Re: [CGUYS] really bad references
So slick, no answer again...you can dance for months can't you? On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm still waiting for the better RAID solution. There is no better RAID solution. RAID is for old men who have not kept up with technology. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] really bad references
So slick, no answer again...you can dance for months can't you? Silly boy. Don't do it is an answer. Just not the answer you want. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] really bad references
Well, the islands quote may be yours, but John Kenneth Galbraith got there first in 1958, with his private splendor, public squalor remark in the Affluent Society. A clever man and far left wingnut. His ideas were shaped during the Roosevelt administration and he hung onto them too tightly. Potentially as dangerous as our wingnuts of the far right. I don't know that the lefties would have ended the American Century as abruptly, but I suppose they could have. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] really bad references
I'm figuring you are going to keep making the 'old man and his RAID' claims without a shred of anything resembling an answer till new tech actually does come out that replaces RAID. I just like seeing you struggle to come up with new ways to not say you have no clue how you got yourself into this corner and have no answer. Come on, dance another... On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 10:27 AM, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So slick, no answer again...you can dance for months can't you? Silly boy. Don't do it is an answer. Just not the answer you want. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] really bad references
I guess we're dealing with semantics then. The second paragraph doesn't use the word 'banned' at all, and it's speaking about a particular set of circumstances having to do with repeat offenders. It does NOT say exceeding the cap will get you banned for a year - that's said in a later comment. On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Chris Dunford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Get a grip. The banned claim was made in a *response* to the article. Right now all Comcast is planning is to inform the violators of the cap. The report I read said that exceeeding the cap will get you banned for a year. http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/150473/critics_question_c omcast_broadband_caps.html No, it actually is in the article. Second paragraph. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] really bad references
Get a grip. The banned claim was made in a *response* to the article. Right now all Comcast is planning is to inform the violators of the cap. Tony, you need to read more slowly and pay better attention. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] really bad references
On UUNET accounts it is very easy. With a user name and password once it hits it limit you turn off the account until it recycles. With a standard ISP account it is not so easy unless you require them to log in every time they access the account. I have a cable account with Charter. They monitor my activity by the MAC on my cable modem. If I change out modems, I have to let them know so they can program the new MAC into their system to allow connectivity. Secondly this cap is on all activity not just UUNET. Every web site, and every email etc. So if you got large attachments (not possible but suppose) this could also push you over the limit. Watch too many movies from TIVO same thing. (More realistic. I see there is a box now where you can download movies from TIVO and watch them on your TV.) I personally think it is overkill, and they are going about it the the wrong way. This reminds of the letters I used tog et from my old dialup ISP which sold see unlimited usage telling me I was staying connected to long. (I had a separate line which my modem used and I just left it connected.) They are selling this so I expect some folks will go out and find new ISP's. Stewart At 01:25 PM 8/30/2008, you wrote: *If a subscriber goes over the limit a second time within a six-month period after getting a warning, Comcast will suspend the customer's account for a year.* Banned, suspended...the end result is the same. No connectivity for a year from the ISP. I'm wondering why not implement these things at the ISP, I have 25 gigs available to me from forte news, when I hit 25 I can't access it anymore. Why not do this? So in four days, when little jonny has downloaded his quota of new music and movies, he doesn't get net access for the next 27 days. Rev. Stewart A. Marshall mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Prince of Peace www.princeofpeaceozark.org Ozark, AL SL 82 * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] really bad references
You're in the wrong thread. this one is not about Comcast or caps, it's about quoting a comment to an article as opposed to the article itself. But if we're talking about references, look at how different this quote is (from the NYTimes http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/30/technology/30comcast.html?ref=technology): Although the 250 gigabyte cap is now specified, users who exceed that amount will not have their access switched off immediately, nor will they be charged for excessive use. Instead, the customers may be contacted by Comcast and notified of the cap. On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 2:25 PM, mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: *If a subscriber goes over the limit a second time within a six-month period after getting a warning, Comcast will suspend the customer's account for a year.* Banned, suspended...the end result is the same. No connectivity for a year from the ISP. I'm wondering why not implement these things at the ISP, I have 25 gigs available to me from forte news, when I hit 25 I can't access it anymore. Why not do this? So in four days, when little jonny has downloaded his quota of new music and movies, he doesn't get net access for the next 27 days. On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Tony B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I guess we're dealing with semantics then. The second paragraph doesn't use the word 'banned' at all, and it's speaking about a particular set of circumstances having to do with repeat offenders. It does NOT say exceeding the cap will get you banned for a year - that's said in a later comment. On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Chris Dunford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Get a grip. The banned claim was made in a *response* to the article. Right now all Comcast is planning is to inform the violators of the cap. The report I read said that exceeeding the cap will get you banned for a year. http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/150473/critics_question_c omcast_broadband_caps.html No, it actually is in the article. Second paragraph. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] really bad references
I guess we're dealing with semantics then. The second paragraph doesn't use the word 'banned' at all, and it's speaking about a particular set of circumstances having to do with repeat offenders. It does NOT say exceeding the cap will get you banned for a year - that's said in a later comment. Tony is back in dead parrot mode. Whenever he sees something he does not like he vehemently insists that it is not what it is. I think it is just a strategy for shutting down any real discussion of the issue. In this case it is a very clear 2nd paragraph of the story. Not a comment, not even a quote, just a very clear report: Comcast will suspend the customer's account for a year. No wiggle room here, unless you are Tony. Here is my clear opinion: Comcast is a nasty piece of work and should be put down as a matter of national security. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] really bad references
National security?? So little jonny can download more movies? On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is my clear opinion: Comcast is a nasty piece of work and should be put down as a matter of national security. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] really bad references
National security?? So little jonny can download more movies? Do you know what portion of the US GNP comes from movies? That is still a business the US dominates. Would you have us give up on that too? Are you rooting for that right-wing vision for America: islands of opulence surrounded by squalor? AKA: I got mine the hell with you. Who said that first? When I Google islands of opulence surrounded by squalor I get only one hit: me on this list, 2 months ago! Think I'll ever make Bartletts? * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] really bad references
National security?? So little jonny can download more movies? Let's just call it for what it is: IMD. Internets of Mass Destruction. If you don't support the fight against it, then you must hate your country. Keep throwing things! We have to see what sticks! * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] really bad references
It's times like these I realize why I shouldn't even ask for clarification from you. I'm still waiting for the better RAID solution. On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 2:10 PM, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: National security?? So little jonny can download more movies? Do you know what portion of the US GNP comes from movies? That is still a business the US dominates. Would you have us give up on that too? Are you rooting for that right-wing vision for America: islands of opulence surrounded by squalor? AKA: I got mine the hell with you. Who said that first? When I Google islands of opulence surrounded by squalor I get only one hit: me on this list, 2 months ago! Think I'll ever make Bartletts? * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] really bad references
I'm still waiting for the better RAID solution. There is no better RAID solution. RAID is for old men who have not kept up with technology. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] really bad references
Well, the islands quote may be yours, but John Kenneth Galbraith got there first in 1958, with his private splendor, public squalor remark in the Affluent Society. --- On Sat, 8/30/08, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [CGUYS] really bad references To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM Date: Saturday, August 30, 2008, 5:10 PM National security?? So little jonny can download more movies? Do you know what portion of the US GNP comes from movies? That is still a business the US dominates. Would you have us give up on that too? Are you rooting for that right-wing vision for America: islands of opulence surrounded by squalor? AKA: I got mine the hell with you. Who said that first? When I Google islands of opulence surrounded by squalor I get only one hit: me on this list, 2 months ago! Think I'll ever make Bartletts? * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
