me. Usually vendors bury this stuff under the rug.
After drilling down to the article, this one, should it work (big if) would burn down existing spent fuel rods by squeezing more energy from fission reactions. It would therefore have a huge amount of already-a-problem fuel to decontaminate even further.
It's said to use uranium or thorium as a fuel source. Indeed it could fuel the expense of your desalinizing plant and conceptually a helluva lot more in a package that's much smaller that shuts itself down safely in the event of failures. So, IN THEORY, no Chernobyls etc because no contaminated water to escape.
A good judge would take action against the prosecutors for any number of varying reasons, and the one that I would pick would be: vexation.
Hey- Google does this, and legally, and gets child porn emails!
The ends always justify the means. That's what the world has come to.
Rule of law? Holders of the gold filigreed rulers get the law, it would seem.
You don't get it.
You can put these on isolated segments, VLANs, whatever but importantly: wherever in the system you want to attract the bees.
So long as it can send even one "ouch" packet, it's done its job, saved your ass, and saved you hours looking through even great syslog managers to find symptoms of internal infections.
Do they cost? Not much. Aren't VMs cooler to use? No, because you want them randomly everywhere, not just in your VM farms. Yes, VM honeypots are a great idea. No, you can't simply put them in a dev pool or out in the cubes. But you *can* put a pie anywhere your network has a connection, and your switch ports allow admittance. Hint.
Sadly, sedition would be vilified. Look at Mr Snowden. Enemy of the state, now exiled in Moscow. He's one of many, and as there are no controls, and the game of extortion is played at the highest level like a bad poker game, the chances of clarity, openness, and even "just the right thing" are nil.
Martyrdom doesn't work with 72 virgins, and it doesn't work when corporate America controls the press-- especially Murdoch. Who has the WSJ by the printing press short-hairs? None other. Most of us just duck low, shaking our heads.
Some people get a lifestyle choice with ACA coverage that's impossible without the ACA: they can breathe.
Others might remove that choice. There's a civics lesson there. If you're talking about covering people with HIV, or who were smokers, then please charge admission for the times when you walk on water. I genuflect.
Your dignity sold. What every ad man wants. Everyone has their price, and the price is frighteningly small.
Verizon already gets LBS, GPS, WiFi, and other info from most phones unless users go to fiendish depth with Snoopwall and other products to stanch the data flow. I'm wondering WHY they're asking for permission. Seems ludicrous to do so when everyone's already giving it up for free. Making it legit?
Legit like net neutrality? Legit like stonewalling their clientele? Doesn't make sense.
Nah. They put MPLS logic-- deterministic routing by knowing the domain into an algorithm that optimizes time slots, too.
All the hosts are know, their time costs, and how much crap they jam into wires. It's pretty simple to typify what's going on, and where the packet parking lots are. If you have sufficient paths and bandwidth in and among the hosts, you resolve the bottlenecks.
This only works, however, if and when the domain of hosts has sufficient aggregate resources in terms of path availability among the hosts. Otherwise, it's the classic crossbar problem looking for a spot marked ooops, my algorithm falls apart when all paths are occupied.
Certainly it's nice to optimize and there's plenty of room for algorithms that know how to sieve the traffic. But traffic is random, and pathways limited. Defying the laws of physics will be difficult unless you control congestion in aggregate from applications where you can make the application become predictable. Only then, or you have a crossbar matrix, will there be no congestion. For any questions on this, look to the Van Jacobsen algorithms and what the telcos had to figure out, eons ago.
The throttling began long ago, when we let carriers give us asymmetrical connections, e.g. (ex:) 80% download and 20% upload. This is how FIOS, and many other schemes will come unraveled. Upload speed is important if for this fact: pooling web services is now done via ISPs/MSPs and other data centers, instead of a distributed pattern of symmetrically-supplied carriers-- like your own home. It requires us to host our stuff at ISPs, and even more-- if you're delivering streaming content-- via specialized providers called content delivery networks/CDNs, like Akamai instead of some place else. This tends to optimize delivery for multicasted services and on-demand services, but screws anyone wanting to make the next YouTube without an oceanliner full of cash-up-front.
We're already heavily throttled. This just prevents it from getting WORSE.