You're a retard. We are not significantly altering our environment. There's pretty much the same amount or land sea and air, the temperatures are pretty much the same, volcanic and seismic activity happens at pretty stable rate, we're just as likely to get hit by a comet.
If we were able to significantly alter the environment we wouldn't have wildfires in California every year. Old people in Florida wouldn't be whisked away by hurricanes. Volcanoes wouldn't halt air traffic in Europe.
You're a typical myopic fuck who thinks only on the small scale. Building a city is not fundamentally altering the environment any more than a a bear taking a shit in the woods.
Climatology? You mean the fucks said "The Earth will freeze! No, boil! No freeze! No, neither! No, just give us money!"?
Physics? You mean an area of actual science that has no official opinion on hugging whales, fucking trees, what have you, because it's a SCIENCE, and not a hippie love-in or political swamp?
Biology? You mean that field of science that says life adapts and changes and that CHANGE has gotten us to where we are now? You think they're advocating for STOPPING the phenomena that got us here?
Game theory? So you really DO think you're entitled to an environment to host yourself. Protip: Even if the Universe were a game, you're a pawn, not a Player.
"Not to mention that when using a computing device rather than print, zoom is a reasonable substitute for taking a closer look."
Next time don't make a general statement you don't want to be called out on, retard.
Zooming and holding the screen 6 inches are the only options? Are you really that dumb? How about making the screen larger? People seem to like big screens. Look at TVs. Look at portable media players. Look at phones. Look at the iPad.
Believe it or not, screen size & resolution is the answer, as it always has been. Zooming and panning is NOT a substitute for raw screen area and pixel density.
Resolution isn't fucking wasted. Who the fuck came up with this 12" rule? If I want to see detail on something, I can take a closer look. With phones this is fucking easy, as you can try 10 inches, 8 inches, or 6 or 4 or 1. If you're fucking blind you'll be looking at EVERYTHING IN YOUR FUCKING LIFE more closely anyway. A phone is no different.
You're a fool, just because you don't get a movie reference doesn't mean you should call someone a fool.
And I understand all of the things you're talking about, your post just made no sense.
You're suggesting that 80 Hz, 16777216 colors, and shitty resolution are enough.
You talk about the "colorspace" of the eye, the "color resolution" of 24-bit color, and completely ignore the color space of the displays themselves. (Words have meanings, try to get them right.)
You completely ignore (or are oblivious to) the fact that much press work is done in 36- or 48-bit color for a reason.
You don't understand the fact that the signaling rate over the optic nerve has ZERO connection to the timing of a display refresh.
You suggest creating non-uniform pixels because it will get us "off the grid". You suggest driving and refreshing each pixel individually because it will get us "off the grid".
Your suggestions offer zero advantages and add orders of magnitude more complexity.
Tape is not legacy - it's the industry standard. Believe it or not, being old is not the same as being obsolete. In fact, in this industry, being old is a testament to how reliable something is.
Compression? Deduplication? Seeding remote sites? What fantasy world do you live in?
Tape is a storage medium. You can compress anything and store it on the tape.
Deduplication is not a backup mechanism.
Backups need to be made before going live and routinley afterward. Full backups.
Tape is easy to restore from. You need full/incremental backups with tape exactly as you need them with a remote location. If it's attached to a machine it's a copy, NOT a backup. A backup must be remote, unpowered, and protected from Earth, Fire, Wind, Water, and Heart (thieves) etc.
It's not difficult to know if data is safe. Just try to restore it. If you're not testing your restore process, you're an idiot, regardless of what method you're using. Tape is the most reliable storage format we have today.
You can reuse tapes all the time. Such inefficiencies only matter if you're backing up data that's a fraction of a single tape. If this is the case, just buy more tapes. They're very cheap. If this is not the case, then you'll never run into the problem because each tape you write to will be part of a set of tapes corresponding to an individual backup job, and all but one of that set will be completely utilized.
It's not a needless nightmare. It's a necessary nightmare. And it's not a nightmare. There's this thing called a label maker. Alternatively, labels and a Sharpie. Alternatively still, tape, paper, and a pen.
Actually, your logic is terrible. Here's a thought experiment for you: You have a sealed box the size of a house, the internal temperature is 100 degrees, cool air (say 50 degrees) can only move in from a 1" hole, and out from a small fan. After 1 hour what is the temperature inside the house? Now, same scenario but instead of a house you use a toilet paper roll.
No, it is YOUR logic that is terrible.
How long does it take a house to heat up to 100 degrees? How long does it take a toilet paper roll to heat up to 100 degrees?
The heat comes from inside the container, using the same source.
The degree to which a smaller space improves your ability to exchange volume is the exact degree to which your smaller volume increases your requirements on how often you need to exchange said volume.
Obstructions that impact airflow work have a far larger impact in smaller designs, thus, smaller designs need to move a much larger volume of air per time than a larger design.
Fans need to move a volume of air, PER TIME, that will result in a desired temperature.
Heat sinks rely on ambient temperature for cooling and this is achieved by replacing the hot air in the case with the cooler air outside. Smaller volume in the case requires less CFM from the fans to bring in cold air for the heat sink. It's just like A/C in a house. If you have 10' ceilings instead of 8' then you need an air conditioner with higher CFM output.
You mean PASSIVE heatsinks. Using a PASSIVE heatsink is about the dumbest thing you could do when trying to build anything of decent power. ESPECIALLY in a lower-volume environment because that lower volume will simply heat up that much faster. Your post is invalidated.
Can we stop with this idiotic argument that the universe will survive just fine without humans? No shit, Sherlock. Way to state the obvious, Capt'n Obvious. In the meantime, I'd like to make sure that my life is nice and cushy, and that of my kids as well. Unfortunately, that requires a stable ecosystem. And a hallmark of a stable ecosystem is a diverse ecosystem.
What a typical, pompous, self-important, human dipshit.
By your same fucking argument we shouldn't be wiping out polio or HIV or malaria. WHO KNOWS HOW IMPORTANT THEY MAY BE!?!?!?
You don't give a shit about the environment, nor do you know what is good or bad for it. You just know what it's like now, and fear any change because it could potentially make you somewhat uncomfortable.
There is zero logical reason for humans to actively "protect" the environment. Not only is our idea of "protection" a simple prevention of any and all change, the idea that we need to do it comes from fear and selfishness, not any inherently good intention.
It is emotion, not reason, that drives you and others to cry about "protecting" the environment as if you are its rightful master. For all you know the current state of the environment is holding back the evolution of a species that will be far superior to ours.
We are here today because the previous batch of dominant organisms did not alter their environment to continue to suit them. For us to think that we have some right to alter the environment to suit ourselves at the cost of other potential species is hubris. The idea that we have the capability to do so is laughable.
You're not for the environment, you're for your current cushy lifestyle. An unknown, big change is just as likely to be good for humans as it is to be bad.
You simply fear the unknown.
Enjoy your short ride on this rock. Know that you "deserve" nothing more than will be allotted, and come to terms with your inability to change that.
Mr. Ruby, what you've just written is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this page is now dumber for having read to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Not to mention that when using a computing device rather than print, zoom is a reasonable substitute for taking a closer look.
No. It. Fucking. Isn't.
I am fucking sick of having to pinch and zoom endlessly to be able to read shit on my Nexus One, with it's shitty screen that's half the advertised resolution.
Protip: Wireshark IS Ethereal The only difference is the name.
I bet you call BP "Beyond Petroleum". I bet you call Pizza Hut "The Hut". I bet you call Mountain Dew "Mtn Dew". I bet you'll now call any display with a DPI over 300 a "Retina Display".
Boy, you single-issue people really like having your buttons pushed.
And with the new 4th generation iPhone, you now have ACTUAL BUTTONS to press!
Power! With our patented on/off technology, the Apple-designed power button will let you control the power state of your device!
Home! Making a return appearance is the always popular enter key! We call it a "Home" button but it might as well be a big red "Easy!" button from Staples.
Volume up and volume down! Control that volume, bitches!
Of course it will. Diamonds will blend. (Yes, even if they used real diamonds in that video they would have blended. The diamonds hitting each other at high speed causes the damage.)
The only that didn't blend (they didn't even try) was a crowbar.
The strength of the material isn't the only factor in determining the strength of an object/structure. The amount and positioning of that material play a huge role as well.
Dude just recovered from cancer. Not just cancer, but a type of cancer that is to cancer what most cancers are to not having cancer at all, which fucked up his liver and he had to get that replaced after getting past the cancer. I usually don't comment on personal attacks, but this one is exceptional in its lack of class, and not even at least being funny enough to make up for it.
A public figure is a target for random ridicule? Cry me a river.
"Jail Broken" is a shitty term, and it's less valid that the term you're bitching about.
Unlocked (or Application Unlocked) - able to install unsigned/unapproved/unofficial programs Carrier Unlocked - able to move across carriers (provided the radio and ID methodology (SIM card, for example) are supported Rooted - Having root access on the phone Jail Broken - Derp I'm an Apple user derp
No, the fail here is morons still trying to use barcodes, QR codes, etc. when a simple hyperlink will suffice, look less retarded, take less space, be human-readable, etc.
People will shit on your post, but you are correct.
The active silencing and removal of scientists who present certain viewpoints is disgusting.
I don't care if it's with regards to global warming, religion, or bogus claims about cold fusion.
A scientist must provide a hypothesis, test it, and provide the data and exact test procedures.
Other scientists must then repeat the test to verify or refute the claims.
The manner in which people are shunned from academia is appalling. They are shunned based on politics, not science. You MUST waste time dealing with bullshit claims from retards if you want people to accept your system of peer review for things you claim are true.
In an ideal world, all claims would be public and open, and would be tested publicly and openly.
In the real world, we have to parcel out time and resources. We should parcel them out based on the scientific qualifications of the claim, not the politics of the claimant.
If someone claims that WiFi causes cancer, and puts together a hypothesis and experiment with data, there sure as fuck should be more tests done against that hypothesis. The test methodology and complete dataset should be made public. The results of said experiment should dictate whether or not further research is necessary and whether or not resources should be spent on similar claims from others.
In the end, though, the system is working as intended. It's just not working as claimed.
What, you thought it was about science? It's about patting your cronies and yourself on the back and getting published, getting political kickbacks, and getting research grants.
The system is bullshit. Even though it's often correct (laughing at religion and cooks who say you can get sustainable cold fusion from a potato), people will rightfully reject the system as a whole when it is exposed as being bullshit (global warming).
They created a system that caters to money first and science second. They ran the risk of people losing faith in the actual good science that resulted from said system. People learned of their cronyism, their bullshit, and their political benefactors. People then lost faith (and to an average person, science is just as faith-based as religion) in the scientific community as a whole, and rightfully so.
An average person won't know the difference between social "sciences" and an actual science. When they see: Economists being wrong at every fucking turn Psychologists telling them they have a hidden desire to fuck their mother Climate scientists telling them the world was supposed to be covered in water years ago Sociologists telling them that their kid is a racist because it wanted a white GI Joe / Barbie
People are going to distrust the "experts". These experts claim to be scientists (despite their fields not being sciences), so actual scientists get fucked in terms of reputation.
People shit on NASA and the Giant Boner Jammer and vaccines because they see other "scientists" being dead wrong at every turn, and once in a while they'll catch those other "scientists" just plain ol' bein' corrupt.
The peer review process, as it is now, is as much of a problem as the ignorance of the public and the morans who put forth bullshit claims.
The only solution is to make the process more open (something which those entrenched in academia absolutely abhor) and to force them to test each unique, testable claim, regardless of politics (and give them the resources to do so).
When you say yes, Firefox sends a list of the WiFi networks your computer can see to Google.
What possible legitimate reason is there for a browser having access to my WiFi adapters list of accessible... access... points?
(No, location servers are not a legitimate reason.)
The browser shouldn't even be able to distinguish between WiFi, LAN, etc. It should just have a list of connected network adapters with names and let you choose the default ordering if you want.
Slashdot Mirror
A risk I am more than willing to take. I even smoked for years! I also drink. Life is short, have fun.
Yeah, yours will be.
You're a retard.
We are not significantly altering our environment. There's pretty much the same amount or land sea and air, the temperatures are pretty much the same, volcanic and seismic activity happens at pretty stable rate, we're just as likely to get hit by a comet.
If we were able to significantly alter the environment we wouldn't have wildfires in California every year. Old people in Florida wouldn't be whisked away by hurricanes. Volcanoes wouldn't halt air traffic in Europe.
You're a typical myopic fuck who thinks only on the small scale. Building a city is not fundamentally altering the environment any more than a a bear taking a shit in the woods.
Climatology? You mean the fucks said "The Earth will freeze! No, boil! No freeze! No, neither! No, just give us money!"?
Physics? You mean an area of actual science that has no official opinion on hugging whales, fucking trees, what have you, because it's a SCIENCE, and not a hippie love-in or political swamp?
Biology? You mean that field of science that says life adapts and changes and that CHANGE has gotten us to where we are now? You think they're advocating for STOPPING the phenomena that got us here?
Game theory? So you really DO think you're entitled to an environment to host yourself. Protip: Even if the Universe were a game, you're a pawn, not a Player.
Here's a tip you fucking dipshit:
You were talking about my phone.
"Not to mention that when using a computing device rather than print, zoom is a reasonable substitute for taking a closer look."
Next time don't make a general statement you don't want to be called out on, retard.
Zooming and holding the screen 6 inches are the only options? Are you really that dumb? How about making the screen larger? People seem to like big screens. Look at TVs. Look at portable media players. Look at phones. Look at the iPad.
Believe it or not, screen size & resolution is the answer, as it always has been. Zooming and panning is NOT a substitute for raw screen area and pixel density.
Resolution isn't fucking wasted. Who the fuck came up with this 12" rule? If I want to see detail on something, I can take a closer look. With phones this is fucking easy, as you can try 10 inches, 8 inches, or 6 or 4 or 1. If you're fucking blind you'll be looking at EVERYTHING IN YOUR FUCKING LIFE more closely anyway. A phone is no different.
You're a fool, just because you don't get a movie reference doesn't mean you should call someone a fool.
And I understand all of the things you're talking about, your post just made no sense.
You're suggesting that 80 Hz, 16777216 colors, and shitty resolution are enough.
You talk about the "colorspace" of the eye, the "color resolution" of 24-bit color, and completely ignore the color space of the displays themselves. (Words have meanings, try to get them right.)
You completely ignore (or are oblivious to) the fact that much press work is done in 36- or 48-bit color for a reason.
You don't understand the fact that the signaling rate over the optic nerve has ZERO connection to the timing of a display refresh.
You suggest creating non-uniform pixels because it will get us "off the grid". You suggest driving and refreshing each pixel individually because it will get us "off the grid".
Your suggestions offer zero advantages and add orders of magnitude more complexity.
You're a moron.
You're an idiot, Starscream.
Tape is not legacy - it's the industry standard.
Believe it or not, being old is not the same as being obsolete.
In fact, in this industry, being old is a testament to how reliable something is.
Compression? Deduplication? Seeding remote sites? What fantasy world do you live in?
Tape is a storage medium.
You can compress anything and store it on the tape.
Deduplication is not a backup mechanism.
Backups need to be made before going live and routinley afterward. Full backups.
Tape is easy to restore from. You need full/incremental backups with tape exactly as you need them with a remote location. If it's attached to a machine it's a copy, NOT a backup. A backup must be remote, unpowered, and protected from Earth, Fire, Wind, Water, and Heart (thieves) etc.
It's not difficult to know if data is safe. Just try to restore it. If you're not testing your restore process, you're an idiot, regardless of what method you're using. Tape is the most reliable storage format we have today.
You can reuse tapes all the time. Such inefficiencies only matter if you're backing up data that's a fraction of a single tape. If this is the case, just buy more tapes. They're very cheap. If this is not the case, then you'll never run into the problem because each tape you write to will be part of a set of tapes corresponding to an individual backup job, and all but one of that set will be completely utilized.
It's not a needless nightmare. It's a necessary nightmare. And it's not a nightmare. There's this thing called a label maker. Alternatively, labels and a Sharpie. Alternatively still, tape, paper, and a pen.
No sir, it is you that deserves the beating.
Actually, your logic is terrible. Here's a thought experiment for you: You have a sealed box the size of a house, the internal temperature is 100 degrees, cool air (say 50 degrees) can only move in from a 1" hole, and out from a small fan. After 1 hour what is the temperature inside the house? Now, same scenario but instead of a house you use a toilet paper roll.
No, it is YOUR logic that is terrible.
How long does it take a house to heat up to 100 degrees?
How long does it take a toilet paper roll to heat up to 100 degrees?
The heat comes from inside the container, using the same source.
The degree to which a smaller space improves your ability to exchange volume is the exact degree to which your smaller volume increases your requirements on how often you need to exchange said volume.
Obstructions that impact airflow work have a far larger impact in smaller designs, thus, smaller designs need to move a much larger volume of air per time than a larger design.
Fans need to move a volume of air, PER TIME, that will result in a desired temperature.
Heat sinks rely on ambient temperature for cooling and this is achieved by replacing the hot air in the case with the cooler air outside. Smaller volume in the case requires less CFM from the fans to bring in cold air for the heat sink. It's just like A/C in a house. If you have 10' ceilings instead of 8' then you need an air conditioner with higher CFM output.
You mean PASSIVE heatsinks.
Using a PASSIVE heatsink is about the dumbest thing you could do when trying to build anything of decent power.
ESPECIALLY in a lower-volume environment because that lower volume will simply heat up that much faster.
Your post is invalidated.
Have you ever had it properly cooked?
Canned tuna is not very good.
Have you ever had tuna?
Mercury is not very good.
Can we stop with this idiotic argument that the universe will survive just fine without humans? No shit, Sherlock. Way to state the obvious, Capt'n Obvious. In the meantime, I'd like to make sure that my life is nice and cushy, and that of my kids as well. Unfortunately, that requires a stable ecosystem. And a hallmark of a stable ecosystem is a diverse ecosystem.
What a typical, pompous, self-important, human dipshit.
By your same fucking argument we shouldn't be wiping out polio or HIV or malaria. WHO KNOWS HOW IMPORTANT THEY MAY BE!?!?!?
You don't give a shit about the environment, nor do you know what is good or bad for it.
You just know what it's like now, and fear any change because it could potentially make you somewhat uncomfortable.
There is zero logical reason for humans to actively "protect" the environment. Not only is our idea of "protection" a simple prevention of any and all change, the idea that we need to do it comes from fear and selfishness, not any inherently good intention.
It is emotion, not reason, that drives you and others to cry about "protecting" the environment as if you are its rightful master. For all you know the current state of the environment is holding back the evolution of a species that will be far superior to ours.
We are here today because the previous batch of dominant organisms did not alter their environment to continue to suit them.
For us to think that we have some right to alter the environment to suit ourselves at the cost of other potential species is hubris. The idea that we have the capability to do so is laughable.
You're not for the environment, you're for your current cushy lifestyle. An unknown, big change is just as likely to be good for humans as it is to be bad.
You simply fear the unknown.
Enjoy your short ride on this rock. Know that you "deserve" nothing more than will be allotted, and come to terms with your inability to change that.
Mr. Ruby, what you've just written is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this page is now dumber for having read to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Not to mention that when using a computing device rather than print, zoom is a reasonable substitute for taking a closer look.
No.
It.
Fucking.
Isn't.
I am fucking sick of having to pinch and zoom endlessly to be able to read shit on my Nexus One, with it's shitty screen that's half the advertised resolution.
Protip: Wireshark IS Ethereal
The only difference is the name.
I bet you call BP "Beyond Petroleum".
I bet you call Pizza Hut "The Hut".
I bet you call Mountain Dew "Mtn Dew".
I bet you'll now call any display with a DPI over 300 a "Retina Display".
Boy, you single-issue people really like having your buttons pushed.
And with the new 4th generation iPhone, you now have ACTUAL BUTTONS to press!
Power! With our patented on/off technology, the Apple-designed power button will let you control the power state of your device!
Home! Making a return appearance is the always popular enter key! We call it a "Home" button but it might as well be a big red "Easy!" button from Staples.
Volume up and volume down! Control that volume, bitches!
Mute! Control that volume again, bitches!
Of course it will.
Diamonds will blend. (Yes, even if they used real diamonds in that video they would have blended. The diamonds hitting each other at high speed causes the damage.)
The only that didn't blend (they didn't even try) was a crowbar.
The strength of the material isn't the only factor in determining the strength of an object/structure. The amount and positioning of that material play a huge role as well.
Dude just recovered from cancer. Not just cancer, but a type of cancer that is to cancer what most cancers are to not having cancer at all, which fucked up his liver and he had to get that replaced after getting past the cancer. I usually don't comment on personal attacks, but this one is exceptional in its lack of class, and not even at least being funny enough to make up for it.
A public figure is a target for random ridicule?
Cry me a river.
Ludicrously impressive.
Real nerds still refer to it as Ethereal.
"Jail Broken" is a shitty term, and it's less valid that the term you're bitching about.
Unlocked (or Application Unlocked) - able to install unsigned/unapproved/unofficial programs
Carrier Unlocked - able to move across carriers (provided the radio and ID methodology (SIM card, for example) are supported
Rooted - Having root access on the phone
Jail Broken - Derp I'm an Apple user derp
Same.
I am filled with disappointment.
I'd expect you'd be in some trouble if your condoms came with tricks
I'd expect you'd be in some trouble if your tricks didn't cum with condoms.
No, the fail here is morons still trying to use barcodes, QR codes, etc. when a simple hyperlink will suffice, look less retarded, take less space, be human-readable, etc.
You're an idiot.
This is science.
You cannot reject a claim without testing it.
This is science.
I don't care what the claim is or who it comes from.
This is science.
If someone makes the same claim repeatedly, you can reject it once.
This is science.
This is science.
People will shit on your post, but you are correct.
The active silencing and removal of scientists who present certain viewpoints is disgusting.
I don't care if it's with regards to global warming, religion, or bogus claims about cold fusion.
A scientist must provide a hypothesis, test it, and provide the data and exact test procedures.
Other scientists must then repeat the test to verify or refute the claims.
The manner in which people are shunned from academia is appalling. They are shunned based on politics, not science. You MUST waste time dealing with bullshit claims from retards if you want people to accept your system of peer review for things you claim are true.
In an ideal world, all claims would be public and open, and would be tested publicly and openly.
In the real world, we have to parcel out time and resources. We should parcel them out based on the scientific qualifications of the claim, not the politics of the claimant.
If someone claims that WiFi causes cancer, and puts together a hypothesis and experiment with data, there sure as fuck should be more tests done against that hypothesis. The test methodology and complete dataset should be made public. The results of said experiment should dictate whether or not further research is necessary and whether or not resources should be spent on similar claims from others.
In the end, though, the system is working as intended. It's just not working as claimed.
What, you thought it was about science? It's about patting your cronies and yourself on the back and getting published, getting political kickbacks, and getting research grants.
The system is bullshit. Even though it's often correct (laughing at religion and cooks who say you can get sustainable cold fusion from a potato), people will rightfully reject the system as a whole when it is exposed as being bullshit (global warming).
They created a system that caters to money first and science second. They ran the risk of people losing faith in the actual good science that resulted from said system. People learned of their cronyism, their bullshit, and their political benefactors. People then lost faith (and to an average person, science is just as faith-based as religion) in the scientific community as a whole, and rightfully so.
An average person won't know the difference between social "sciences" and an actual science. When they see:
Economists being wrong at every fucking turn
Psychologists telling them they have a hidden desire to fuck their mother
Climate scientists telling them the world was supposed to be covered in water years ago
Sociologists telling them that their kid is a racist because it wanted a white GI Joe / Barbie
People are going to distrust the "experts".
These experts claim to be scientists (despite their fields not being sciences), so actual scientists get fucked in terms of reputation.
People shit on NASA and the Giant Boner Jammer and vaccines because they see other "scientists" being dead wrong at every turn, and once in a while they'll catch those other "scientists" just plain ol' bein' corrupt.
The peer review process, as it is now, is as much of a problem as the ignorance of the public and the morans who put forth bullshit claims.
The only solution is to make the process more open (something which those entrenched in academia absolutely abhor) and to force them to test each unique, testable claim, regardless of politics (and give them the resources to do so).
So when the librarian is standing there watching you press a gummy bear up to the scanner, he or she is not going to be a little suspicious?
The librarian will never be standing and watching, and you know it.
When you say yes, Firefox sends a list of the WiFi networks your computer can see to Google.
What possible legitimate reason is there for a browser having access to my WiFi adapters list of accessible... access... points?
(No, location servers are not a legitimate reason.)
The browser shouldn't even be able to distinguish between WiFi, LAN, etc. It should just have a list of connected network adapters with names and let you choose the default ordering if you want.