Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - 6 month subscription of Pandora One at 46% off. ×

Comment And what does that cost for gigabit routing? (Score 1) 70

The problem PFSense has as compared to consumer routers is that running on normal Intel CPUs it needs more CPU power (and thus cost) to be able to forward a given amount of traffic. Plus all the NICs and such are separate silicon. Boradcom makes little all-in-one chips that have a couple of ARM cores that have acceleration for routing and so on. Also they have things like an ethernet switch and ethernet PHYs on the chip so they needn't be added. Have a look at a BCM4709A for an example that is popular in routers.

PFSense is good but it is not the most economical thing if you are talking features matching a consumer router, meaning gig routing, multiple ports, and wifi, you can have your costs go up a fair bit. Particularly if you also then want it to be fairly small and low power. If you hop over to PFSense's site it would cost about $575 for a SG-2440 with WiFi which would give features roughly on par with a consumer router.

While I'd much rather have that over a consumer router, a consumer router is in fact what I have because I didn't want to spend a ton of money for a home router.

Comment Re:Questions... (Score 1) 133

It's not greed, just survival. For some unknown reason antibiotics have a synergistic growth effect on animals that are not sick so antibiotics are feed to healthy animals. In the real world most businesses are barely profitable so any action that can increase profits is used to avoid bankruptcy.

Horses**t. The first farmers who did this did it because of greed, trying to make a bigger profit. Later farmers might have felt that it was the only way to survive, but only because the first farmers did what they did.

If your business isn't making a profit, you raise prices until it does. If you can't do that, it means either that you're doing something inefficiently or that somebody else is cutting corners. If it is the former, you need to fix the inefficiency. If it is the latter, you need to clearly differentiate your products from those others in the marketplace so that your customers know why your products cost more. Either way, cutting the same corners that everybody else does invariably results in a race to the bottom, not just in terms of cost, but also in terms of profit margins and quality. Once your business goes down that path, you might as well close the business and give the money back to the shareholders, because it is a hopeless cause, and your business is no longer contributing anything of value to the world as a whole that could not be contributed just as easily (and more efficiently) by your competitors in your absence.

Comment Re:Small print (Score 1) 33

Yes, this isn't all that unusual at all. It's pretty consistent with the unsolicited ideas submission policies of most major companies.

With that said, if these terms scare you, and if you don't care about submitting to Amazon, but just want a web-based script writing platform, check out WebScripted TV. It's kind of preliminary (translation: I'm the only developer, only user, and only tester), and I had to work around dozens of really bad bugs and misbehavior in various browsers' HTML editing functionality (to such an extent that MSIE isn't even supported, because it was just too broken to be even halfway functional last time I tried), so don't expect God's greatest gift to his people, but it is free to use, and lets you save copies of your content locally for backup purposes (or at least I think I enabled that feature).

And if you're an aspiring director, camera operator, etc., it offers the potential for creating groups of reviewers who can accept submissions from outside writers, collaboration on an online forum, peer editing, etc. Of course, I don't have the connections needed to actually get folks to start using it, but the potential is there.

Comment Re:Don't install Comcast equipment... (Score 1) 47

I've never seen any /29 blocks for sale, and even if you could, you'd still have to get the ISP to route it, which they won't do, because they aren't willing to set up static routes, which is why they demand that you use their equipment so that they can use authenticated RIP without giving you the credentials.

Comment Re:Apple Music (Score 1) 460

t throws away all the timing information, so "c"onsonants aren't, and the difference between "p", "b" and "v" are completely lost, even though they're acoustically quite distinct.

That sounds like every cell phone call I ever heard. If you ever want to drive yourself to commit homicide on a bunch of audio codec engineers, try driving a car down the freeway and having someone on the other end of the line feed you crossword puzzle questions. They'll be saying "d as in dog", and half the time you'll still hear "p as in paul".

This makes me wonder how much of it is the software, and how much of it is the horrific microphone hidden behind a single tiny hole that is anything but acoustically transparent....

Comment Re:Don't install Comcast equipment... (Score 1) 47

Exactly this - what's to stop your own equipment from being the static IP?

I think you both misread what I said.

Comcast requires their business-class DSL customers with more than one static IP to use rented equipment.

They'll let you have a single static IP with your own CPE. They might even allow you two (not certain). They won't let you have a block of eight IPs, which is what I currently have from Covad or Megapath or whatever their name is this week (Global something-or-other).

Comment Re:GM producers are shooting themselves in the foo (Score 1) 513

This genetic modification involves adding genes that produce additional fish growth hormones. If they added growth hormones to the meat after they killed the fish, that would be an additive. How is modifying the organism to produce that same chemical somehow magically different?

More to the point, how certain are we that fish growth hormones have no effect on human biology? Twenty years ago, nobody would have thought twice about plant estrogen, bovine growth hormone, antibiotics in meat, etc. What will we know twenty years from now that we don't know today, and how certain are we that none of those genetic changes will turn out to be a mistake?

The whole point of requiring labeling for genetically modified foods is to ensure that if someone buys atlantic salmon, he or she gets atlantic salmon, not chinook salmon. Whether it matters in this particular case—whether there's a noticeable difference between the health benefits of chinook salmon and atlantic salmon—is largely immaterial. As soon as you allow genetically modified organisms to be sold without labeling, you can't put that genie back in the bottle, and other companies are going to expect similar treatment. Sooner or later, one of those changes is going to make a material difference in terms of how healthy the food is, and nobody will have any way to know that they're not really getting what they paid for.

Comment This is the only answer that matters (Score 5, Informative) 370

If this is for the kids, then they need to make the choice. Mostly because online play tends to only work in console. So if all their friends have an Xbox one and they have a PS4, then they can't play games together.

If you want any kind of technical considerations or the like the PS4 is faster than the Xbone because of details with hardware design so it will end up rendering things at a higher resolution and so on. Also the controllers feel very different in the hands, and some people have a strong preference. I like the Xbone controllers much better and they are what I use with my PC (I have a PS4 controller as well).

Really though what matters is choosing the one that has the games you want, and that plays with the people you want to play with. The rest is secondary.

Comment Re:GM producers are shooting themselves in the foo (Score 1) 513

Five years of study and testing.

Mostly done by the industry and by an agency that has repeatedly failed to regulate that industry. The very same organization that is saying that these foods are safe also approved all those fun food additives that are believed to cause cancer and other issues. They're the same folks who were talking about allowing a rebranding of high fructose corn syrup as something else (I forget what, maybe corn sugar) to let the industry hide from consumer backlash over excessive fructose consumption that has been linked to diabetes and heart disease. And the list goes on and on. If we can't trust the FDA—and I maintain that we cannot—then we also can't trust its testing.

And even if we can trust its testing, the harsh reality is that although we know roughly what spliced genes will do in the first generation, under typical circumstances, we can't be certain how these changes could affect naturally suppressed genes over the course of hundreds of generations of breeding, variable environmental conditions, etc. Given enough unrestricted genetic modification, there's a nonzero chance that a previously safe plant or animal could spontaneously stop being so, without warning. Now to be fair, there's a nonzero chance of that happening without genetic modification, but my gut says that the chance is greater in a newly created genetic hybrid than in an organism that evolved over millions of years to be suited to its environment without any of those latent genes getting turned on throughout all of known history.

For those reasons, I feel that people who wish to minimize their exposure to genetically modified foods should have a legal right to know whether a given food product is likely to contain genetically modified foods, even if the additional risk posed by those foods is extremely low, in much the same way that they have the right to know whether pesticide was used, whether the milk was pasteurized, etc. The fact that it is impossible to say with absolute certainty that foods don't contain any genetically modified organisms is mostly irrelevant, because the risk of GMO foods is likely to be extremely small to begin with, so I think the FDA is being disingenuous when they use that excuse to block product labeling. Besides, there's a tiny possibility of pesticide blowing in from the next field and contaminating an organic crop, but the FDA doesn't ban farmers from calling their crops organic. So the FDA is treating this subject differently from other similar issues. That alone is reason to doubt whether they are truly functioning as an independent organization in this regard, or merely bowing to political pressure from big agribusiness.

Comment Re:Don't install Comcast equipment... (Score 2) 47

... problem solved. The only reason this attack vector exists in the first place is that people are too lazy to install their own equipment.

Unfortunately, Comcast requires their business-class DSL customers with more than one static IP to use rented equipment, even if you are using it in a residential setting. So power-user customers don't have the option to install their own equipment. This is the main reason I'm still on DSL. They quoted me a price for service, then upped it by twenty or thirty bucks a month for equipment rental that wasn't in their original price. I told them I wasn't renting. They told me that it wasn't an option. I stayed with slow-but-largely-under-my-control DSL.

Comment Re:GM producers are shooting themselves in the foo (Score 4, Interesting) 513

It is labeled properly. There is no evidence whatsoever that it is unsafe ...

Nor is there any real evidence that it is safe. History is littered with food additives that were assumed to be safe because there was no evidence that they were unsafe, only to find out later, after those products were broadly distributed, that they were causing harm. The difference is that in the rest of the world, the governments protect people from that by demanding safety testing, whereas here, the FDA just adds them to the "generally recognized as safe" list and hopes for the best.

Case in point, sodium benzoate is on the GRAS list, despite breaking down in the presence of ascorbic acid (vitamin C) into benzene, a known carcinogen. And several soft drink brands were pulled from the shelves for this very reason.

For another example, red dye #2 was legal for 70 years before a Russian study and a subsequent FDA follow-up both tied it to cancer risk.

The burden of proof should be on the food industry to show beyond reasonable doubt that all food additives, including genetic modifications, result in food that is sa

Not only is UNIX dead, it's starting to smell really bad. -- Rob Pike