The fact that the compliance folks of JPM were doing this as well is staggering.

To me, this is an excellent example of what goes wrong without Net Neutrality. Wikipedia: I can understand and agree with paying to float data caps to share their information. However, Facebook and Google (and any other company using "zero rating") are abusing their power. If a true Facebook or Google competitor could be built within these countries natively, they would be at a severe disadvantage because of the superpowers they're going up against.
I don't think that is disputable. The trouble is how to vet the "Wikipedias" that the public could greatly benefit from and the "Facebooks and Googles" that are using their money to have an unfair advantage over competition?

I am not surprised at all that the hotels kicked em to the curb. Makes sense, you have a bunch of techies that do not gamble like other conventioneers do, CES makes money (and continues to beable to have the CES because of the income), and no offense to the small players, but if you can't pay/are unwilling to pay to get on the floor, then perhaps you don't belong at CES.

From the Hotel's perspective, the removal makes complete sense. CES is bringing in money to them, paying them to have X amount of floor space, which X floor space would be larger if these small players paid to be on the floor, and are instead paying for just a room.

Which sounds more likely in Vegas: CES is really upset not to have the money and asks the small player(s) to be removed, or the Hotel is upset enough to ask them to leave because they're not making the extra money. I'm going with the latter. Vegas hotels will say one thing and then change their mind, or the front of the hotel person was incorrect on the "restrictions" (possibly even using tricky wording to think they have the freedom to have their displays in their room). My money is totally on hotel management getting wind of it and taking it upon themselves to "solve" the situation.

Last I checked, Fallout 3 was an RPG. I don't know I could be mutated to believe anything.

Higher performing parts have always carried a higher price. However, there is a need for higher performance, and clearly the market shows that the demand is there for the price, I'm looking at you servers and computer enthusiasts.

I have a 300GB velociraptor in my computer, and I have been eye'ing the SSD's for some time, but they just haven't hit the price point for me yet to justify purchasing them yet.

In fact, I feel like an oddity, I work for a small IT firm, and when I asked my boss why a customer's computer had a raid0 of 250'sGB (where we had to replace them both with a new 500GB) why did he just get a velociraptor in the first place, he simply stated that it was cheaper to get 2 250GB hard drives at $60 than it was to get 1 300GB velociraptor.

Now, the only thing that may change the landscape from all this is that SSDs are built on silicon, which is subject to Moore's Law, and we've witnessed how cheap thumb drives and other flash media drives are, there's definitely a real possibility that in time SSD's will be faster AND cheaper than HDDs.

I've always liked Anand's articles primarily because he's not afraid to be frank and say something that's bad is bad. He doesn't sugar coat. Sometimes, when a product launches, he reviews it, and he says it doesn't live up to the hype, or X thing is missing/wrong/etc, I get bummed, but he does quite well at putting it all into perspective.

At the same time, I "feel" this giddy-nerd-joy when he writes about something that is ground-breaking or game-changing (RV770, Nehalem, etc). Take a look at this article, it's about how the RV770 came to be, and if you liked the SSD article and the back story, you'll surely be impressed by this one: http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=3469