 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/2/2012 12:39, Warp wrote:
> (*) Well not "rent" per se. I think the closest term I can find with google
> is "condominium payment" or "condo fee". But this same housing cooperative
> has rental housing with the same deal.
FWIW, the word "condo fee" means the money you pay to the condo association
to maintain the part of the condo you don't own (e.g., the swimming pool,
the sidewalk, repaint the stairwells, etc.)
Home Owner Association fee is the same thing for separate houses.
The home owner association is a non-profit group made entirely of home
owners. Similarly for condos. It's there to take care of such shared property.
Rent for a condo (in the USA at least) usually includes the cost of the
condo fee.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/2/2012 14:39, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> I'm not sure what the English term for this is.
>
> OIC, I'm not sure either. Could you basically walk away from it if you
> wanted to?
Seconded. That sounds odd. An unusual form of ownership.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/3/2012 5:31, Warp wrote:
> I think the Finnish term that most accurately corresponds to this is
> "asunto-osake", which literally means "apartment share" (as in a stock
> market share). I think that you literally buy a share (in the exact same
> way as you would buy shares of any compnay) and you own the apartment as
> property. The apartment is usually located in a building and you have to
> pay a (relatively small) monthly fee for the maintenance (which would be
> exactly a "condo fee", AFAIK).
Kewl. So some organization or company owns the entire building, and you own
part of that organization, which gives you certain rights in the building. A
neat system. I think I've heard of that in the USA, but it's far from common.
> This form of living is a bit like that, except you don't actually own the
> apartment as property, although you have much more rights to it than with
> a rented apartment.
There's something in the USA called a "time-share", where you own 1/52'nd of
one apartment, and you get to use it during that week, with the intent that
you use it for vacations. Another odd thing I don't think I've seen outside
of north america.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/2/2012 13:12, clipka wrote:
> On a typical point-to-point link between a gamer's computer and the internet
> provider, the data transfer rate has absolutely, positively /nothing/ to do
> with latency.
This isn't true. The higher the throughput, the faster the end of the packet
arrives after the beginning has been sent.
Send a 1K packet 100 miles over a 300-baud modem. Now send a 1K packet 100
miles over a gigabit fiber. Which gets there first if you start them at the
same time?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/3/2012 1:17, Invisible wrote:
>>> (Hell, I have a 100 mbit *LAN* and VNC is still laggy as hell...)
>>
>> VNC is an insult to any network. X11 had some clue, but VNC really lost
>> everything. Worst than VNC, I guess, would be running VM via VNC...
>
> Funny. Everybody tells me that X11 has a really horrid wire protocol...
Compared to everything except VNC, it does.
>> Also, default client for VNC do not have compression (tsclient nor
>> vinagre).
>
> Actually I'm using TightVNC, which is supposedly one of the best.
The best VNC. That's not saying much.
> I hate to say it, but RDP seems to be more reliable. Although no less laggy...
RDP using Microsoft's client is by far the best remote experience I've had.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 03/08/2012 19:21, Darren New nous fit lire :
> On 8/2/2012 13:12, clipka wrote:
>> On a typical point-to-point link between a gamer's computer and the
>> internet
>> provider, the data transfer rate has absolutely, positively /nothing/
>> to do
>> with latency.
>
> This isn't true. The higher the throughput, the faster the end of the
> packet arrives after the beginning has been sent.
>
> Send a 1K packet 100 miles over a 300-baud modem. Now send a 1K packet
> 100 miles over a gigabit fiber. Which gets there first if you start them
> at the same time?
>
A case does not make a general truth.
Please considere the bandwidth of a 747 filled with dual layer DVD-R (or
now blu-ray).
It will blast even your fiber, on raw value of provided bandwidth.
Yet, the plane won't leave before it get full... may take a few hours of
latency to cover the 100 miles (most on ground).
Bandwidth and latency are not always connected. In fact, for a real
situation, a satellite link (dedicated, you have $$$) is really a big
bandwidth, yet the latency is uncompressible, and worse than a fiber to
make a 100 miles trip.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
> On 8/3/2012 5:31, Warp wrote:
> > I think the Finnish term that most accurately corresponds to this is
> > "asunto-osake", which literally means "apartment share" (as in a stock
> > market share). I think that you literally buy a share (in the exact same
> > way as you would buy shares of any compnay) and you own the apartment as
> > property. The apartment is usually located in a building and you have to
> > pay a (relatively small) monthly fee for the maintenance (which would be
> > exactly a "condo fee", AFAIK).
> Kewl. So some organization or company owns the entire building, and you own
> part of that organization, which gives you certain rights in the building. A
> neat system. I think I've heard of that in the USA, but it's far from common.
I think that "housing cooperative" is the most accurate term for that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_cooperative
However, the "in-between" form of my apartment might be unique to Finland
(or very few countries).
Basically it's: "Pay 15% (or such) of the apartment's full price, and you
can live there cheaper than the rent of the same apartment would be, plus
you get more rights to the apartment than with a rented apartment (eg. you
can perform modifications and renovations to a much larger extent, and it's
a bit more difficult for the building's owner to kick you out, for insance)."
The upside of this is also that you can move out at any moment (with a
month's notice) and you get that 15% you paid back (inflation-adjusted).
However, you don't actually *own* the apartment. You can't eg. sell it to
someone else, and there are limits to what you can do to it.
> There's something in the USA called a "time-share", where you own 1/52'nd of
> one apartment, and you get to use it during that week, with the intent that
> you use it for vacations. Another odd thing I don't think I've seen outside
> of north america.
There are time-share schemes like that in Finland, especially for luxury
vacation cottages near to skiing centers and such (which would otherwise
be *way* too expensive for the average person to buy).
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/08/2012 9:09 AM, Invisible wrote:
>
> Maybe in your country. Over here, most people don't even realise that
> it's /possible/ to have fiber to your house. (Or that this would be
> beneficial somehow.)
Balderdash!
It is not the century of the Fruit bat any more.
Don't believe him folk. :-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/08/2012 6:47 PM, Warp wrote:
> However, the "in-between" form of my apartment might be unique to Finland
> (or very few countries).
>
> Basically it's: "Pay 15% (or such) of the apartment's full price, and you
> can live there cheaper than the rent of the same apartment would be, plus
> you get more rights to the apartment than with a rented apartment (eg. you
> can perform modifications and renovations to a much larger extent, and it's
> a bit more difficult for the building's owner to kick you out, for insance)."
It sounds similar to some of our Housing association schemes in the UK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_association
Co-op is reserved for:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Co-operative_Group
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Um, good luck with that...
>
> Cool thing is, it's quite likely to work, just like gmail did. :-)
Well, I hope you're right and everything, but I'm not feeling too
optimistic at this moment. Google clearly is, though. Saying that in 7
years' time the rates for 10mbit/sec "will be $0"? That's fighting talk
where I'm from. ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
