"thanatoid" <waiting@the.exit.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns991D8C800FEFFthanexit@66.250.146.158...

"Noozer" <dont.spam@me.here> wrote in
news:E5PXh.126796$DE1.126581@pd7urf2no:

Nice to see a little sanity interjected into the discussion.
Thank you.


--
Disagreements and the usual insults expected and welcomed.

thanatoid wrote:
However, once that compressed item is received, it is expanded to
more than the original number of bits, and those are deposited in
your file. You never see the compression or expansion. Neither
does the other end. Thus the apparent rate can exceed 56k.

--
<http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt>
<http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/423>
<http://www.aaxnet.com/editor/edit043.html>
cbfalconer at maineline.net



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Apr 24, 8:24 pm, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Where can I find examples of this?

CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:463005D7.3941D61@yahoo.com:

Yes, I know. I understand the concept of compression and
decompression, BION.

Also, while I SINCERELY apologize for dragging this on, but
surely you meant "same as the original" unless by "original" you
mean "compressed" which would be kind of weird IMO.

As to what is "apparent" or not - to whom and under what
circumstances - well, this may not be the best group for that
subject... ;-)



--
Disagreements and the usual insults expected and welcomed.

Radium <glucegen1@gmail.com> wrote in
news:1177561509.204860.273470@c18g2000prb.googlegr oups.com:

This link does not provide EXAMPLES but appears to claim it to
be possible - albeit troublesome to put it mildly. (In fact I
doubt it HAS been done, certainly not with a THOUSAND modems.)

http://rescomp.stanford.edu/~cheshir...s/Latency.html


--
Disagreements and the usual insults expected and welcomed.

"thanatoid" wrote:
There used to be something called "shotgunning modems", where you would use
two modems on two different phone lines in the same box to double your d/l
speed. It was pretty picky though, IIRC.

Jon

On 26 Apr 2007 05:00:02 GMT, thanatoid
<waiting@the.exit.invalid> wrote:


Good, then the dead horse has been beaten enough.

Don't let ego drag out a thread that was senseless right
from the start.

Also, please do not change thread subject lines! If you
disagree with a topic, fine, put that in the body of the
message. A subject line is for continuity of threads, not a
place to put your own personal opinions by changing the
subject (line).

"kony" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:d0k133pso74m8po8jpcgqjmjbb3okf3i47@4ax.com...
thanatoid may be a troll. it's an ancient tactic to say one thing,
backpedal, agree with some people, argue with others, etc.

this thread may be akin to counting the angels on the head of a pin. no ISP
or phone company will agree to bond 1,000 phone lines. they'd insist on
fiber, T1, whatever for 56 mbps.

you can get high speed lines run to homes. the guy who owns nyx.net has
one.

even multilink 2 * 56k would be silly. you can get satellite internet for
that price.

most dialup ISPs have timeouts, as low as 4 hours for PeoplePC. ironically
AOL, considered the worst ISP by many, has no timeout locally.

kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:

Who the fuck died and made you boss of usenet, you snot-nosed little
fuckwad?

kony <spam@spam.com> wrote in
news:d0k133pso74m8po8jpcgqjmjbb3okf3i47@4ax.com:

*That* statement proves it to you? I SAID I'm sorry to have
dragged this on - I just have nothing better to do when I drink
my morning coffee.

I have no ego - but I admit I enjoy having the last word, even
if it's incorrect, as it often is. And I was the 1st one to say
the thread was stupid and probably trollwork. However, I read a
few articles and learned a few things (admittedly, pretty
useless) as a result of it.

Lighten up. I did not CHANGE it, I added a phrase. It's done all
the time. When Usenet consisted of 3,000 geeks, "rules" made
sense to all of them.

But it's not 1985 anymore. I read a thread in a group frequented
by *serious* anal-retentives just yesterday, which had about 30
posts, 75% of them top-posting, and no-one even bothered to make
an issue of it. I was actually surprised.



--
Disagreements and the usual insults expected and welcomed.

"S" <s@example.net> wrote in
news:4630e213$0$97237$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readf reenews.net:

And you may be stupid.

Yes, conversation has been an option for Homo Sapiens for SOME
time.
Welcome to the world of human and semi-human interaction. (Some
claim all humans are descended from trolls, you know.)

I, "the troll" was the first to say the OP WAS a troll. I still
can't understand how this has dragged on so long. But if you
read my posts, at least I found out that it is apparently
technically possible to do it - which I did NOT originally
believe. In practice, of course, it would never happen.

<SNIP>


--
Disagreements and the usual insults expected and welcomed.

Malcolm Cartwright wrote:

Most people realize that what is typed into the SUBJECT header has
nothing to do with how a conversation is threaded. Continuity results
from the REFERENCE TO portion of the complete header.

"UCLAN" <nomail@thanks.org> wrote in message
news:sN6Yh.12404$OJ1.6161@newsfe13.phx...
depends. Outlook Express and Thunderbird sometimes link "Troll Thread 1" to
another older "Troll Thread 1", even though they are separate.

i understand that better newsreaders don't have that shortcoming.

"thanatoid" <waiting@the.exit.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns991E8A82633ACthanexit@66.250.146.158...
no, i am observant, and you said compression is how modems achieve their
rated speeds. which is wrong. then you reversed and said that the line
speed was 56k. i'm using paraphrasing, but that was precisely the argument
you made.

it was not the backpedalling that makes me suspicious, but the fact you
didn't admit to be wrong.

you are using ancient troll methods, whether intentional or not.

"UCLAN" <nomail@thanks.org> wrote in message
news:sN6Yh.12404$OJ1.6161@newsfe13.phx...
a lot of netiquette is covered in RFCs. while there is no boss of Usenet,
there are strong recommendations for proper behaviour.

people munge incorrectly (e.g. acme.com), > 4 line sigs, incorrect
delimiters, etc. this is no different than the asshole street racers.

"Malcolm Cartwright" <stocky-street-sister@ratty-vadge.co.th> wrote in
message news:3EE745DB.A97C47A4@alt.bitch.afflicted.pushin' .cushion...
have you written any RFCs?

S <s@example.net> wrote:

Have you read any RFCs, pisswit?

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:15:56 GMT, "Malcolm Cartwright"
<stocky-street-sister@ratty-vadge.co.th> wrote:


I don't recall asking for your opinion.

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:09:23 -0700, UCLAN
<nomail@thanks.org> wrote:


Sure, but by the same token most people also realize if the
post is just a continuation of the same thread, the subject
line is purposefully left unchanged.