You might want to get you reading comprehension checked. I said that Motives (not Means) are of no interest.
Results are of interest, as are means; but motives are irrelevant drivel that I leave to the hypothetical biographers.
As it happens, I find Anonymous' results to be largely positive. Their means are more mixed(as is not especially surprising in an "organization" that anybody can claim, at any time, to be acting in the name of); but I think that they've been quite useful and comparatively restrained. Not saints, certainly, but their collateral damage levels aren't exactly keeping me up at night.
140 Octets: Depending on character set, that will give you 160, 140, or 70 characters. Anything larger will kick you into concatenated SMS, which is (usually) transparent enough; but is still often billed per-SMS...
Do you think that the acquisition of documentary evidence(that would never otherwise have come to light) of the sort of dirty-tricks tactics used by entities like the "Chamber of Commerce" is actually of zero value? Or the revelation that comparatively well respected US contractors would be putting out proposals to do the hatchet work?
I have no wish to claim that every member of anonymous(to the degree that there are "members") is some sort of heroic altruist. I strongly suspect that many of them are just pranksters, vandals, or dumb kids. Similarly, I would be wholly unsurprised to discover that Assuage is a creepy attention whore with serious grandiosity issues.
However, judgement-by-personality is only relevant for people I have to deal with personally. In this realm, I only care about results. I care what they are doing, not why they are doing it.
If *real* fascists ever took control in this country, most of these people would shit themselves on a continuous basis before the secret police killed them, their families, their pets, burned down their houses and killed a few others standing around just to send a message.
Which is why attempting to foil incremental steps in that direction, before they reach fruition, is sort of a good idea, no?
Option 1: Members or associates of a loose-knit group of hackers who are likely subjects of federal interest after illegally penetrating and utterly humiliating a private-sector spook shop decide that it would be a great idea to show up, in person, at an event with some amount of security likely to be in the vicinity, just to heckle somebody they have already pwned good and hard. They think that this is a good idea because showing up in crowded areas and making a disturbance is an excellent way to remain anonymous.
Option 2: Aaron Barr and the rest of the losers at HBGary really don't want to show their faces at RSA, after having been ruthlessly punked by a bunch of amateurs; but decide to cry about "security threats" in an attempt to look less than totally pathetic.
Y'know, I don't think that this is a terribly difficult decision...
" It’s about using your friends as resources to progress in the game, which is the opposite of actual sociality or friendship. Maybe not exactly, but it’s not the same thing, right?"
"Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end and never merely as a means to an end" -- Immanuel Kant
He certainly isn't the only person who would consider such games "evil"...
I have an evil plan: if this "facebook over SMS" nonsense takes off, there will be loads of poor suckers paying per-sms for the drivel that accumulates there.
Please ensure that all status updates, wall scrawls, and similar communications are greater than 140 octets long...
That would be a scary thought, except that it is a vulnerability that can be solved just by throwing more highly competitive assholes at the problem...
If there is one thing that the world has in abundance, those are it.
They are paying the owners of those bits for every copy that they make...(specifically, 70% of retail, in most cases. This is going to leave them pretty unmotivated to give apple 30% of retail...)
Which is why I explicitly drew the contrast between the original "We host, we handle billing, we manage the storefront: 30%", which was skeezy because of its compulsoriness(no sideloading or competing stores allowed); but was a reasonably square deal, particularly for indies, and the "You Must give us 30% of the take from your own storefront if that storefront interacts in any way with one of the apps that we deign to tolerate" model...
The former case is definitely command and control; no alternatives, cryptographically enforced fiat; but it was a deal: Apple provided hosting, billing, and storefront management in exchange for 30%.
The latter case is pure rent-seeking: Even if you operate your own hosting, storefront, billing, etc.(as Amazon, say, does) it will no longer be allowed to let them access a web page and make a purchase. You will be required to offer it as an in-app purchase(30% cut to Apple) for the same price that you would offer it outside. That, is pure rent seeking. Perhaps your ISP should get a percentage of the online shopping you do? Heck, why doesn't Fedex get a cut of the value of the goods they ship?
Was anybody seriously expecting the app store not to degenerate into blatant rent seeking?
The original deal, while compulsory(which is not a good sign) was a 30/70, where apple took 30 in exchange for hosting the thing, transaction handling, etc. The fact that that was the only deal in town was a bit skeezy; but it was certainly a boon for the indies who couldn't or didn't want to deal with logistics themselves.
At this point, though, it's a pure money grab. Hey, Amazon, want to offer customers the ability to purchase ebooks(downloaded from your server, linked to their amazon accounts, through the kindle application)? 30% of that is ours, and you aren't allowed to charge a higher price in-app to make up for that. You don't like that? Well, it's a nice app you've got there. It'd be a pity if it were to suffer a cryptographic revocation accident, Capiche?
Unless Dell is considering a fundamental rethink in strategy(as in "trying to turn into IBM" fundamental...), I can't imagine the logic behind buying AMD...
Right now, Dell is more or less Intel's box-assembly bitch; but they are reaping substantial "marketing assistance" funds, and they also seem to be able to buy AMD chips for their cheap seats and/or large-number-of-sockets servers(where hypertransport is still enough of a factor to make up for intel's better cores), since AMD's open-market prices are excellent.
Were they to aquire AMD, they would be spending a great deal of money in order to piss off intel(who would presumably de-friend them to the extent that the feds allow, thus ruining their prices and/or margins on intel-based systems), and obtain super-preferential access to a product that AMD is selling at excellent prices to all comers anyway... Why?
Unless there is some advantage that I'm not thinking of, buying AMD seems like it would essentially amount to conceding the market for things like corporate laptops and small servers to HP et al, and moving to some other strategy(presumably some sort of AMD APU-based light-to-thin desktop strategy(would they be eating Citrix next? between competition from Microsoft and competition from VMware, they might be edible enough), with some combination of leveraging hypertransport's advantages and hoping real hard for Bulldozer on the server/workstation end...)
That would be quite a shake-up. Anybody have an alternate hypothesis that seems less radical?
Arguably, Mr. Beck has just had a rare "stopped clock" moment. Yup, no shit, highly sophisticated electronic data systems are, in fact, the biggest development in profiling and surveillance since approximately the invention of writing. Yes, in fact, most players large enough that you know their names are(directly or indirectly) likely to be working for, or co-opted by, the state. CALEA is a matter of public law, not exactly a shadowy secret. "National security letters", while their scope is a shadowy secret, are also a publicly known instrument of data gathering. The fact that the state buys "3rd party intelligence" from private companies to supplement the domestic surveillance it isn't supposed to be doing also isn't a secret, it's a bloody industry...
Purely going by well-corroborated stories that show up on the NYT frontpage you can pretty much fulfill any paranoid conspiracy theory you want, as long as it doesn't involve reptoids or the illuminati.
Unfortunately, in Beck's case, his not-exactly-groundbreaking observation that a large advertising company might in fact be tracking users is surrounded by so much sheer nonsense as to be of effectively no use. Rather than laying out the sort of surveillance society we have voted and purchased our way happily into, he gives us one conspiracist snippet about Google. Next week, I'm sure that Soros will be secretly bankrolling Google so that Obama will know where the Real True Christians are when it is time for his legions of welfare-spawned criminality to emerge from their ghettos and begin operating the Obama-Youth reeducation/death camps...
Aside from the "Yup, SSDs still smaller than platter drives, news at 11." answer, I think that there are really two points to be made:
Since this sucker is the same size as a miniPCIe card, rather than a 1.8 or a 2.5inch HDD, it gives the laptop OEMs two options:
Option 1: Ultralight, ultramobile: For a modest premium, you can now build a laptop that simply doesn't have a 2.5 or even 1.8 inch drive bay, just a miniPCIe-sized slot. This will make it thinner and/or lighter than was previously possible, while still offering enough space for Windows, Office, a specialist utility or two, and a bunch of files. Serious Storage will either be irrelevant to the person buying this, or provided by the Office WLAN/VPN. Pure candy for your road warrior types.
Option 2: Standard size; but now with SSD for screaming boot/loading of favored applications, plus standard 2.5inch spinny disk for bulk storage. Historically, if you wanted two disks, you needed to get a behemoth "Mobile workstation" or "desktop replacement". With one of these, you can get the equivalent; but in a body of essentially the same size as a standard 1 laptop drive. 80GB for OS and favored programs, whatever 2.5incher you want for mass storage...
It will also be interesting to see if any storage vendor does something with these. If mounted vertically, you could get a backplane with sockets, plus as many vertically oriented SSD cards as you had space for, in a 2U enclosure. Connected to a suitably screaming SATA controller, that would give you quite high density by SSD standards, with commodity parts for lower cost, and Real Serious Performance...
In the context of the mobile phone market, where the end user is rather limited control over the firmware(without resorting to quite-unencouraged hackery), the scamminess is arguably much greater, in practical impact.
On a PC, say, it is quite likely that many, likely most, of the hardware components have a mess of patents and licenced code baked into their firmware. The same thing would apply to a phone's cellular baseband components. While the "free hardware" hard line might find that philosophically problematic(and the OSS guys practically so, if they have to build drivers that talk to the thicket 'o secrets inside); It is also likely, outside of a FOSS purist's system, that much of the software is licensed.
However, on a PC, it is typically the case that drivers are available at least until the next significant revision of windows(except in the case of the chintziest printers and scanners and such rubbish) and any software can, either for free or for money, be upgraded as needed, until the hardware is just too antique to bother.
On the phone side, however, something like Flash is a licenced component; but it is not exactly a retail product. Unless your phone vendor wishes to pay adobe for X units and provide a firmware update, you are SOL. More generally, because of the challenges of embedded development, (and the explicit cryptographic hurdles placed in the way of 3rd parties who would try) phones are far harder for the end user to support for themselves. An x86 you can just keep updating until it isn't worth it. A phone? vendor firmware or hacking...
The "scam" isn't so much in the fact that adobe wishes to be paid; but in the fact that(because of the perversities of the ecosystem), Flash is a product that must be purchased to be updated; but simply isn't for sale to anybody except OEMs, Hooray for unnecessary obsolescence...
The other issue, aside from Adobe squeezing the sector for all it is worth, is that a fair amount of the Flash out there was really built with the performance of fairly beefy wintels in mind. Aside from Atoms, basically the cheapest and nastiest computer you can find on the shelf these days is running an A64 derivative in the 2GHz range, backed by a couple gigs of RAM, and an embedded video chip that probably has the same die area as your phone's entire ARM SoC.
Having flash is useful in certain legacy cases(if you must have StrongBad on the go, that was running fine on 600MHz P3s, a decade ago...) or just plain maldesigned websites(Hey! instead of providing an HTML link on our useless flash-splash page, let's embed the link in the flash!), or use cases that just dump a video stream right to the hardware decoder(though using flash to do this is comparatively pointless).
For things like games, though, (or even just ghastly banner ads), your battery life and system responsiveness will quickly inform you that most Flash out there was really designed for a much more powerful system.
Eh, that's just one of the audiophile wet-ops teams. After a few thousand rounds of being mocked about $600 ethernet cables and $2,000/meter silver IEC cables, some of the tighter wound ones go rogue and start striking back at the uncaring world that will never understand or accept them.
In addition to the onboard sound(an unforgivable aural insult), you may find that your system and backups have been selectively purged of all lossy-compressed media. In especially severe cases, all audio may be purged(it was only CD "quality" to begin with, and even lossless compression makes audio sound flat and lifeless. It has to do with jitter, you wouldn't understand.)
There are outcomes between "sun comes up, sun goes down" and "Sun gives the Van Allen belt a good hard shove and everybody eats ionized death"...
Solar behavior capable of knocking out a bunch of satellites, or affecting the power grid, is worrisome; but can be mitigated(or at least expected and then repaired) for various levels of nuisance and expense.
If, for example, next week is going to be a especially terrible time to go into the wilderness with nothing but your trusty GPS and satellite phone, you can't do anything about what the sun is going to do to that infrastructure; but you can avoid relying on it...
Frankly, no browser extension will be suitable to the task of going after link farmers until Lethal Force over IP is developed and widely adopted; but, in the absence of robust LF/IP implementations, I suppose hitting them in the wallet will have to do....
How exactly does one charge separately for fiber channel over ethernet when selling ethernet switches?
Does the switch have firmware that actually dedicates processor time to blocking FCoE traffic unless you pay the man(and is a license fee for "UDP over ethernet" or "HTTP over ethernet" the next brainwave from Cisco?), or is the "over ethernet" a marketing exaggeration, and there are actually certain non-ethernet features that the switch must support in order to handle FC "over ethernet"?
Slashdot Mirror
You might want to get you reading comprehension checked. I said that Motives (not Means) are of no interest.
Results are of interest, as are means; but motives are irrelevant drivel that I leave to the hypothetical biographers.
As it happens, I find Anonymous' results to be largely positive. Their means are more mixed(as is not especially surprising in an "organization" that anybody can claim, at any time, to be acting in the name of); but I think that they've been quite useful and comparatively restrained. Not saints, certainly, but their collateral damage levels aren't exactly keeping me up at night.
140 Octets: Depending on character set, that will give you 160, 140, or 70 characters. Anything larger will kick you into concatenated SMS, which is (usually) transparent enough; but is still often billed per-SMS...
I would have replied earlier; but my computer snow crashed.
Damn your European socialism! Your lamentable unwillingness to be ruthlessly screwed over by your corporate overlords has foiled my plan...
Do you think that the acquisition of documentary evidence(that would never otherwise have come to light) of the sort of dirty-tricks tactics used by entities like the "Chamber of Commerce" is actually of zero value? Or the revelation that comparatively well respected US contractors would be putting out proposals to do the hatchet work?
I have no wish to claim that every member of anonymous(to the degree that there are "members") is some sort of heroic altruist. I strongly suspect that many of them are just pranksters, vandals, or dumb kids. Similarly, I would be wholly unsurprised to discover that Assuage is a creepy attention whore with serious grandiosity issues.
However, judgement-by-personality is only relevant for people I have to deal with personally. In this realm, I only care about results. I care what they are doing, not why they are doing it.
I wonder how much amusement his fellow inmates will have with the phrase "hit me up anyway possible"?
I'm guessing that HBGary Federal won't be seeing too much of that...
If *real* fascists ever took control in this country, most of these people would shit themselves on a continuous basis before the secret police killed them, their families, their pets, burned down their houses and killed a few others standing around just to send a message.
Which is why attempting to foil incremental steps in that direction, before they reach fruition, is sort of a good idea, no?
So, let's take a look at this:
Option 1: Members or associates of a loose-knit group of hackers who are likely subjects of federal interest after illegally penetrating and utterly humiliating a private-sector spook shop decide that it would be a great idea to show up, in person, at an event with some amount of security likely to be in the vicinity, just to heckle somebody they have already pwned good and hard. They think that this is a good idea because showing up in crowded areas and making a disturbance is an excellent way to remain anonymous.
Option 2: Aaron Barr and the rest of the losers at HBGary really don't want to show their faces at RSA, after having been ruthlessly punked by a bunch of amateurs; but decide to cry about "security threats" in an attempt to look less than totally pathetic.
Y'know, I don't think that this is a terribly difficult decision...
" It’s about using your friends as resources to progress in the game, which is the opposite of actual sociality or friendship. Maybe not exactly, but it’s not the same thing, right?"
"Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end and never merely as a means to an end" -- Immanuel Kant
He certainly isn't the only person who would consider such games "evil"...
I have an evil plan: if this "facebook over SMS" nonsense takes off, there will be loads of poor suckers paying per-sms for the drivel that accumulates there.
Please ensure that all status updates, wall scrawls, and similar communications are greater than 140 octets long...
That would be a scary thought, except that it is a vulnerability that can be solved just by throwing more highly competitive assholes at the problem...
If there is one thing that the world has in abundance, those are it.
They are paying the owners of those bits for every copy that they make...(specifically, 70% of retail, in most cases. This is going to leave them pretty unmotivated to give apple 30% of retail...)
Which is why I explicitly drew the contrast between the original "We host, we handle billing, we manage the storefront: 30%", which was skeezy because of its compulsoriness(no sideloading or competing stores allowed); but was a reasonably square deal, particularly for indies, and the "You Must give us 30% of the take from your own storefront if that storefront interacts in any way with one of the apps that we deign to tolerate" model...
The former case is definitely command and control; no alternatives, cryptographically enforced fiat; but it was a deal: Apple provided hosting, billing, and storefront management in exchange for 30%.
The latter case is pure rent-seeking: Even if you operate your own hosting, storefront, billing, etc.(as Amazon, say, does) it will no longer be allowed to let them access a web page and make a purchase. You will be required to offer it as an in-app purchase(30% cut to Apple) for the same price that you would offer it outside. That, is pure rent seeking. Perhaps your ISP should get a percentage of the online shopping you do? Heck, why doesn't Fedex get a cut of the value of the goods they ship?
Was anybody seriously expecting the app store not to degenerate into blatant rent seeking?
The original deal, while compulsory(which is not a good sign) was a 30/70, where apple took 30 in exchange for hosting the thing, transaction handling, etc. The fact that that was the only deal in town was a bit skeezy; but it was certainly a boon for the indies who couldn't or didn't want to deal with logistics themselves.
At this point, though, it's a pure money grab. Hey, Amazon, want to offer customers the ability to purchase ebooks(downloaded from your server, linked to their amazon accounts, through the kindle application)? 30% of that is ours, and you aren't allowed to charge a higher price in-app to make up for that. You don't like that? Well, it's a nice app you've got there. It'd be a pity if it were to suffer a cryptographic revocation accident, Capiche?
That makes me feel sooo much better about the value of antivirus software.
Does slashdot's new interface support posting from a Babbage engine running OpenBSD?
Unless Dell is considering a fundamental rethink in strategy(as in "trying to turn into IBM" fundamental...), I can't imagine the logic behind buying AMD...
Right now, Dell is more or less Intel's box-assembly bitch; but they are reaping substantial "marketing assistance" funds, and they also seem to be able to buy AMD chips for their cheap seats and/or large-number-of-sockets servers(where hypertransport is still enough of a factor to make up for intel's better cores), since AMD's open-market prices are excellent.
Were they to aquire AMD, they would be spending a great deal of money in order to piss off intel(who would presumably de-friend them to the extent that the feds allow, thus ruining their prices and/or margins on intel-based systems), and obtain super-preferential access to a product that AMD is selling at excellent prices to all comers anyway... Why?
Unless there is some advantage that I'm not thinking of, buying AMD seems like it would essentially amount to conceding the market for things like corporate laptops and small servers to HP et al, and moving to some other strategy(presumably some sort of AMD APU-based light-to-thin desktop strategy(would they be eating Citrix next? between competition from Microsoft and competition from VMware, they might be edible enough), with some combination of leveraging hypertransport's advantages and hoping real hard for Bulldozer on the server/workstation end...)
That would be quite a shake-up. Anybody have an alternate hypothesis that seems less radical?
Arguably, Mr. Beck has just had a rare "stopped clock" moment. Yup, no shit, highly sophisticated electronic data systems are, in fact, the biggest development in profiling and surveillance since approximately the invention of writing. Yes, in fact, most players large enough that you know their names are(directly or indirectly) likely to be working for, or co-opted by, the state. CALEA is a matter of public law, not exactly a shadowy secret. "National security letters", while their scope is a shadowy secret, are also a publicly known instrument of data gathering. The fact that the state buys "3rd party intelligence" from private companies to supplement the domestic surveillance it isn't supposed to be doing also isn't a secret, it's a bloody industry...
Purely going by well-corroborated stories that show up on the NYT frontpage you can pretty much fulfill any paranoid conspiracy theory you want, as long as it doesn't involve reptoids or the illuminati.
Unfortunately, in Beck's case, his not-exactly-groundbreaking observation that a large advertising company might in fact be tracking users is surrounded by so much sheer nonsense as to be of effectively no use. Rather than laying out the sort of surveillance society we have voted and purchased our way happily into, he gives us one conspiracist snippet about Google. Next week, I'm sure that Soros will be secretly bankrolling Google so that Obama will know where the Real True Christians are when it is time for his legions of welfare-spawned criminality to emerge from their ghettos and begin operating the Obama-Youth reeducation/death camps...
Aside from the "Yup, SSDs still smaller than platter drives, news at 11." answer, I think that there are really two points to be made:
Since this sucker is the same size as a miniPCIe card, rather than a 1.8 or a 2.5inch HDD, it gives the laptop OEMs two options:
Option 1: Ultralight, ultramobile: For a modest premium, you can now build a laptop that simply doesn't have a 2.5 or even 1.8 inch drive bay, just a miniPCIe-sized slot. This will make it thinner and/or lighter than was previously possible, while still offering enough space for Windows, Office, a specialist utility or two, and a bunch of files. Serious Storage will either be irrelevant to the person buying this, or provided by the Office WLAN/VPN. Pure candy for your road warrior types.
Option 2: Standard size; but now with SSD for screaming boot/loading of favored applications, plus standard 2.5inch spinny disk for bulk storage. Historically, if you wanted two disks, you needed to get a behemoth "Mobile workstation" or "desktop replacement". With one of these, you can get the equivalent; but in a body of essentially the same size as a standard 1 laptop drive. 80GB for OS and favored programs, whatever 2.5incher you want for mass storage...
It will also be interesting to see if any storage vendor does something with these. If mounted vertically, you could get a backplane with sockets, plus as many vertically oriented SSD cards as you had space for, in a 2U enclosure. Connected to a suitably screaming SATA controller, that would give you quite high density by SSD standards, with commodity parts for lower cost, and Real Serious Performance...
In the context of the mobile phone market, where the end user is rather limited control over the firmware(without resorting to quite-unencouraged hackery), the scamminess is arguably much greater, in practical impact.
On a PC, say, it is quite likely that many, likely most, of the hardware components have a mess of patents and licenced code baked into their firmware. The same thing would apply to a phone's cellular baseband components. While the "free hardware" hard line might find that philosophically problematic(and the OSS guys practically so, if they have to build drivers that talk to the thicket 'o secrets inside); It is also likely, outside of a FOSS purist's system, that much of the software is licensed.
However, on a PC, it is typically the case that drivers are available at least until the next significant revision of windows(except in the case of the chintziest printers and scanners and such rubbish) and any software can, either for free or for money, be upgraded as needed, until the hardware is just too antique to bother.
On the phone side, however, something like Flash is a licenced component; but it is not exactly a retail product. Unless your phone vendor wishes to pay adobe for X units and provide a firmware update, you are SOL. More generally, because of the challenges of embedded development, (and the explicit cryptographic hurdles placed in the way of 3rd parties who would try) phones are far harder for the end user to support for themselves. An x86 you can just keep updating until it isn't worth it. A phone? vendor firmware or hacking...
The "scam" isn't so much in the fact that adobe wishes to be paid; but in the fact that(because of the perversities of the ecosystem), Flash is a product that must be purchased to be updated; but simply isn't for sale to anybody except OEMs, Hooray for unnecessary obsolescence...
The other issue, aside from Adobe squeezing the sector for all it is worth, is that a fair amount of the Flash out there was really built with the performance of fairly beefy wintels in mind. Aside from Atoms, basically the cheapest and nastiest computer you can find on the shelf these days is running an A64 derivative in the 2GHz range, backed by a couple gigs of RAM, and an embedded video chip that probably has the same die area as your phone's entire ARM SoC.
Having flash is useful in certain legacy cases(if you must have StrongBad on the go, that was running fine on 600MHz P3s, a decade ago...) or just plain maldesigned websites(Hey! instead of providing an HTML link on our useless flash-splash page, let's embed the link in the flash!), or use cases that just dump a video stream right to the hardware decoder(though using flash to do this is comparatively pointless).
For things like games, though, (or even just ghastly banner ads), your battery life and system responsiveness will quickly inform you that most Flash out there was really designed for a much more powerful system.
Eh, that's just one of the audiophile wet-ops teams. After a few thousand rounds of being mocked about $600 ethernet cables and $2,000/meter silver IEC cables, some of the tighter wound ones go rogue and start striking back at the uncaring world that will never understand or accept them.
In addition to the onboard sound(an unforgivable aural insult), you may find that your system and backups have been selectively purged of all lossy-compressed media. In especially severe cases, all audio may be purged(it was only CD "quality" to begin with, and even lossless compression makes audio sound flat and lifeless. It has to do with jitter, you wouldn't understand.)
There are outcomes between "sun comes up, sun goes down" and "Sun gives the Van Allen belt a good hard shove and everybody eats ionized death"...
Solar behavior capable of knocking out a bunch of satellites, or affecting the power grid, is worrisome; but can be mitigated(or at least expected and then repaired) for various levels of nuisance and expense.
If, for example, next week is going to be a especially terrible time to go into the wilderness with nothing but your trusty GPS and satellite phone, you can't do anything about what the sun is going to do to that infrastructure; but you can avoid relying on it...
Frankly, no browser extension will be suitable to the task of going after link farmers until Lethal Force over IP is developed and widely adopted; but, in the absence of robust LF/IP implementations, I suppose hitting them in the wallet will have to do....
How exactly does one charge separately for fiber channel over ethernet when selling ethernet switches?
Does the switch have firmware that actually dedicates processor time to blocking FCoE traffic unless you pay the man(and is a license fee for "UDP over ethernet" or "HTTP over ethernet" the next brainwave from Cisco?), or is the "over ethernet" a marketing exaggeration, and there are actually certain non-ethernet features that the switch must support in order to handle FC "over ethernet"?