Forgot your password?

Comment: Good or Bad News? (Score 1) 248

by pubwvj (#47935717) Attached to: FCC Chairman: Americans Shouldn't Subsidize Internet Service Under 10Mbps

So does this mean that I'll get faster, better service?


Does this mean that I'll lose the service I now have?


Will the price skyrocket?

One of those three. I live in a rural area, as does much of the country. We have a big country. This is not some piddling small urbanesque country like they have in Europe with short distances. The USA has vast distances between homes and businesses in the rural areas.

Basically what I hear him saying is he only wants to subsidize the urbanites and to hell with the rural folks. Typical bureaucrat. They are from the cities and don't understand the real world outside their borders.

The reality is I already pay $130/month for what costs about $20/month in the city but I only get 1.5Mbps rather than the 25Mbps they get in the urban areas. I suspect that rather than getting better service I'll simply lose what I have. When a piece of hardware goes down the phone company, the only ISP around, will just not replace it leaving a black hole in the telecommunications landscape. No cell. No landline. No internet.

Comment: He doesn't have very good hearing... (Score 1) 90

by pubwvj (#47920531) Attached to: MIT's Cheetah Robot Runs Untethered

"Our robot can be silent and as efficient as animals. The only things you hear are the feet hitting the ground."

He doesn't have very good hearing. Real animals can be a lot quieter than his motors. His robots are making sounds - he just isn't hearing them.

Furthermore his future goal of 30 mph is pretty slow. I have dogs that run twice that. Real cheetahs run almost three times that.

Not to diss his achievements with his robots but he should stop spinning the PR so hard. Exaggeration isn't necessary.

Comment: Re:What are the bounds of property? (Score 3, Insightful) 163

by pubwvj (#47898217) Attached to: Justice Sotomayor Warns Against Tech-Enabled "Orwellian" World

Actually, "how high above the dirt you own" is already well defined, both in law, regulation and court cases. What is happening at the ground and a bit above on your property is yours and you can even own copyright on it. Government and individuals are not supposed to snoop on you. Fliers are not supposed to fly below 500' above you in rural areas, higher in urban areas. The result is that if someone is peeping on you in a situation where you can reasonably expect privacy you can sue them and they can also separately be fined and imprisoned by the government. The government itself is supposed to get a warrant to view you.

Just as importantly, the other logical question is how far down below the surface do you own. This is your mineral rights.

Typically in the eastern United States you own all the way down, let's say to the mantle. The exact depth doesn't get too much precedence since deep drilling hasn't been done but fracking may be changing that soon.

Out in the western United States you may well not own below your surface soil, you may well not own your mineral rights, you may well not own your water rights and you may well not even own the rain that falls upon your land. Check your deed and your state laws.

In the fourth dimension of space you own nothing. That is possibly reserved for the alternative owners who may or may not own the land you own in this variation of the multiverse. This will not appear on your deed.

In the fifth dimension (time) your ownership started at some point in the past delineated by your purchase and will end at some point in the future marked by your death or other event. Again, check your deed for the particulars.

Comment: Re:Double-edged sword (Score 5, Informative) 111

by pubwvj (#47892529) Attached to: Software Patents Are Crumbling, Thanks To the Supreme Court

No, not at all. People were making innovative software long, long before software was patented. It didn't used to be that patents were applied to software. Patenting of software is a relatively new thing and should not be done. Hopefully we'll see the end of it. The entire patent system is abused and abusive. Time to scrap it and reset.

Comment: Payments over phone or internet? (Score 1) 730

by pubwvj (#47866267) Attached to: Apple Announces Smartwatch, Bigger iPhones, Mobile Payments

So the new iOS has payment abilities to store my credit cards but it sounds like that is for when I'm physically at a store. 99% of my 'shopping' does not involve going to a physical location but is over the web via my laptop computer or in a few cases over my landline phone. There is no cellphone service around here. I never shop via my iOS device. I very rarely shop in person. I would rather just give my credit card number to the sales person over the phone or web. I've almost never had a problem with fraud and in the extremely few cases the credit card company took care of the issue. That's what you pay the fees for.

Testing can show the presense of bugs, but not their absence. -- Dijkstra