Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment In mainstream. A few days after Julian Assange sto (Score 1) 252

I have no doubt this story got the most attention in the mainstream press. The attack was also a few days after a Julian Assange story, for example, and Clinton/DNC stories (we know hackers have an interest in the DNC.) Might some hacker respond to a Julian Assange story? Maybe. There's simply no evidence at all as to what the hacker's motive was.

Comment Or 100 other stories they ran this week (Score 1) 252

It's also *very* possible that the attack has absolutely nothing to do with that particular story. The site an probably a hundred stories or more just in the past week alone. So far I've heard zero evidence that the attack has anything at all with that particular story or any story about any political jerkoff.

Comment Perhaps, but different requirements. Origin for ex (Score 1) 237

You make a good point.

On the other hand, UPS and FedEx are deisgned for any customer to send any type of package from anywhere to anywhere, using any of many services. Amazon's will be designed for only Amazon to send packages from the places they choose, and they need not deliver everywhere - they can have UPS deliver to small towns for them. Amazon doesn't need to ship those cookies grandma made for you and she's shipping from Tiny Town, Colorado, paying by check. Amazon Shipping will have one customer sending packages, and sending only from Amazon's warehouses, using the standardized box sizes that Amazon chooses.

There may be enough differences that although Amazon can't make a better retail shipping company, they can make one that works better FOR AMAZON, for some packages. You may have seen the back of a UPS truck looks a bit chaotic because there are all these different sizes and shapes of boxes. On Amazon trucks, they'll all fit neatly and efficiently on the shelf, with one medium box being exactly same the same size as two small boxes.

Comment "Warrior" does mean taking sides (Score 1) 392

No doubt some Palestinians got a raw deal in 1967. Now their grandchildren are bombing schoolkids, hospitals, and paramedics. Neither group is the good guy in that conflict, if you look at it with any intellectual honesty.

As far as "most people concerned", voting suggests that most in the US support Israel, though some support the Palestinians (most of *those* do in fact prattle on about the Jews' conspiracies to take over the US), and some see that two groups killing each other is just bad all around.

It seems to be the nature of warriors, Social Justice warriors and most other kinds, to always take sides. In this case, they've picked the Israeli side. I find that neither surprising nor inconsistent with their core world view that the world is full of weak victims who need a SJW to ride in on a white horse and save them.

Comment Re:It's the law (Score 1) 317

>> >You know, insurance, a system that covers unexpected high costs that I can't readily cover out-of-pocket.

> Yes, that's what we have in Canada.

I'm specifically saying NOT we you describe in Canada, NOT this:

>> Did you know that hospitals and clinics in Canada don't even have POS systems or cash registers?

Insurance covers unexpected high costs, NOT routine, day-to-day expenses. Consider home insurance. You use home insurance if your house burns down, or floods, not to change a light bulb or fix a leaky faucet.

I can afford a $25 visit, for a flu shot or whatever. That's a routine, expected day-to-day expense. I used to pay for $25 and that was that. Now, the flu shot goes through multiple levels of huge bureaucracies, so it has a total cost of $75-$150 an it takes three months for the doctor to get paid.

Comment No, ADL actually DOES "fight for social justice" (Score 1) 392

I think you misunderstood. GP simply said that ADL is a bunch of social justice warriors. That's entirely correct, according to ADL. He didn't "blame" the SJWs for anything, he said ADL is SJWs, and it is, they say they are. A few references from the ADL web site for you:

http://blog.adl.org/tags/socia...

http://www.adl.org/education-o...

http://stlouis.adl.org/the-fut...

http://blog.adl.org/education/...

http://www.adl.org/education-o...

Comment DSL dedicated for about 1,000 - 2,500 feet (Score 1) 227

Cable is actually a type of DSL, but here we'll talk about phone-line DSL. There are many, many versions of phone-line DSL. IDSL, CDSL, and DSL Lite can provide about *up to* 1 Mbps for absolutely no more than 18,000 feet (2.5 miles). VDSL has an "up to" bandwidth of 51.84 Mbps, with a maximum distance of 1,000 feet.

So basically you have a DSL connection between your house and the end of the block. At the end of the street, your DSL connection ends at a DSLAM, where it's connected to a segment shared by you and your neighbors.

The SLAs have three costs associated with them. As you suggested, they may have higher repair and maintenance costs, because problems get fixed faster. Rarely, the ISP may have to pay out on the SLA. More importantly, bandwidth usage is very peaky - demand is much higher than average for short periods. If I have an X Mbps line, I can use that to provide X Mbps to 1 customer 100% of the time, or X Mbps to 10 customers 99% of the time, or X Mbps to 40 customers 90% of the time. In other words, the ISP can serve many more customers per fiber if congestion is allowed occasionally, during peak periods. There's a big cost difference between "you'll have 10 Mbps dedicated to you all the time" and "you'll have 10 Mbps most of the time, but it may slow a bit during peak hours".

Comment Lower than you'd like, available bandwidth is used (Score 1) 227

I have no doubt that your cap is set lower than what you'd like it to be. Hopefully you have the option to upgrade by paying $10 more to get the plan you want, or a new competitor entering your market.

> arbitrarily and artificially low, compared to the available bandwidth.

During peak times, available bandwidth is in fact pretty well saturated at many points. If it weren't, ISPs would be stupid - they would have spent money on equipment that they didn't need, and aren't fully using. The ISPs aren't stupid - their marketing departments may be a bit slimy, but their engineers know how to provision a network.

Comment It's the law (Score 1) 317

> SOME employers. Many do not. Or many only partially pay.

There's a little law here in the US that says employers MUST provide health coverage for full-time employees. If you're not aware of the Affordable Care Act, no need to try to discuss the finer details with you.

What kinda pissed me off about ACA is that I preferred health INSURANCE, not a comprehensive health *plan*. You know, insurance, a system that covers unexpected high costs that I can't readily cover out-of-pocket. ACA basically made health *insurance* illegal, now everyone has to pay for "the system" to handle a $25 flu shot, doubling it's cost.

Comment PS, if you want to try it (Score 1) 156

PS:

> I've only tinkered with it in VM environments but I would like to give it a spin as an offsite backup sync solution.

In all my years on Slashdot I've never done this, but since you said you would like to give something like this a spin:

We've spent many years developing a pretty bad ass offsite backup solution based on this concept. One reason it's bad ass is that I found some cool ways to make it very efficient (cheap). You can boot up your backups live in our DC and SSH to them (or however you like to access them, they are exact replicas of the original, other than IP address). If your need is enough that you might be interested in spending about $30 / month for a really nice solution, let me know.

Slashdot Top Deals

Almost anything derogatory you could say about today's software design would be accurate. -- K.E. Iverson

Working...