Re: Predicting Problems
It was a misalignment, so some of the mirrors that reflect light were off-point and no one noticed until it was too late.
553 posts • joined 20 Sep 2007
It was a misalignment, so some of the mirrors that reflect light were off-point and no one noticed until it was too late.
Sorry Google, Facebook has it right with Aquila. Your balloons are just hot air.
I always wonder why Android needs to go in to devices like this? What value does it add compared to Debian or something similar?
The mantra of "Android all the things" seems wrong to me.
In the article it wasn't particularly clear as to why you had suspended operations, perhaps you could look at the text to make that clearer?
There are a variety of different DSL bandwidths/profiles depending on the customer need. There is however a 2Mbps/2Mbps profile which is called SDSL (and there is also SHDSL).
Also ADSL2+ Annex M allows for uplinks up to 3.3Mbit/sec, <sarcasm>but what would someone want with that much bandwidth is beyond me.</sarcasm>
2.6% of defectors were apparently in military service at the time of their departure from the North.
Further proof that measuring success by "average" numbers isn't relevant, it is all about the distribution.
There is plenty of spectrum, it just needs operators to use it better. They need to invest more in femtocells and other small cell architectures to off-load capacity at a local level.
In my view 5G is technology m*sturbation, operators need to work harder with what they have.
Until BT has competition they don't really try.
OpenReach doesn't have a KPI which includes reliability at any sort of fine level. As long as the bit of copper works when someone from OpenReach tests it then Schrödinger's cable is alive. We need OpenReach to be accountable for uptime as well.
I believe I've seen BT deliberately not upgrading cabinets to FTTC because they are primarily business customers and they know they'll loose BTNet fibre business. That is one of the bigger crimes here.
A sterling engine?
I believe it relates to how much data is "lost" through bit-rot or other data loss factors, rather than just being unavailable.
I read a posting by some company who had some hosted hardware in NY, I can't remember who it was but I think I found it through El Reg though.
Interestingly their argument was that if you could justify the headcount to manage hardware and you had predictable capacity then outsourcing your servers doesn't necessarily make sense. Every argument I have seen about going cloud either boils down to two things: scaling/flexibility and/or administration overhead. Whenever I hear the administration overhead argument it is put forward by software people because, understandably, software people don't want to care about hardware.
But simply put, the costs of hardware and hosting can be cheaper than the cloud if you have the right economies of scale. But people should be doing more diligence than just saying "put it all in the cloud!" because they might not be doing the best for their business.
'Disaster recovery' is an over used phrase, in my view DR is like insurance: it shouldn't be needed but you have it just in case. If your day-to-day processes need DR then you are doing it wrong. You should have good processes with appropriate monitoring and roll-back, in this case they didn't seem to have that.
I remember when things went off-air at a previous job it was standard procedure to yell "Nigel!!!!" in to the racks. It was probably him who had broken something.
Multiple 4k programmes? How many 65in TVs do you have anyway?
The hydraulic pipes are already full of fibre, but the core route doesn't cover as much of London as people expect because it really focused on key buildings.
I loved the irony of talking about the 'okay' camera just below a terrible shot of the phone.
Yes, I love the price vs spec (dual SIM in particular) but the fact that it looks like a Samsung clone makes me more reticent.
Take a look at the Lenovo K3 Note which is about £150 from DX.com.
Reminds me of that misunderstanding in a bar in Koln...
Perhaps it's a dirty bomb.... a dirty, dirty, filthy, dirty, naughty, oh... my....
And the Mrs Grace L. Ferguson Airline and Storm Door Company
...waits for the first person to get that reference
I am confused by the qualification that it is silent, how are people so sure that it isn't transmitting anything? Is it just because it isn't transmitting on Ku-Band, C-Band, L-Band or UHF? Have people checked the entire EM spectrum and found nothing? I would expect the NSA/GCHQ to have done that but it isn't easy if they aren't using standard mechanisms. It could even be using some exotic UWB communications are are very hard to spot and are easily mistaken for noise.
Redundant: adjective - not or no longer needed or useful; superfluous.
The power supplies aren't redundant, they are resilient, if they were redundant you wouldn't need them but I am fairly certain it doesn't have its own generator inside.
Can people please stop referring to things as being redundant when they mean resilient?
My Samsung NC10 didn't perform particularly well with Ubuntu but I think Unity was to blame, I really need to find that machine and rebuild it with Mint.
Actually you can do tropo-scatter but it is really hard, really noisy and doesn't give nearly the capacity of LoS microwave.
Has anyone compared the 1pps of GPS to the frequency reference of MSF? As far as I am aware the MSF signal is very, very accurate (10^12) and so it should make a good reference for the UK.
Recently I received a handful of SD cards, delivered in a tray that would hold 48 SD cards, in an antistatic bag, wrapped in bubble wrap, in a box, inside another box packed with foam.
Those blank SD cards were, at no point, at risk.
This was not HP and I actually received two sets in two separate and identically packed shipments.
A foreign sounding voice at the end of the line, "we would like to come and study your computer-ma-bob"
The contract used to be what was a facility that C&W set up as part of the Siemens outsourcing deal after BBC Technology was sold to Siemens. The national fibre network was part of the contract to connect every BBC location and largely about moving uncompressed video about. The London connectivity was a separate contract where huge quantities of dark fibre were on long-term lease and that preceded outsourcing.
BT has always provided video connectivity to broadcasters, they host the main neutral video switch at BT Tower that just about everyone uses. To conflate this as being an IT outsourcing contract is to confuse video with IT and the provision is very different.
But the TETRA equipment costs a fortune, they could use more COTS parts with LTE (if done correctly).
That saying I would suggest that in the interim, until LTE is ready, it would be easy to build a TETRA accessory module which has a emergency beacon button and links to the officers phone by Bluetooth or USB? That way you could use the LTE network for day-to-day operations but keep TETRA for emergencies and when LTE is unavailable.
If this is EE, will they offer callers priority access if they pay an additional 50p?
One of the problems with mobile coverage is that most of the the masts aren't owned by the operators, they are owned by Arqiva. If the government paid Arqiva to roll out more masts instead of putting pots into satellite broadband then the rural community might get somewhere. But the other challenge is: do the rural communities want more masts on their hills?
In late 2014 I was staying at the Snake Pass Inn in the Peak District and they were constrained to satellite broadband. I don't imagine many locals wanting the Peak District dotted with masts.
Fibre is great, but it is really expensive to dig roads and rural communities are more spread out, thus connectivity is more expensive. The government has tried to subsidise it but those plans weren't very successful. I believe enabling communities to manage their own solutions, which meet their particular local needs, with government support and subsidy, is the best approach. Enable local communities to petition Arqiva and enable small FTTC cooperatives.
Finally, OpenReach, they are over burdened and as a virtual monopoly there doesn't seem to be an adequate solution that doesn't involve restructuring the market.
Self-inflicted injury, no sympathy.
I actually started my career in the control room of a large satellite communications operator, there you get to see horrific and pornographic things on a regular basis.
If that was an SMR drive then you might want that!
I wonder what colour temperature said carbonised human is currently at....
Sounded painful to me, I've taken a few zaps in my time but none has resulted in me emitting anything that sharp.
Actually BT and TalkTalk both use Multicast for the delivery of YouView channels. But it isn't without complexities and getting the networks to do it with stability is a right b*tch. It is easy to say that all switches support multicast but experience says they get a bit delicate even in lab conditions when you throw a lot of traffic their way, also the equipment at the exchanges needs careful profiling and too many joins sometimes can break things if you aren't careful.
Then the channels want to charge the ISPs for the right to deliver channels instead of seeing the advantage of a distribution medium paid for by someone else. Then the channels also want encyption/DRM which I am sure many here would object to, even if the same channel were originally available free-to-air they still want DRM. Go figure.
Summary: multicast does work, it is in production, but it is more complex at very large scale (hundreds of thousands to millions of users) and channels want to charge ISPs for it.
I agree, the mobile companies shouldn't get more bandwidth until they can prove that they can behave correctly with what they've got already. They should invest in more and better coverage, more small cells and more femto cells. Asking for more premium bandwidth is just executives waving male appendages to see who has the bigger offering.
I'm actually surprised that more of the 'niche' channels haven't cottoned on to the idea that they could save money by switching to H.264 SD. They might reduce their viewership but that cost saving would be substantial. This happened in other countries when they introduced H.264 and the move of some content to the newer systems actually drove adoption of the devices by consumers because they wanted to continue to get the content even if it wasn't in HD.
Daddy Pig agrees with your sentiment.
Backhaul via WiFi is my feeling, this can really be just a secondary re-enforcement channel for high bandwidth downlink (given that in most cases user's traffic is async). As for the connection to the lightbulb? I am thinking GbE or 2.5GbE with 802.3at Type 2 PoE is the answer, you'll get 25W per bulb which should be sufficient for each fixture of an LED bulb system.
uUSB $0.40 x 2
Excluding discrete components and the Broadcom IC I count it as $5.65. Now I appreciate that they might pay less for connectors and PCBs, mine are estimates based on only many thousands of volume, not millions. Still, there is no margin as far as I can see and I can't see how Broadcom make any money. Perhaps the Zero is subsidised?
I'm confused CMU/CERT did research into TOR vulnerabilities and found them, but didn't let TOR know? Irrespective of the FBI warrant, surely it is standard practice for CERT to notify interested parties of vulnerabilities so that they can mitigate and alert users if they see fit?
Sounds like it would be perfect, shame it doesn't seem to be a dual SIM phone otherwise I would jump on it.
It would be interesting if VM did wholesale their broadband at least, not in an LLU kind of way but in the old school virtual operator way. Then you would see other players delivering MPEG4 IPTV over DOCSIS 3.0 competing with VM's mostly MPEG-2 DVB-C + DOCSIS network.
I know this is an old topic but when the sparky replaced my consumer unit I had him fit a socket next to it and that socket was on the same neutral as the workshop and I have a gigabit Powerline adaptor to bridge the two spaces.