Why are old threads so slow?

[Rat in the Hat]

Bush administration the F.C.C. deregulated high-speed Internet providers, arguing that cable Internet access was different from the kind of high-speed Internet access provided by phone companies. Cable Internet access providers, the commission said, really offered an integrated bundle of services — not just Internet connection but also e-mail, Web hosting, news groups and other services. So the F.C.C. declared that high-speed Internet access would no longer be considered a “telecommunications service” but rather an “information service.” This removed all high-speed Internet access services — phone as well as cable — from regulation under the common-carrier section of the Communications Act.

This was a radical move, because it reversed the long-held assumption that a nondiscriminatory communications network was essential to economic growth, civic welfare and innovation. At the same time, the F.C.C. said that it would retain the power to regulate Internet access providers if the need arose, under another section of the Communications Act.

The Bush F.C.C. hoped that deregulation would prompt greater competition in Internet access services. But a wave of mergers instead reduced it. Prices stayed high and speeds slow. And eventually the carriers started saying that they wanted to be gatekeepers — creating fast lanes for some Web sites and applications and slow lanes for others.



Op-Ed Contributor - An Internet for Everybody - NYTimes.com

You and the writer of your linked OPINION piece are facking retards.

EVERY telecom offers high speed internet, television, and phone services.

EVERY cable company offers high speed internet, television, and phone services.

EVERY satellite provider offers high speed internet, television, and phone services.

The fact that your internet connection is so slow has nothing to do with the Bush administration. It all has to do with the fact that you're so cheap, you have your upload/download data packets delivered by carrier pigeon.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Eh, I give up. I've tried stopping the .exe file in active running programs that blocks things, but it still blocks things.

No biggie anyway. Like I said, fast enough for me. I just visit sites that it allows me to.

 

[percysunshine]

It is all Al Gores fault.

 

[Ringel05]

Or CometBird, Arora, LunaScape...... etc.

Hold on, lemme try.

I could download and install Lunascape, but sites still blocked. No-go.

Try the Webkit search feature with Lunascape, look at the address bar, just to the right it will have Trident or Gecko listed, click on the down arrow and select Webkit.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Eh, I give up. I've tried stopping the .exe file in active running programs that blocks things, but it still blocks things.

No biggie anyway. Like I said, fast enough for me. I just visit sites that it allows me to.

OK, the alternate browser trick won't work for you. Do you use any VPN connections on your job?

 

[RadiomanATL]

Hold on, lemme try.

I could download and install Lunascape, but sites still blocked. No-go.

Try the Webkit search feature with Lunascape, look at the address bar, just to the right it will have Trident or Gecko listed, click on the down arrow and select Webkit.

I've already uninstalled. I don't want any nasty emails/phone calls from the IT department for downloading programs. They've made it very, very clear that it is a no-no.

The only one I got away with was FF, and that's because they were going to make it one of the official browsers that is allowed within the company.

 

[Ringel05]

What are you using, a Commodore 64 and an AOL dial up connection???

I can point you in the right direction of someone with a much more powerful computer. And some nifty little uses for it.

It is the price one pays for living off the beaten track.... and using my old lappie.

You mean one of these?...

 

[RadiomanATL]

Eh, I give up. I've tried stopping the .exe file in active running programs that blocks things, but it still blocks things.

No biggie anyway. Like I said, fast enough for me. I just visit sites that it allows me to.

OK, the alternate browser trick won't work for you. Do you use any VPN connections on your job?

You'll have to explain what a VPN is.

I'm an audio geek, not a computer geek.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Eh, I give up. I've tried stopping the .exe file in active running programs that blocks things, but it still blocks things.

No biggie anyway. Like I said, fast enough for me. I just visit sites that it allows me to.

OK, the alternate browser trick won't work for you. Do you use any VPN connections on your job?

You'll have to explain what a VPN is.

I'm an audio geek, not a computer geek.

It's a virtual private network. Usually a connection to another company's computer system. I had one to one of my vendor's systems, and their IT folks didn't block anything, so I would tie in to that whenever I wanted to visit a site that I just couldn't find a work-around on our system.

 

[RadiomanATL]

OK, the alternate browser trick won't work for you. Do you use any VPN connections on your job?

You'll have to explain what a VPN is.

I'm an audio geek, not a computer geek.

It's a virtual private network. Usually a connection to another company's computer system. I had one to one of my vendor's systems, and their IT folks didn't block anything, so I would tie in to that whenever I wanted to visit a site that I just couldn't find a work-around on our system.

I'm pretty sure we have that, but I have no idea how to access it. I download the audio I need every week via websites directly and an FTP site.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

You'll have to explain what a VPN is.

I'm an audio geek, not a computer geek.

It's a virtual private network. Usually a connection to another company's computer system. I had one to one of my vendor's systems, and their IT folks didn't block anything, so I would tie in to that whenever I wanted to visit a site that I just couldn't find a work-around on our system.

I'm pretty sure we have that, but I have no idea how to access it. I download the audio I need every week via websites directly and an FTP site.

I don't think you have it. If you did, you would know. It requires a separate set of user names and passwords, and while you're on it, you can't access your own system.

 

[RadiomanATL]

It's a virtual private network. Usually a connection to another company's computer system. I had one to one of my vendor's systems, and their IT folks didn't block anything, so I would tie in to that whenever I wanted to visit a site that I just couldn't find a work-around on our system.

I'm pretty sure we have that, but I have no idea how to access it. I download the audio I need every week via websites directly and an FTP site.

I don't think you have it. If you did, you would know. It requires a separate set of user names and passwords, and while you're on it, you can't access your own system.

OK, yeah. That sounds like something we have, but I don't have access to it.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

I'm pretty sure we have that, but I have no idea how to access it. I download the audio I need every week via websites directly and an FTP site.

I don't think you have it. If you did, you would know. It requires a separate set of user names and passwords, and while you're on it, you can't access your own system.

OK, yeah. That sounds like something we have, but I don't have access to it.

I hated using their programs because they were all text based, and had no point and click functions. You had to hit the "F" keys to flip screens. But I loved being able to just open the VPN, then go wherever I wanted on the internet.

My employees being stuck viewing only company approved websites - $12.00 per hour.

Me being able to view whatever I wanted - priceless.

For everything else, there's VPN.

 

[Amelia]

Ducking back in.

Yes, that's also where I have experienced occasional slow times - when I've made or edited comments.

So, not so much in simply downloading the page. But maybe in submitting comments.



BRB.

I just posted a test comment in your long thread and sure enough ... quite the delay. I counted up to 38-one-thousand before it finally posted.






Edit to add: In contrast this post went through in less than two seconds.

I checked again this morning, TM. It took 39 seconds for my post to show up in your thread this time.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-difficult-to-vote-thread-91.html#post4187879



I also made a post in the Coffee Shop. It took 12 seconds for that post to show up. The Coffee Shop thread is longer than yours so I was braced for a longer post time, so the result is sort of mysterious. 12 seconds is still longer than average so the length of the Coffee Shop thread might be a factor there. But maybe there are other factors also. Possibly the forum the long thread is in? or?




Space reserved for how long it will take for this post to show up in this relatively short thread: ____this post took 3 seconds ____

 

[Ringel05]

Ducking back in.

Yes, that's also where I have experienced occasional slow times - when I've made or edited comments.

So, not so much in simply downloading the page. But maybe in submitting comments.



BRB.

I just posted a test comment in your long thread and sure enough ... quite the delay. I counted up to 38-one-thousand before it finally posted.






Edit to add: In contrast this post went through in less than two seconds.

I checked again this morning, TM. It took 39 seconds for my post to show up in your thread this time.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-difficult-to-vote-thread-91.html#post4187879



I also made a post in the Coffee Shop. It took 12 seconds for that post to show up. The Coffee Shop thread is longer than yours so I was braced for a longer post time, so the result is sort of mysterious. 12 seconds is still longer than average so the length of the Coffee Shop thread might be a factor there. But maybe there are other factors also. Possibly the forum the long thread is in? or?




Space reserved for how long it will take for this post to show up in this relatively short thread: ____this post took 3 seconds ____

It just took me less than 5 seconds and I'm tethered to my 3G phone which is slow by my standards.

 

[Amelia]

Ducking back in.

Yes, that's also where I have experienced occasional slow times - when I've made or edited comments.

So, not so much in simply downloading the page. But maybe in submitting comments.



BRB.

I just posted a test comment in your long thread and sure enough ... quite the delay. I counted up to 38-one-thousand before it finally posted.






Edit to add: In contrast this post went through in less than two seconds.

I checked again this morning, TM. It took 39 seconds for my post to show up in your thread this time.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-difficult-to-vote-thread-91.html#post4187879



I also made a post in the Coffee Shop. It took 12 seconds for that post to show up. The Coffee Shop thread is longer than yours so I was braced for a longer post time, so the result is sort of mysterious. 12 seconds is still longer than average so the length of the Coffee Shop thread might be a factor there. But maybe there are other factors also. Possibly the forum the long thread is in? or?




Space reserved for how long it will take for this post to show up in this relatively short thread: ____this post took 3 seconds ____

It just took me less than 5 seconds and I'm tethered to my 3G phone which is slow by my standards.

5 seconds in which thread?

To me the question isn't about anyone's individual computer speed as much as it is about the differences between different threads.

How long does it take for your 3G phone to post to TM's long thread in comparison with this thread?

 

[Ringel05]

I checked again this morning, TM. It took 39 seconds for my post to show up in your thread this time.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-difficult-to-vote-thread-91.html#post4187879



I also made a post in the Coffee Shop. It took 12 seconds for that post to show up. The Coffee Shop thread is longer than yours so I was braced for a longer post time, so the result is sort of mysterious. 12 seconds is still longer than average so the length of the Coffee Shop thread might be a factor there. But maybe there are other factors also. Possibly the forum the long thread is in? or?




Space reserved for how long it will take for this post to show up in this relatively short thread: ____this post took 3 seconds ____

It just took me less than 5 seconds and I'm tethered to my 3G phone which is slow by my standards.

5 seconds in which thread?

To me the question isn't about anyone's individual computer speed as much as it is about the differences between different threads.

How long does it take for your 3G phone to post to TM's long thread in comparison with this thread?

5 seconds in the thread you linked. That's what we were discussing, right?
BTW this thread takes less than a second.

 

[Amelia]

It just took me less than 5 seconds and I'm tethered to my 3G phone which is slow by my standards.

5 seconds in which thread?

To me the question isn't about anyone's individual computer speed as much as it is about the differences between different threads.

How long does it take for your 3G phone to post to TM's long thread in comparison with this thread?

5 seconds in the thread you linked. That's what we were discussing, right?
BTW this thread takes less than a second.

Thanks for clarifying, and for checking this thread too.

I think the issue is the longer threads taking longer to post in than shorter threads would. And thus, if I interpreted the context correctly, an issue with some threads being made artificially long by combining them with older threads.

Anyway, longer threads taking longer to post in than shorter threads.

You seem to confirm that for whatever reason, Truthmatters' thread does take longer than other threads. 5 seconds isn't a lot of time but there is at least some lag for you. And a lot of lag for me. And apparently a significant lag for Truthmatters.

 

[Ringel05]

5 seconds in which thread?

To me the question isn't about anyone's individual computer speed as much as it is about the differences between different threads.

How long does it take for your 3G phone to post to TM's long thread in comparison with this thread?

5 seconds in the thread you linked. That's what we were discussing, right?
BTW this thread takes less than a second.

Thanks for clarifying, and for checking this thread too.

I think the issue is the longer threads taking longer to post in than shorter threads would. And thus, if I interpreted the context correctly, an issue with some threads being made artificially long by combining them with older threads.

Anyway, longer threads taking longer to post in than shorter threads.

You seem to confirm that for whatever reason, Truthmatters' thread does take longer than other threads. 5 seconds isn't a lot of time but there is at least some lag for you. And a lot of lag for me. And apparently a significant lag for Truthmatters.

It's a given that it's gonna take longer, more data to load plus the time required is determined by the computer, the internet connection being used and how busy both are. Apparently her's is taking quite a while to perform that function and I was hoping she'd give me some more info so I could try to figure out the problem or at least make suggestions to help alleviate the situation.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

5 seconds in the thread you linked. That's what we were discussing, right?
BTW this thread takes less than a second.

Thanks for clarifying, and for checking this thread too.

I think the issue is the longer threads taking longer to post in than shorter threads would. And thus, if I interpreted the context correctly, an issue with some threads being made artificially long by combining them with older threads.

Anyway, longer threads taking longer to post in than shorter threads.

You seem to confirm that for whatever reason, Truthmatters' thread does take longer than other threads. 5 seconds isn't a lot of time but there is at least some lag for you. And a lot of lag for me. And apparently a significant lag for Truthmatters.

It's a given that it's gonna take longer, more data to load plus the time required is determined by the computer, the internet connection being used and how busy both are. Apparently her's is taking quite a while to perform that function and I was hoping she'd give me some more info so I could try to figure out the problem or at least make suggestions to help alleviate the situation.

I'd like to add that it also depends on how busy USMB's server is, and their internet connection too.