mikecb

40 ms·

361.
by mikecb 12y ago
*Fifth.
362.
by mikecb 12y ago
My favorite example of ggplots ease and customizability comes from xkcd style graphs: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12675147/how-can-we-make-...
363.
by mikecb 12y ago
The Coast Guard has a very interesting set of law enforcement, military, and regulatory authorities.
364.
by mikecb 12y ago
Sweden, where the sun doesn't shine enough to induce a great deal of natural vitamin D production, might not be the best place for such a topic with so many contributing factors. Vox could have written a very interesting article about
365.
by mikecb 12y ago
I would hope so.
366.
by mikecb 12y ago
Shimomura was successfully prosecuted?
367.
by mikecb 12y ago
Also s/Logisitc/Logistic
368.
by mikecb 12y ago
It might be more accurate, though confusing for lay readers, to explain that replacing the operating system can both increase--by keeping more up to date than official updates might allow--and decrease--by deactivating security features tha
369.
by mikecb 12y ago
I suggest you read the SCOTUS opinions in the cases that generated the exclusionary[1] and other "prophylactic" rules. The judiciary has created several, including this one and the Miranda warnings[2], in order to protect the inte
370.
by mikecb 12y ago
The basic rule is http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/exclusionary_rule
371.
by mikecb 12y ago
Not necessarily. It just means that whatever court does hear the case will apply New York law to it, because those are the rules the contracting parties have agreed to use, whether that court be in New York, California, or Scotland. Having
372.
by mikecb 12y ago
You're both partly right: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Centre_for_Settle... The World Bank itself gives loans, advice, and research. But there are a large number of semi-associated agencies, under th
373.
by mikecb 12y ago
Many banks will request a fingerprint to cash a check if you do not have a preexisting relationship with the bank.
374.
by mikecb 12y ago
Wired used to have fantastic long forms like this, I wonder what happened. Some of my favorites: Recipe for Disaster: The Formula That Killed Wall Street http://archive.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/17-03&#x2
375.
by mikecb 12y ago
The law changed recently. The lower limit is now 25cm, but I'm not sure if that's due to Digital Globe's new satellite or if that is the new legal limit. [1] http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04&#x2
376.
by mikecb 12y ago
I think Verizon has an internal struggle. They are both a transit provider and an end-user isp. I think their transit role, which made this deal with Level3 for settlement-free peering, and its ISP role, which made deals with end users for
377.
by mikecb 12y ago
That's very true. The only limit would be losing customer (HA!) because they didn't connect to the right content providers. There's some interesting network effects here that smell like positive externalities, which would exp
378.
by mikecb 12y ago
I guess the idea is that backbone providers will each have a similar number of ISPs (and content networks) to deliver traffic from and to. That's clearly not the case, especially with Verizon providing both a backbone and an ISP, and l
379.
by mikecb 12y ago
To your edit: No, my theory was that, when the businesses aren't servicing each other, as in a mutual transit scenario, then one getting a benefit at the expense of the other is unfair. Honestly, it's a case of externalities, so w
380.
by mikecb 12y ago
You make a much better point than I've seen here. Verizon acting both as a backbone and as an ISP. This creates an internal conflict between those businesses.
381.
by mikecb 12y ago
Why not? There's plenty of price data for high volume bandwidth applications, and even if there weren't, the parties could negotiate for it.
382.
by mikecb 12y ago
I have a website I host from home. Am I entitled to free FIOS because someone else on FIOS wants to access it? That's the question. It gets confused in the peering issue. And settlement free peering is important, even essential to how
383.
by mikecb 12y ago
Good to know. And these all remain settlement-free?
384.
by mikecb 12y ago
And I don't know how Verizon's backbone is laid out. But they have transit and end-user traffic. Regardless, if Level3 keeps insisting this is a peering point, and then demonstrating that it's more like a transit to ISP link.
385.
by mikecb 12y ago
Right. And the latter has to pay for it.
386.
by mikecb 12y ago
Surely someone should. Level3 is getting squeezed between its customer (Netflix) and its customer's customers.
387.
by mikecb 12y ago
I agree to an extent. But there's a point at which Level3 stops becoming a peer and starts becoming a subscriber. That point is somewhere between equal utilization of Verizon's peering point and (near) total upstream into Verizon&
388.
by mikecb 12y ago
And Verizon claims that peering points are intended to be roughly equal in directional usage. Which this is not. Are there examples of peering agreements where companies don't care that usage isn't balanced and still don't re
389.
by mikecb 12y ago
Is it just me or is this not at all inconsistent with Verizon's arguments? They've been saying the whole time that this link is meant to be balanced with roughly equal upstream and downstream, and they showed it was not. What am
390.
by mikecb 12y ago
Report say it was flying too high for a manpad. These countermeasures wouldn't work against a Buk or other radar guided missile.

More ›