Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

F.C.C., In Net Neutrality Turnaround, Plans To Allow Fast Lane

n8_f Re:Wrong battle. (410 comments)

I think we saw with the ILECs in the 90's that unbundling doesn't work unless the infrastructure company can't provide any services on top of that infrastructure. Otherwise there is too much incentive to shift costs and play games with other service providers, favoring your services in subtle and not-so-subtle ways. And they will still need to be regulated like a utility. It does allow a company to incrementally build competing infrastructure, but it's debatable whether that is an efficient allocation of resources.

about 7 months ago
top

F.C.C., In Net Neutrality Turnaround, Plans To Allow Fast Lane

n8_f Re:Comcast says the routers cost too much (410 comments)

If you look at Comcast's income statement for 2013, you'll see rising profits. They made 6.816 billion dollars in 2013. I find it disingenuous (fucking bullshit) for them to claim these content providers are costing them money.

In reality it is likely the opposite, the content providers are increasing the demand for their product and allowing Comcast to charge more for service. Their relation to content providers is somewhat like Apple's relation to App providers.

Except Apple doesn't make 97% margins (it's no longer break-even, but it is way, way less than 30%).

about 7 months ago
top

F.C.C., In Net Neutrality Turnaround, Plans To Allow Fast Lane

n8_f Re:Monopoly Rights Are Wrong (410 comments)

This is exactly what would happen if we'd given UPS a monopoly on all the roads. Would anyone be surprised that they started charging FedEx more? So why is anyone surprised by this? The solution is the same one we've used with roads: public infrastructure (municipal/public-utility fiber) that any company can build on top of.

about 7 months ago
top

F.C.C., In Net Neutrality Turnaround, Plans To Allow Fast Lane

n8_f Re:Wrong battle. (410 comments)

I suspect that this is because cable and internet phone service are very high-margin, while internet service is not.

No, it's quite the opposite. Once you're making 97% margins on your Internet customers and have no competition, why in the hell would you put any money in to it? You're going to have a hard time finding any ROI.

about 7 months ago
top

F.C.C., In Net Neutrality Turnaround, Plans To Allow Fast Lane

n8_f Re:Nice Website You Have There... (410 comments)

As long as ISPs are not allowed to intentionally degrade non-premium traffic on the back of direct-peering deals, I see no fundamental problem with it.

Non-premium traffic with be de-facto downgraded, because even if they don't actively do it, large monopoly ISPs will be incentivized to make non-premium traffic as unreliable as possible. So whether it is simply slashing the capital budget of non-premium infrastructure or not performing repairs in a timely manner or a hundred other small things, non-premium traffic has to suffer. How long before there are multiple tiers of premium traffic? The monopoly ISPs face no competition or regulation; now they simply have to figure out how to maximize their rents.

about 7 months ago
top

F.C.C., In Net Neutrality Turnaround, Plans To Allow Fast Lane

n8_f Re:Wrong battle. (410 comments)

Still wrong battle. Franchises are simply agreements to use a city's rights-of-way. They've been non-exclusive since 1992. The problem is that building wireline infrastructure is extremely capital expensive and has severely diminishing returns in areas that are already saturated by a competitor. Your business plan is to sink a bunch of capital into a business and then compete on price with a company that has no capital costs? Good luck raising the billions you'll need for that.

No, the solution here is municipal fiber networks that are managed as public utilities that sell wholesale to ISPs. Just like how we have multiple shipping companies that use public infrastructure to transport packages between customers. Then you can have as many different competitors as the market will bear with as many different business plans. In that situation, the Comcast-Netflix deal would never have happened, because the competing ISPs would have been begging Netflix to install hardware in their data centers to make their customers' experience as good as possible. An ISP trying to make Netflix slower would have lost every customer that cares about Netflix (which apparently is a lot of them).

about 7 months ago
top

25% of Charter Schools Owe Their Soul To the Walmart Store

n8_f Re:Love the quotes (233 comments)

Sounds like a horribly inefficient allocation of resources. Even wolves spread teaching amongst the pack.

about 10 months ago
top

IPTV Providers To Pay Same Regulatory Fees As Cable Companies

n8_f Re:why licensing? (97 comments)

FTFA: "IPTV is digital television delivered through a high speed Internet connection, instead of by the traditional cable method." They are talking about FiOS and Google Fiber (which is why people who read it also noticed a reference to a comment from a Google). Don't worry, grandpa, the guvmint isn't coming to take away your Internets.

about a year ago
top

A Radical Plan For Saving Microsoft's Surface RT

n8_f Re:Yeah, and they'd go broke (391 comments)

Yeah, the problem is that if you sell them at $75, you've now set the price expectation for all Surfaces going forward. What could Microsoft possibly do to justify selling a Surface 2 at $199? And that is taking a huge loss on any kind of decent tablet. The estimates for Apple's bill of materials on a $499 iPad is about $300 (remember, that doesn't include R&D and other costs) and they have the best supply chain in the world. Microsoft can't go below their current $349 if they ever plan on being successful in this market and even that is setting them up for failure.

about a year ago
top

Banks Find Way To Sell Consumers' Shopping Data

n8_f Re:A Technicality: (195 comments)

How did this get marked insightful!? I'm pretty sure the Mormon Police aren't real and if they are, I have no special insight into them. It was a Simpsons joke. I guess season 9 was before the moderator's time. Instead of making me feel insightful, your moderation has made me feel old.

more than 3 years ago
top

Banks Find Way To Sell Consumers' Shopping Data

n8_f Re:A Technicality: (195 comments)

You just need to know who to talk to. I'm sure that for their biggest and best customers, the bank will be happy to provide names.

No, they won't. That would be breaking the law and the whole point of this approach is to avoid breaking the law.

more than 3 years ago
top

Banks Find Way To Sell Consumers' Shopping Data

n8_f Re:A Technicality: (195 comments)

But the bank didn't sell you the list of names.

Trivial. The Mormon Police just have the bank send all of those people a bogus prize certificate for a free motor boat and then when they show up to get their boat, the Mormon Police arrest them and beat them to the full extent of the law.

more than 3 years ago
top

Why Thunderbolt Is Dead In the Water

n8_f Re:Really? (568 comments)

Yes, you should absolutely get a mini DisplayPort to DisplayPort cable/adapter. Here's one at random: Accell UtraAV DisplayPort Adapter.

If you can return the other, do so, otherwise figure out some other use for it / put it up on E-Bay. If nothing else, the drop in lag should be noticeable.

more than 3 years ago
top

Why Thunderbolt Is Dead In the Water

n8_f Re:Really? (568 comments)

Plain vanilla DVI (DVI-D) just requires a simple $5-$30 adapter on Macs. You're talking about dual link DVI (DVI-DL). Apple's mini DisplayPort is really a Dual-mode DisplayPort (DP++), which allows backwards compatability with DVI/HDMI. Basically, the port is able to use the same pins it uses to send DisplayPort to instead send DVI/HDMI, which then just requires a passive adapter to rearrange the pins in the correct order. Apple's Thunderbolt port maintains that backwards compatibility. However, due to the limitations of using a DisplayPort socket to do this, it is limited to single link DVI-D, which maxes out at a resolution of 1920x1200 @ 60hz.

To use higher resolutions, you need an active converter that takes the actual DisplayPort signal and converts it into DVI/HDMI. That is why it costs ~$100 (whether from Apple or someone else) and why it requires power; it is actual processing the signal and translating it into the other protocol, not simply switching wires around. You would also need it for simple single link DVI is your DisplayPort where not a DP++ port. Hope that makes things clearer.

more than 3 years ago
top

How the Social Tech Bubble Is Different

n8_f Re:What about investment banking? (388 comments)

I think that banking is actually a little more honorable than click ads.

Really? Because I don't anticipate having to spend hundreds of billions of dollars of our money to bail out Google and Facebook in order to prevent a global catastrophe. And yet, not only have I had to do that once already in my lifetime for the banking industry, I expect to have to do that again because little has changed since the last time we did it. So, fuck the banks. We're lucky that this bubble is in an industry that is not "too big to fail."

more than 3 years ago
top

Why You Should Use OpenGL and Not DirectX

n8_f Re:OpenGL and the rant about marketing (515 comments)

Sure, you could have an "open standard," but someone is controlling that, too.

No, that is why it is an open standard. Once it is out there, anyone can implement it and conform to the standard. Maybe someone maintains it and maybe someone is working on the next version, but no one controls it. To illustrate the difference, what platforms does DirectX run on? Microsoft Windows, Microsoft Xbox, and Microsoft Windows Mobile. Notice the pattern? And what platforms does OpenGL run on? All of those plus dozens or even hundreds more. If you want to port your app to the iPhone or the Palm Pre or an Android phone, who is going to have to do more work, the person with the app programmed in DirectX or the person with the app programmed in OpenGL? That is the advantage of an open standard.

more than 4 years ago
top

AT&T Suggests To 300K Employees To Lobby the FCC

n8_f Re:Difference is the union has more power over you (239 comments)

[A union] can just beat you when you leave work for the day
Have you ever worked for a union? I have and I don't recall getting beaten for disagreeing with the representative we elected. Did you have a different experience?

more than 5 years ago
top

Google Acquiring VP3 Developer On2 Technologies

n8_f Re:Google probably wants the engineering taltent. (133 comments)

Perhaps "open sourcing" was an imprecise choice of words. Obviously part of that would be royalty-free licensing of the patents on VP8. Presumably Google now owns most or all of those; any they don't they can either acquire or get a license that allows anyone to use it. The point is that Google doesn't care about making money off of licensing the codec; what they want is something open that has virtually no barrier to entry, everyone can use, and is widely available on clients. Just like with browsers and OSes, they view this as the platform for their advertising and they want as many users as possible.

more than 5 years ago

Submissions

n8_f hasn't submitted any stories.

Journals

n8_f has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?