<quote><p>I can certainly see why Facebook hates it though: Not only does it deprive them of the tracking information for all the people who don't click the like button, it changes the user's choice in clicking the button from "click this button if you like the story, but you'll be tracked either way" to "click this button to cause Facebook to track you" -- and if it becomes common knowledge that that is how the like button works, fewer people will use it.</p></quote>

So, it goes from 'install software to force an opt-out' to opt-in. Fine with me. More sites should do this in order to allow their users a choice.

I have to say that I'm impressed with Heise doing this. This puts the choice of being tracked into the user's hands.

I think the key to preventing people from seeing too much of your information on Facebook, is not to provide that information in the first place. Problem solved.

My two cents, keep the change.

Oh, by the way for those who want a copy but can't seem to get the main blender website to render... Here's a link to the download that worked for me.

http://download.blender.org/release/Blender2.57/

Have fun all :)

What? You can't touch-type? ;)

Anyway, back to the subject at hand. I've been using Blender and 3DS Max for years. I love them both, but for different things. Also, as far as blender is concerned, you can't beat free, and it's still one of the most powerful 3D content creation apps that I've seen. Since I've switched to Linux, I've been playing with it more and more, and enjoying it equally as much. It's also great for making aircraft and other models for X-Plane (www.x-plane.com for those curious).

Enjoy

In the video, the narrator mentioned that the bandwidth could scale up from 10GB to 100GB over the next 10 years or so. This might mean that they're still working out bugs in the transceivers. But there was no mention of anything lower than 10GB of bandwidth. Although admittedly that doesn't rule out the possibility of claiming more than they can actually do. Also, they never explicitly state at what distances you can expect to get what levels of bandwidth.

But, a grain of salt is a good idea to be taken with any claims of whatever entities. Although I still think that if this technology is as good as claimed, it has some nice potential applications.

When you say 'this technology'. To which technology are you referring? 10GB Ethernet, or the new optical one? If the latter then if you'll recall, it was stated explicitly that the signal was able to be transmitted as far as 100 meters, through a thin and flexible cable. That's a fair margin further than 3 meters.

I'm also sure that even a 10 GB Ethernet cable can transmit further then 3 meters. This technology sounds like it has a good potential to replace Ethernet (if costs can be kept down, and if it proves to be reliable over the long-term). The cable construction is simple, based on the sound of it, and it uses less materials than an equivalent Ethernet cable.

The Ethernet form-factor for network cabling has been around a long time. My personal opinion is that if this technology works as well as planned/advertised, perhaps it's a good time to start to deprecate the older system.

My two cents, keep the change.