|
I remember being amused at Emery's stunts, like selling that banned 2 Live Crew tape, and paying a guy to feed nearly-expired parking meters while wearing a Santa suit, but I was in high school for that. I lost track of him when he finally left town. Sadly, I'm not surprised to learn he's a putz. And you're welcome, mediaphage! I'm sure there are some others around town, but I've been drifting out of the scene for a while. Those are ones I pass often, so I'm pretty certain they're still operating. Bieeanshee fucked around with this message at 06:05 on Sep 26, 2015 |
# ? Sep 26, 2015 06:02 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 07:20 |
|
Hey, another completely off-topic question. I didn't want to start a new thread for this right off. I thought someone here might know. You know how Amazon prime give you cloud drive for storage of files/photos, right? For the life of me, I can't figure out how to directly link to a .jpg for embedding or whatever. If I copy an image location it's not a direct .jpg link, and if I use their link tool it isn't either. For example, this is a link I get: https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/share/TQhlgmb99hsTEsnOA0pFGne8YrVBdJZkdddghsQK3TC?v=grid&ref_=cd_ph_share_link_copy but lets say for example I want the base .jpg so I can (img) (/img) into a post I see nothing on the FAQ of how to do this. Anyone know how to do this, or even if it's possible?
|
# ? Sep 26, 2015 18:10 |
|
8ender posted:I'm so sorry. At least it isn't Windsor
|
# ? Sep 26, 2015 19:00 |
|
shadow puppet of a posted:pricing contract with the distributor Since you already said you don't actually have any experience in the industry and this conversation is a real derail I'll just leave it at that. Again I do accept though that some retailers must put defective items back on the shelf even though it is not a rational thing to do. You just can't argue with facts that it's in their best interest though.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2015 22:14 |
|
Derail ahoy! But yeah, that totally does happen. For example, HITS Computers (in Ontario, I'm not sure how far they spread) were basically a retail arm of Daiwa distribution. They bought parts at set prices from distribution. They could buy parts from other distributors, but they'd lose their marketing support (e.g. Not mentioned in flyers) and they'd pay higher prices on any merch purchased through Daiwa. The retail chain died for obvious reasons (I was the last employee of the last store in Ontario), but it did exist. For the record, HITS never sold returns as new, although they did sell returned and refurbished products in discounted systems.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2015 22:35 |
|
That sounds pretty different from what he was speculating to be the case, but that is interesting. You say it stopped a long time ago though so that explains why my experience is different in the present day and why my colleagues have heard of nothing like that in the last decade. I did kinda forget (until I scrolled up just now) that this derail started with somebody talking about getting defective items sold to them as new years and years ago in the early 2000s. If some retailers had a totally different relationship with distributors back then, perhaps they were actually rationally motivated to do that kind of poo poo back then. Whereas I was only ever arguing it makes no sense for anybody to do it today the way the industry works today, which is true but kind of a seperate point.
|
# ? Sep 27, 2015 01:17 |
|
On the topic of Canadian internet, is there a map or any data out there about gigabit Fibe? I was wondering how widely deployed it is currently.
|
# ? Sep 27, 2015 16:01 |
|
It's entirely likely that they have measures in place to prevent direct linking of images. I opened that image and it spun for a minute, then I right clicked to open in a new tab and I have a URL with a different ID than the thumbnail: https://content-na.drive.amazonaws.com/cdproxy/templink/QreUYrudIGhDgsue8fed2rdpo0smwms3UmXaF1vh5oQE0Xnc3?viewBox=1505 It might just be generating image URLs on a per request/host basis to discourage direct linking.
|
# ? Sep 28, 2015 03:34 |
|
Thanks, you're probably right. Not sure why they'd be so against direct linking though. Oh well.
|
# ? Sep 28, 2015 05:01 |
|
slidebite posted:Thanks, you're probably right. Not sure why they'd be so against direct linking though. Oh well. Almost certainly to prevent it being used as cheap web storage over, say, AWS.
|
# ? Sep 28, 2015 05:44 |
|
This thread took a weird turn over the weekend
|
# ? Sep 28, 2015 16:05 |
|
Zigmidge posted:This thread took an awesome turn over the weekend
|
# ? Sep 28, 2015 19:29 |
|
zergstain posted:On the topic of Canadian internet, is there a map or any data out there about gigabit Fibe? I was wondering how widely deployed it is currently. Nothing good/concrete. Sites that have GigaFibe are generally new developments and condos (ie: where there's no preexisting copper/POTS lines to migrate). Since Bell is using Hydro's poles now for it in most areas, you can tell if the neighbourhood is even going to be capable by seeing if the new extra high power poles are installed.
|
# ? Sep 29, 2015 15:51 |
|
unknown posted:Nothing good/concrete. Sites that have GigaFibe are generally new developments and condos (ie: where there's no preexisting copper/POTS lines to migrate). Bell is actively targeting wealthy neighborhoods as well, even creating checkerboard patterns where they don't offer services to areas completely surrounded by areas getting service, with no geography that would prevent deployment. While Bell is a business and will thus behave to maximize profit, they get a huge advantage from favorable right of way access and such behavior should be investigated and corrective action forced.
|
# ? Sep 29, 2015 16:33 |
|
EoRaptor posted:While Bell is a business and will thus behave to maximize profit, they get a huge advantage from favorable right of way access and such behavior should be investigated and corrective action forced. It's cute you still think any governing body is able to control Bell, or any telco for that matter. Also, it would be pretty hard for the CRTC to step-in and demand where infrastructure was built, unless they were granted money for very specific purposes.
|
# ? Sep 29, 2015 17:17 |
|
Telus is rolling out their fibre in Port Coquitlam, anyone here get in on that? All I've heard about that was the shoddy job some of the contractors Telus hired did when patching people's driveways when they cut them to run the fibre across. I saw it on the news a few months back, they just sawed a trench into a nice looking textured driveway then shovelled in some asphalt.
|
# ? Sep 29, 2015 18:23 |
|
What the hell? Why are some contractors so poo poo?
|
# ? Sep 29, 2015 18:32 |
|
The cartel didn't get rich by writing checks to the competent. Rogers delenda est
|
# ? Sep 29, 2015 18:42 |
|
priznat posted:Telus is rolling out their fibre in Port Coquitlam, anyone here get in on that? I wonder legally what they are obliged to do in a case like that. I mean, it's obvious what they should do and that's not patch it in some lovely cheap-as-gently caress way, but typically the first few feet (meter or two) from the street is not actually owned by the homeowner/property owner, it's usually municipality owned utility right-of-way. I'd be fuming mad if that's what Telus did to me, but I wonder if they need to patch it back to a "per-existing" aesthetic or not. Also, their fiber laying process is sort of odd down here in Southern Alberta. They pretty much done the armpit community of Coaldale (a bedroom community of Lethbridge of about 8,000 people) but as far as I know haven't touched Lethbridge at all.
|
# ? Sep 29, 2015 19:03 |
|
EoRaptor posted:Bell is actively targeting wealthy neighborhoods as well, even creating checkerboard patterns where they don't offer services to areas completely surrounded by areas getting service, with no geography that would prevent deployment. Now days anybody can get RoW access on public lands, it just costs a huge amount of money upfront (bonds, contracts, gear and staffing), so newcomers aren't likely to do it in existing areas. Sometimes it's just easier/cheaper to do it via a 3rd party, which even is what Bell is doing in this case (using Hydro poles). Basically municipalities have woken up to the clusterfuck it used to be for RoW access and the new income stream and now are charging huge $ and are making sure you've got the capability to fix the gently caress ups. (ie: storm damage and the like causing your cable/pole/hole/etc to close a street). On a related note, there was someone advertising jobs on craigslist for students/etc to go around to neighbourhoods and get private RoW access (via backlane/etc) so they could provide access to companies. Business idea: Play the long game and sign up your entire neighbourhood and then lease the package to someone else for a lifetime pay cheque. The real killer for 3rd party access to the GigaFibe network is going to be the backhaul cross connects. Instead of a single connection to Bell for all of Ont/Que (right now), the provider will have to get connections to each regional node (ie: CO - although that's not set yet) with 10G+. Basically Bell is offloading the backhaul costs to the providers which at that speed/distance is very expensive. Hopefully that'll get dealt with at the CRTC. This is what will be the doom of the independent ISP. So now you'll have things like the 3rd party only light up a small region and go intensive there and skip everywhere else until economics say otherwise.
|
# ? Sep 29, 2015 19:40 |
|
iirc it was well inside the homeowner's property, just a couple feet in front of their garage. It was a terrible job too. Yeesh.
|
# ? Sep 29, 2015 19:50 |
|
unknown posted:Now days anybody can get RoW access on public lands, it just costs a huge amount of money upfront (bonds, contracts, gear and staffing), so newcomers aren't likely to do it in existing areas. Sometimes it's just easier/cheaper to do it via a 3rd party, which even is what Bell is doing in this case (using Hydro poles). Basically municipalities have woken up to the clusterfuck it used to be for RoW access and the new income stream and now are charging huge $ and are making sure you've got the capability to fix the gently caress ups. (ie: storm damage and the like causing your cable/pole/hole/etc to close a street). Where I work, our fibre deployment is using a combination of using Bell / Hydro / Local Utility poles, putting in our own poles, and doing underground work with directional drilling. I'm not directly involved in the process, but it's very interesting to see unfold. Our biggest enemy in all of this? loving squirrels.
|
# ? Sep 29, 2015 19:51 |
|
unknown posted:Now days anybody can get RoW access on public lands, it just costs a huge amount of money upfront (bonds, contracts, gear and staffing), so newcomers aren't likely to do it in existing areas. Sometimes it's just easier/cheaper to do it via a 3rd party, which even is what Bell is doing in this case (using Hydro poles). Basically municipalities have woken up to the clusterfuck it used to be for RoW access and the new income stream and now are charging huge $ and are making sure you've got the capability to fix the gently caress ups. (ie: storm damage and the like causing your cable/pole/hole/etc to close a street). Bells advantage is they can use any existing right of way they have for this, and they have a huge, huge number of them, built almost all at the public expense. This is way such targeted tactics should be rejected. And yes, it's pretty easy to have an assessment done of an area that borders any other serviced area on two or more sides and request Bell to explain what, precisely, is stopping them from deploying and offering services there. Is the CRTC likely to do this? Maybe. They've been coming around more and more that Bell/Rogers/Telus/Shaw aren't very honest and have been demanding more open access out of them. It all gets bogged down in endless litigation, which is all about exhausting their competitors, not offering better product, but that's the way things are currently structured in this country.
|
# ? Sep 29, 2015 21:04 |
|
It certainly reflects what John Ralston Saul was getting at by saying that Canada's corporate execs are the laziest on earth. "We don't get a guaranteed monopoly when we spend our money building something? Eh, then we won't bother, and block anyone else who tries."
|
# ? Sep 29, 2015 21:35 |
|
Chris Knight posted:It certainly reflects what John Ralston Saul was getting at by saying that Canada's corporate execs are the laziest on earth. "We don't get a guaranteed monopoly when we spend our money building something? Eh, then we won't bother, and block anyone else who tries." And it's loving infuriating.
|
# ? Sep 29, 2015 21:42 |
|
Speaking of London again (sorry you guys) it's my understanding they're doing a fiber network in the downtown core in an attempt to bring businesses in? I'm not sure where I saw it (it's gonna be super embarrassing if it was this loving thread) but it's certainly not advertised well. I wonder if they'll ever consider expanding it to residential.
|
# ? Sep 30, 2015 01:30 |
|
One of the most galling things is in downtown Kitchener there is a Google office, which houses a team working on Google Fiber, and there are still no plans for rolling it out here.
|
# ? Sep 30, 2015 01:42 |
|
Skandranon posted:One of the most galling things is in downtown Kitchener there is a Google office, which houses a team working on Google Fiber, and there are still no plans for rolling it out here. The only galling thing about it is that every six months some nimrod uses it post "WHOA GOOGL FIBR IS COMIN TO CANADA!!!!! OMG"
|
# ? Sep 30, 2015 03:50 |
|
I doubt we'll ever see Google Fibre in Canada, and can you really blame them? gently caress dealing with the CRTC.
|
# ? Sep 30, 2015 04:02 |
|
unknown posted:Now days anybody can get RoW access on public lands, it just costs a huge amount of money upfront (bonds, contracts, gear and staffing), so newcomers aren't likely to do it in existing areas. Sometimes it's just easier/cheaper to do it via a 3rd party, which even is what Bell is doing in this case (using Hydro poles). Basically municipalities have woken up to the clusterfuck it used to be for RoW access and the new income stream and now are charging huge $ and are making sure you've got the capability to fix the gently caress ups. (ie: storm damage and the like causing your cable/pole/hole/etc to close a street).
|
# ? Sep 30, 2015 04:48 |
|
37th Chamber posted:I doubt we'll ever see Google Fibre in Canada, and can you really blame them? I'd be bummed if they didn't try eventually. Google Fiber initially seemed like a game of brinksmanship with the lovely US ISPs. Showing them that their oligarchy like system could be disrupted by a competitor with deep pockets and a business model that didn't give a poo poo about subscriber revenue. It's exactly the kind of thing needed in Canada and Google is the right kind of company to absorb the massive FUD campaigns that would come out of Bell and Rogers.
|
# ? Sep 30, 2015 06:56 |
|
8ender posted:I'd be bummed if they didn't try eventually. Google Fiber initially seemed like a game of brinksmanship with the lovely US ISPs. Showing them that their oligarchy like system could be disrupted by a competitor with deep pockets and a business model that didn't give a poo poo about subscriber revenue. I'm not sure about the point. You can't be a foreign company and own more than 10% marketshare, ever. I know Google seems to like doing things for the "good" of people, but GFiber is still a business. Would they be satisfied going through the trouble of setting up a service, getting television contracts, doing all of this investment, and never being able to rise above a certain point? I'm not sure. I mean 10% is still a lot of money, so I don't think that's the only impediment, but it's definitely something to consider.
|
# ? Sep 30, 2015 13:06 |
|
mediaphage posted:I'm not sure about the point. You can't be a foreign company and own more than 10% marketshare, ever. I know Google seems to like doing things for the "good" of people, but GFiber is still a business. Would they be satisfied going through the trouble of setting up a service, getting television contracts, doing all of this investment, and never being able to rise above a certain point? I'm not sure. I mean 10% is still a lot of money, so I don't think that's the only impediment, but it's definitely something to consider. I'd be happy with them at 10% market share, assuming I'm part of that 10%.
|
# ? Sep 30, 2015 15:59 |
|
mediaphage posted:I'm not sure about the point. You can't be a foreign company and own more than 10% marketshare, ever. I know Google seems to like doing things for the "good" of people, but GFiber is still a business. Would they be satisfied going through the trouble of setting up a service, getting television contracts, doing all of this investment, and never being able to rise above a certain point? I'm not sure. I mean 10% is still a lot of money, so I don't think that's the only impediment, but it's definitely something to consider. With the way the government has been bending over backwards to spur start up cell service, I wouldn't be surprised if that spreads elsewhere in communications of a bunch of money is promised for infrastructure development. Unless a new government becomes protectionist at the expense of consumers.
|
# ? Sep 30, 2015 16:15 |
|
Skandranon posted:I'd be happy with them at 10% market share, assuming I'm part of that 10%. Yeah no poo poo. So would I.
|
# ? Sep 30, 2015 21:17 |
|
mediaphage posted:Yeah no poo poo. So would I. So yes, I DO expect Google to set me up with fiber out of the goodness of their hearts.
|
# ? Sep 30, 2015 21:27 |
|
I was at the google Kitchener open house awhile ago and went to a Google Fiber session. Everyone asked about local fiber and they said they are interested and talked to the mayor but the crtc is the major obstacle.
|
# ? Oct 2, 2015 04:56 |
|
Telus are going to bring fiber to most of Vancouver over the next five years.
|
# ? Oct 2, 2015 18:57 |
|
EngineerJoe posted:I was at the google Kitchener open house awhile ago and went to a Google Fiber session. Everyone asked about local fiber and they said they are interested and talked to the mayor but the crtc is the major obstacle. I wish whoever it was would explain why (but I guess the audience wasn't conducive to details), because aside from the foreign ownership rules discussed above I can't imagine why the CRTC would give a poo poo. They certainly haven't had a problem with muni fiber.
|
# ? Oct 2, 2015 19:38 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 07:20 |
|
This is the organization that ruled a Bryan Adams album didn't qualify as Canadian content because it was co-written by a foreigner. They can be very prickly about foreign ownership and influence, and I'm not surprised they'd be leery about giving Google any kind of an 'in'.
|
# ? Oct 2, 2015 23:01 |