A similar study was done in the late nineties by a UK TV program called tomorrows world where they asked viewers to look through an empty toilet roll at a specific star and count the visible stars around it. The big win was probably the increased interest in astronomy from all the children looking through their 'mini telescopes' rather than the actual data.
This is the last time I try to comment on slashdot from an iPhone. Apologies for the crappy formatting
Removing IE would save me bandwidth on all the patches and more importantly spare me the forced reboots.
I'd probably find that a lot of rendered local text would stop working without IE such as help pages, but I usually find google more effective than built in help these days any way.
Reference please? How would encrypted data travel any different than unencrypted date? Routers don't look at content and the difference in payload sizes is negligible.
This might have to do with compression as well as the key exchange/processing overhead.
I remember my university lecturer explaining that written English text could be compressed down to about 1 bit per character, and this was to do with the fact that patterns of written text are quite common. I would imagine that the same principle holds reasonably true for HTML as well.
Encrypted traffic essentially looks like a sequence of random bytes, so probably requires 7 or 8 bits per character.
I expect that multiple links along the route will try to compress your data to save bandwidth where they can (the first modem being a prime example), and in the case of https, no compression can be done.
Yeah, so if I'm right (sorry, no references), Reading an email could easily be 7-8 times slower over https.
It is now pitch dark. If you proceed, you will likely fall into a pit.