Well if he is looking at traffic shaping he should consider bumping priorities rather than heavy handed throttling. Just bump VOIP and HTTP(S) so they go first and wont get interfered with by bulk P2P transfers. This lets people 'at the keyboard' so to speak get priority over say big file transfers in the background.
If you throttle heavily and/or block P2P then keep in mind that P2P packets that arent getting through are potentially being resent repeatedly. This will likely INCREASE network congestion as things get sent multiple times and possibly get dropped at the router rather than being passed along.
Thankfully, People like you are why Novell isnt selling stuff.
Basically Novell bit the hand that fed them. They were selling their Linux Distro and figured getting into bed with Microsoft would be some sorta secret handshake to get all the people in Microsoft shops using Suse. Unfortunately Suse is flabby and weak when Microsoft can just sell then Windows Server or XP/Vista why would they even consider Novell Suse when they get something that works with their existing Windows infrastructure?
Bad Move + Bad Partner = Death For Novell... Maybe. One can only hope.
Green energy technologies are generally expensive niche products. Ignoring nuclear power because of controversy, green electricity generally isn't generated on a comparable scale to old fossil fuel power. It likely could be. Pouring money and research into it would make it more feasible.
Unfortunately if everyone were to become 'energy independent' or rather 'less dependent' (since I doubt we'd decrease our overall energy consumption enough to be able to go 'off grid') on the existing energy infrastructure then the government would be losing a good portion of its power over the people. If people aren't as dependent on that wire coming into their house as they used to be then the government and power utilities don't and won't have as much muscle with the population anymore.
Clean coal isn't green energy. "Clean" coal attracts money because rationalising it as clean coal helps maintain the entrenched coal generated electricity industry at the expense of the promotion and development of potential competitors. Entrenched industries lobby more effectively than emerging competition.
You're right. Although for a different reason than you think. Many countries/governments have vast coal resources. They want to be able to USE those resources in a responsible way. If there is a way that they can take the coal, burn it (and/or convert it to another form) for electricity and return the CO2 to the ground and/or convert it into a less harmful byproduct(s) then they can use these resources without as much environmental/pollution problems or as bad PR as a result.
Remember that not every location is ideal for 'green' energy. Some may actually be horrible all-round like any far north climate due to little sun, plenty of clouds and frozen over waterways and ocean/lakes to prevent the use of wave power that is a new idea.
The question is does this conversion to METHANE increase the efficiency overall? I mean does going from Coal to Methane double or quadruple the power burning it produces? Is CO2 created from methane conversion more easily contained/controlled/captured than say burning coal? A popular idea for capturing CO2 is to convert it into Sodium Bicarbonate which has been featured as an idea on Daily Planet on the Discovery Channel a few times. Maybe burning the coal wholesale would be difficult to achieve such with? Maybe it filters out sulfur and stuff out of the coal as well which makes burning it less than ideal due to other pollution-ary concerns?
You can take the 'waste' from the reactor and re-enrich it (a process that is also used for creation of nuclear weapons unfortunately) and turn it into fuel-grade material again although you do lose some mass in the process.
The idea of capturing CO2 is basically a result of chemical compounds/processes that turn CO2 into Sodium Bicarbonate or Baking Soda. If you put it underground in places with high Sodium content you'll end up with it converting to Baking Soda as it tries to escape.
Clearly they need such protection for NATIONAL SECURITY! You know just like that ACTA Treaty they're trying to ram down people's throats without it ever being seen by the public?
I would have said 2/3rds or 66%. Which is the number commonly thrown around in science classes and in the media. Those who aren't climatologists or what not probably dont care for an exact number like 70% because it isnt relevant to their daily lives.
If you want to stop a DDOS and your firewaall can't seem to mask off IP ranges quickly enough, by far the easiest technological measure is really quite simple: sever the connection. I guarantee you the DDOS will no longer be affecting your equipment at that point.
Congratulations the attacker just won. You've DOS'ed yourself by yanking the plug. Admittedly this might be a consideration if the DDOS is performing attacks on your servers as well as flooding the tubes to keep your data safe.
It's pretty hard to stop because it is a outright brute force method.
1) All tubes have a limited capacity. 2) If the packet makes it to your router you've already lost. The router's memory and/or processing power is being expended to 'ignore' or 'throw away' packets coming from certain IP ranges.
Distributed makes it harder because the IP addresses do not come from any singular location so you cant just perform an IP range ban. Also the distributed part makes it more difficult to filter out 'garbage/attack' data request from legitimate traffic.
Remember 'Noone got fired for choosing Microsoft' is a famous line the higher up IT guys like to wave around. Fact of the matter is that noone ever got fired for choosing open source either. It's poor implementation of any solution that gets people fired.
'Sir' is easier and quicker to say than 'Officer' which is also acceptable.
Also its about respect. In Australia they might have a different code of conduct for respect than North America but in general being polite and respectful wins out over being an argumentative jackass no matter what country you're in.
The problem is that ISP companies aren't just the lines. They're frequently owned by big media 'content providers'... Like Comcast or Time-Warner or whatever other company. They have a stake in keeping content in artificial scarcity of copyright and threatening to cut off internet access.
GP post would make sense if not for that little fact.
Easiest way would be to start a protest. Unfortunately that would mean getting people off their ass and likely head over to some legislative building and yelling and shouting about it.
As much as I like the idea of trying to get as many people cut off from big business/copyright organizations/government we all know that they're not gonna let that happen. After all the ISPs and the Content Producers (usually one and the same) are in their pockets.
You're right. If they want to use the word PROPERTY then their IMAGINARY PROPERTY should be subject to PROPERTY TAX just like land is. I figure we can appoint a few Imaginary Property appraisers who go around and figure out what various copyrights, patents and trademarks are worth and then tax the companies based on that. I figure that stupid rat from Disney should be worth a few billion a year at least.
Damned if they do, damned if they don't. If they do the government gets mad $$$ coming in. If they don't then you'll see the Public Domain expanding overnight.
After all if they want people to treat it as PROPERTY then it should be taxed as such. Right now they're getting a free ride and squatting on all the intellectual property without paying for holding onto it.
How about Google stops indexing their web pages and removes them from their database. Oh yeah and deprecate their advertisement down a few tiers so they get even less hits. I'm sure the RIAA and its international clones would consider this evil but the rest of us would relish an internet without their bullshit. Oh or make searching the RIAA direct to http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/ instead as the top hit.
That is why security should never rely on a single type of authentication.
Something you HAVE: Smart Cards, USB Dongle, Swipe Card, RFID tag, etc... Something you KNOW: Password, Mothers Maiden Name, Your Address, etc... Something you ARE: Biometric Information.
So if you need to secure something then using biometric data such as a fingerprint (pretty weak) in combination with a smart card and password creates a triangle of security. If you are missing any of the three you lose as only the person authorized would possess all three at once. Naturally if there was a particularly dedicated attacker the person themselves would be the target of the attacker so they could presumably try to get all three at once. This is why a number of electronic locks also have a key. Putting in the right number lets you try the key.
Even if you go to a library or book store and DON'T buy the book, the thing is still copyrighted and you can't make copies of it nor can you make a similar book with the same or a similar story.
Technically you're allowed to photocopy portions of a book say if you're using them for research purposes. This is called 'Fair Use' which is something that copyright holders have been desperately trying to wrest from the hands of the public. Also just because someone made a James Bond book doesnt mean you arent allowed to make a different Spy character that does similar things. Part of the creative process is touching on people's expectations...
Slashdot Mirror
Well if he is looking at traffic shaping he should consider bumping priorities rather than heavy handed throttling. Just bump VOIP and HTTP(S) so they go first and wont get interfered with by bulk P2P transfers. This lets people 'at the keyboard' so to speak get priority over say big file transfers in the background.
If you throttle heavily and/or block P2P then keep in mind that P2P packets that arent getting through are potentially being resent repeatedly. This will likely INCREASE network congestion as things get sent multiple times and possibly get dropped at the router rather than being passed along.
Thankfully, People like you are why Novell isnt selling stuff.
Basically Novell bit the hand that fed them. They were selling their Linux Distro and figured getting into bed with Microsoft would be some sorta secret handshake to get all the people in Microsoft shops using Suse. Unfortunately Suse is flabby and weak when Microsoft can just sell then Windows Server or XP/Vista why would they even consider Novell Suse when they get something that works with their existing Windows infrastructure?
Bad Move + Bad Partner = Death For Novell... Maybe. One can only hope.
Most people use about 5% of the 'features' of Word. So 95% of 'features' are essentially bloat and useless to a majority of people.
Mix it with sodium to create salt?
Green energy technologies are generally expensive niche products. Ignoring nuclear power because of controversy, green electricity generally isn't generated on a comparable scale to old fossil fuel power. It likely could be. Pouring money and research into it would make it more feasible.
Unfortunately if everyone were to become 'energy independent' or rather 'less dependent' (since I doubt we'd decrease our overall energy consumption enough to be able to go 'off grid') on the existing energy infrastructure then the government would be losing a good portion of its power over the people. If people aren't as dependent on that wire coming into their house as they used to be then the government and power utilities don't and won't have as much muscle with the population anymore.
Clean coal isn't green energy. "Clean" coal attracts money because rationalising it as clean coal helps maintain the entrenched coal generated electricity industry at the expense of the promotion and development of potential competitors. Entrenched industries lobby more effectively than emerging competition.
You're right. Although for a different reason than you think. Many countries/governments have vast coal resources. They want to be able to USE those resources in a responsible way. If there is a way that they can take the coal, burn it (and/or convert it to another form) for electricity and return the CO2 to the ground and/or convert it into a less harmful byproduct(s) then they can use these resources without as much environmental/pollution problems or as bad PR as a result.
Remember that not every location is ideal for 'green' energy. Some may actually be horrible all-round like any far north climate due to little sun, plenty of clouds and frozen over waterways and ocean/lakes to prevent the use of wave power that is a new idea.
I'm not sure that is entirely the case.
The question is does this conversion to METHANE increase the efficiency overall? I mean does going from Coal to Methane double or quadruple the power burning it produces? Is CO2 created from methane conversion more easily contained/controlled/captured than say burning coal? A popular idea for capturing CO2 is to convert it into Sodium Bicarbonate which has been featured as an idea on Daily Planet on the Discovery Channel a few times. Maybe burning the coal wholesale would be difficult to achieve such with? Maybe it filters out sulfur and stuff out of the coal as well which makes burning it less than ideal due to other pollution-ary concerns?
Easy way to get funding for fusion research... Just make something like the LHC Rap a ringtone for fusion power.
Actually...
You can take the 'waste' from the reactor and re-enrich it (a process that is also used for creation of nuclear weapons unfortunately) and turn it into fuel-grade material again although you do lose some mass in the process.
The idea of capturing CO2 is basically a result of chemical compounds/processes that turn CO2 into Sodium Bicarbonate or Baking Soda. If you put it underground in places with high Sodium content you'll end up with it converting to Baking Soda as it tries to escape.
Clearly they need such protection for NATIONAL SECURITY! You know just like that ACTA Treaty they're trying to ram down people's throats without it ever being seen by the public?
Sure couldn't hurt. I'm bet it'll be more interesting than Brittney Spears Album #2983
I would have said 2/3rds or 66%. Which is the number commonly thrown around in science classes and in the media. Those who aren't climatologists or what not probably dont care for an exact number like 70% because it isnt relevant to their daily lives.
If you want to stop a DDOS and your firewaall can't seem to mask off IP ranges quickly enough, by far the easiest technological measure is really quite simple: sever the connection. I guarantee you the DDOS will no longer be affecting your equipment at that point.
Congratulations the attacker just won. You've DOS'ed yourself by yanking the plug. Admittedly this might be a consideration if the DDOS is performing attacks on your servers as well as flooding the tubes to keep your data safe.
It's pretty hard to stop because it is a outright brute force method.
1) All tubes have a limited capacity.
2) If the packet makes it to your router you've already lost. The router's memory and/or processing power is being expended to 'ignore' or 'throw away' packets coming from certain IP ranges.
Distributed makes it harder because the IP addresses do not come from any singular location so you cant just perform an IP range ban. Also the distributed part makes it more difficult to filter out 'garbage/attack' data request from legitimate traffic.
People lack the balls to make such a big change.
Remember 'Noone got fired for choosing Microsoft' is a famous line the higher up IT guys like to wave around. Fact of the matter is that noone ever got fired for choosing open source either. It's poor implementation of any solution that gets people fired.
'Sir' is easier and quicker to say than 'Officer' which is also acceptable.
Also its about respect. In Australia they might have a different code of conduct for respect than North America but in general being polite and respectful wins out over being an argumentative jackass no matter what country you're in.
I agree...
To Serve and Protect... Not to Tax and Relax.
Mod Parent Up.
The problem is that ISP companies aren't just the lines. They're frequently owned by big media 'content providers'... Like Comcast or Time-Warner or whatever other company. They have a stake in keeping content in artificial scarcity of copyright and threatening to cut off internet access.
GP post would make sense if not for that little fact.
Easiest way would be to start a protest. Unfortunately that would mean getting people off their ass and likely head over to some legislative building and yelling and shouting about it.
As much as I like the idea of trying to get as many people cut off from big business/copyright organizations/government we all know that they're not gonna let that happen. After all the ISPs and the Content Producers (usually one and the same) are in their pockets.
You're right. If they want to use the word PROPERTY then their IMAGINARY PROPERTY should be subject to PROPERTY TAX just like land is. I figure we can appoint a few Imaginary Property appraisers who go around and figure out what various copyrights, patents and trademarks are worth and then tax the companies based on that. I figure that stupid rat from Disney should be worth a few billion a year at least.
Damned if they do, damned if they don't. If they do the government gets mad $$$ coming in. If they don't then you'll see the Public Domain expanding overnight.
After all if they want people to treat it as PROPERTY then it should be taxed as such. Right now they're getting a free ride and squatting on all the intellectual property without paying for holding onto it.
I have an idea...
How about Google stops indexing their web pages and removes them from their database. Oh yeah and deprecate their advertisement down a few tiers so they get even less hits. I'm sure the RIAA and its international clones would consider this evil but the rest of us would relish an internet without their bullshit. Oh or make searching the RIAA direct to http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/ instead as the top hit.
You've already installed Linux. I doubt they can install anything on there that would be a problem, not without gunning for your job that is.
That is why security should never rely on a single type of authentication.
Something you HAVE: Smart Cards, USB Dongle, Swipe Card, RFID tag, etc...
Something you KNOW: Password, Mothers Maiden Name, Your Address, etc...
Something you ARE: Biometric Information.
So if you need to secure something then using biometric data such as a fingerprint (pretty weak) in combination with a smart card and password creates a triangle of security. If you are missing any of the three you lose as only the person authorized would possess all three at once. Naturally if there was a particularly dedicated attacker the person themselves would be the target of the attacker so they could presumably try to get all three at once. This is why a number of electronic locks also have a key. Putting in the right number lets you try the key.
I see no reason why an ISP would be biased in the matter.
Time Warner Cable is owned by Disney or owns Disney.
Comcast owns Cable TV stations.
etc...
Now tell me if ISPs have no reason to be biased in a matter when they are both content producers and ISPs.
Even if you go to a library or book store and DON'T buy the book, the thing is still copyrighted and you can't make copies of it nor can you make a similar book with the same or a similar story.
Technically you're allowed to photocopy portions of a book say if you're using them for research purposes. This is called 'Fair Use' which is something that copyright holders have been desperately trying to wrest from the hands of the public. Also just because someone made a James Bond book doesnt mean you arent allowed to make a different Spy character that does similar things. Part of the creative process is touching on people's expectations...
What the recording industry provides is not infinitely valuable, so DRM needn't be infinitely strong.
No they just BELIEVE that what they provide is infinitely valuable. That is why they have an obsession with unbreakable DRM>