As one who has maintained an ISP's peering, it is no where near as complicated as you make it sound. Enterprise class hardware (from Cisco, Juniper, etc.) have builtin support for unicast reverse path filtering (uRPF) that's effectively processing free -- based on the routing table ("FIB" -- forwarding information base) -- very effectively preventing traffic from entering (or leaving) your network that doesn't belong there.
(As an end user, uRPF presents a small problem as the ISP DHCP server is a 10-net host and I null route 10/8.)
Yes obviously, which can be implemented in 2 modes: strict, which is useless as an upstream peer because you don't necessarily have best path down to them for everything you're hearing, or as loose, which is again useless as an upstream peer because you might as well turn it right off.
Dude, clearly you have no idea what you just read.
The problem with this becomes what if you're a transit provider yourself. The logistics of managing that kind of fitering suck. It's why most peers don't.
There needs to be a middle ground between loose and strict like feasable. I don't want to accept packets for any route I have, nor do I want to drop any packet that doesn't head back the same direction. For reasonable filtering at that level, it needs to be "allow any packets that should reasonably come from this peer per their advisement that I can filter". Sure you can base it of IRR or something, but it would be much more effective if this was signaled than configured.
The reason I have thus far not taking your survey is it is HOPELESSLY biased in your favor and useless.
Scrap the new site, or don't expect me to be here when it's implemented. Social media is fickle, and this site will be a myspace memory if you continue to ignore the userbase. We can always go tolerate reddit for a while until something else takes it's place. I've been coming here for 10 years, but this may end it for me.
"...require companies with more than 250 employees to submit..." Solution: Fire all but 250 of your employees.
If necessary, outsource any remaining work to 1 or more subcontractors, each of which has 250 employees or less.
Or we could just end the gamemanship which allows companies to claim employees aren't employees if they walk and quack like a duck, just because they're farmed out only for the purpose of avoiding having to call them employees.
The slides refer to a feature called "pacing" where it doesn't send packets as fast as it can, but spaces them out. Can someone explain why this would help? If the sliding window is full, and an acknowledgement for N packets comes in, why would it help to send the next N packets with a delay, rather than send them as fast as possible?
I wonder if this is really "buffer bloat compensation" where some router along the line is accepting packets even though it will never send them. By spacing the packets out, you avoid getting into that router's bloated buffer.
From the linked slides:
Does Packet Pacing really reduce Packet Loss? * Yes!!! Pacing seems to help a lot * Experiments show notable loss when rapidly sending (unpaced) packets * Example: Look at 21st rapidly sent packet
- 8-13% lost when unpaced
- 1% lost with pacing
Well, if you're sending UDP, and your server is connected to a gig link, and the next link between you and the server is 1m, and the buffer size of the device is 25ms...
Sending data over 25k, you might as well set packets 18+ on fire, because they sure aren't making it to the destination unless you delay them accordingly.
As I understand it, QUIC is largely about multiplexing - downloading all 35 files needed for a page concurrently. The test was the opposite of what QUIC is designed for
TCP handles one file at at a time* - first download the html, then the logo, then the background, then the first navigation button....
QUIC gets all of those page elements at the same time, over a single connection. The problem with TCP and the strength of QUIC is exactly what TFA chose NOT to test. By using a single 10 MB file, their test is the opposite of web browsing and doesn't test the innovations in QUIC.
* browsers can negotiate multiple TCP connections, which is a slow way to retrieve many small files.
What the hell are you talking about? You're conflating HTTP with TCP. TCP has no such limitation. TCP doesn't deal in files at all.
Give H1B holders who blow the whistle on their employers violating the law (overworking them, or claiming and paying them as if it were a much lower skilled job that in reality is higher skilled, the employer just wanted to scare off US workers, etc.) either fast-path to a Green Card, double the pay (paid by fines) they would have earned, and/or freedom to move to a different employer for their stay.
I.e. change the incentives for H1B visa holders to rat out misbehaving employers, rather than being scared to say anything because they loose if they do.
That's like saying cops as a whole won't abuse power if we listen to the rare whistle blowers every now and then. When the system itself is abusable by design, 4 or 5 honest actors aren't going to fix that, you have to fix the system.
Just re-write the H1-B laws so that all H1-B workers must be paid 20% more than industry standard for the region or area the job is located in. That, or have a 20-40% premium on each worker's salary paid by the hiring company as an excise tax.
I bet that shit would stop cold right away.
It isn't enough. A lot of the draw of H1B is the lack of mobility. Let them freely change jobs and allow them to have a 1 year grace period between jobs if they've been in their first job for a year.
That's great and all until you look at scale. It simply doesn't, and this is coming from someone who did strategic planning for a CLEC. That's the entire point of using the term natural monopoly.
Nitrogen in a gas chamber is probably the most humane way to do it.
Or Carbon Monoxide.
No, because carbon monoxide is toxic, meaning exposure to it is dangerous, while sufficient nitrogen just dominates the partial pressure to the point where the environment becomes anoxic, so all you have to do is vent the nitrogen when done, while the CO you have to take care to deal with.
So you choose to speed, and drive without mandated insurance, and somehow this is government oppression that you be forced to not endanger others or maintain liability insurance, and then when cited for it, ignored the penalties and act like a victim when the consequences of your actions catch you?
Seriously, you're part of the problem in this country.
Sure. you buy a house for $50,000 in 1973, then 40 years later sell it for $250,000, an inflation calculator will indicate an almost imperceptible change in "value" (in 2013 dollars), but you'll be taxed on the inflation (on not, if you live there as a homestead, and meet other rules).
Capital gains is a tax on the inflation. They don't calculate the capital gains on the "real" gain, but the dollar gain.
You are obviously the person that doesn't understand it. If I don't understand it, explain how I'm wrong. Go ahead. I'll be waiting.
That is actually a really good point.
Is indexing the cost basis against something like CPI something that has been proposed as law before?
I know I personally would absolutely support that change, although I would like to see CG rates be more in line with income rates as a compromise, as the goal was never meant to tax base value of long term assets, but specifically to tax value gained over the time.
Last I checked, it's quite easy to move to Somalia.
So based on that I assume you consider the Islamic Courts Union -- the radical Islamic group that seeks to control Somalia -- to be a... corporation? Not a government (or aspiring government)?
Somalia does not suck because of corporations, it sucks because of its government(s). People like you think of Somalia as a governmental vacuum but that's just ignorant of the real situation.
The point isn't move to Somalia because it sucks, the point is move to Somalia if you want to ignore government. It sucks precisely because the government is ineffective, and that is exactly what a country with no effective government turns into. Sure it has a government, but under the same argument, so does Afghanistan, or hell, even SeaLand had a government for years.
This is a strong indicator that environmental factors are in play in pump failures -- and the first one that comes to mind for me is EMI; that's why hospitals ask you to turn off cell phones. They can screwup devices a lot less sensitive than an insulin pump, and they're only pumping out a few hundred mW of RF when active.
If you only knew a quarter of the reality of how much RF energy is pumped through hospitals by the various competing crap wifi/nursecall/monitoring systems they install, you'd totally freak out.
Perhaps most remarkably, Into Darkness is not even the first weird amalgam of The Wrath of Khan and The Undiscovered Country in the Star Trek film catalogue; that honour belongs to Nemesis.
Nemesis ranks up there with the last Matrix movie though. It was horrible.
Wrath of Khan is probably the most memorable moment of the entire franchise's universe. My point was, Star Trek wasn't turned into war operas by anything recent. It's been that way ever since it had a 2 hour format.
He already turned Star Trek into a battle-oriented space opera. If anything that shows he has a decent handle of what Star Wars is. More than he has on Star Trek at least.
Only if you define "Godwin" as a blindingly obvious collection of falsehoods and scaremongering to foster a worldview that benefits it's producers financially at the expense of basically everyone else.
I don't believe hand grenades have the same warning on them.
As a former Marine, I have some experience with hand grenades, and I can assure you that every case of grenades comes with an entire booklet of warnings, written in dense legalese.
and you have to read all of it within ten seconds
Actually, the directions clearly say that shalt thou count to three. No more. No less. Three shalt be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three.
Of course we can control our environment. It is trivial. At the small scale just start smoking in bed until your home (environment) catches fire. Big change, man-made. One person can overturn a truck carrying pesticide so that it flows into a river which poisons downstream land and farms.
Now I know you're talking about very large scale environment. One human doesn't have a lot of power to affect the very large scale environment, but 4 billion humans do. Humans absolutely have destroyed many environments already. We've drained marshes and created deserts. Arrival of Europeans to America has caused massive change. Most of Europe used to be one large forest. We created the dustbowl in America in recent history. Humans have cause huge changes in the past and the evidence is very clear that humans are greatly exacerbating the current climate change.
Yes, we need to adapt. But we need to stop doing the stupid stuff that is encouraging the climate change. You can't just keep using your 10mpg SUV and importing your food from the other side of the globe while shouting out the window "not my fault!"
Every time I see one of these humans can't change weather cranks, I just hear "Black Blizzard" in my head. Congress actually debated this very issue till one side said "look out the window, and you can see my home state of Kansas blowing by". Some people just refuse to listen to facts and cling to their beliefs until they personally experience just how wrong they are.
Slashdot Mirror
As one who has maintained an ISP's peering, it is no where near as complicated as you make it sound. Enterprise class hardware (from Cisco, Juniper, etc.) have builtin support for unicast reverse path filtering (uRPF) that's effectively processing free -- based on the routing table ("FIB" -- forwarding information base) -- very effectively preventing traffic from entering (or leaving) your network that doesn't belong there.
(As an end user, uRPF presents a small problem as the ISP DHCP server is a 10-net host and I null route 10/8.)
Yes obviously, which can be implemented in 2 modes: strict, which is useless as an upstream peer because you don't necessarily have best path down to them for everything you're hearing, or as loose, which is again useless as an upstream peer because you might as well turn it right off.
Dude, clearly you have no idea what you just read.
The problem with this becomes what if you're a transit provider yourself. The logistics of managing that kind of fitering suck. It's why most peers don't.
There needs to be a middle ground between loose and strict like feasable. I don't want to accept packets for any route I have, nor do I want to drop any packet that doesn't head back the same direction. For reasonable filtering at that level, it needs to be "allow any packets that should reasonably come from this peer per their advisement that I can filter". Sure you can base it of IRR or something, but it would be much more effective if this was signaled than configured.
Heres your feedback: The site is AWFUL.
The reason I have thus far not taking your survey is it is HOPELESSLY biased in your favor and useless.
Scrap the new site, or don't expect me to be here when it's implemented. Social media is fickle, and this site will be a myspace memory if you continue to ignore the userbase. We can always go tolerate reddit for a while until something else takes it's place. I've been coming here for 10 years, but this may end it for me.
Personally, I prefer an air supply *not* at risk of detonation...
"...require companies with more than 250 employees to submit..." Solution: Fire all but 250 of your employees.
If necessary, outsource any remaining work to 1 or more subcontractors, each of which has 250 employees or less.
Or we could just end the gamemanship which allows companies to claim employees aren't employees if they walk and quack like a duck, just because they're farmed out only for the purpose of avoiding having to call them employees.
The slides refer to a feature called "pacing" where it doesn't send packets as fast as it can, but spaces them out. Can someone explain why this would help? If the sliding window is full, and an acknowledgement for N packets comes in, why would it help to send the next N packets with a delay, rather than send them as fast as possible?
I wonder if this is really "buffer bloat compensation" where some router along the line is accepting packets even though it will never send them. By spacing the packets out, you avoid getting into that router's bloated buffer.
From the linked slides:
Does Packet Pacing really reduce Packet Loss?
* Yes!!! Pacing seems to help a lot
* Experiments show notable loss when rapidly sending (unpaced) packets
* Example: Look at 21st rapidly sent packet
- 8-13% lost when unpaced
- 1% lost with pacing
Well, if you're sending UDP, and your server is connected to a gig link, and the next link between you and the server is 1m, and the buffer size of the device is 25ms...
Sending data over 25k, you might as well set packets 18+ on fire, because they sure aren't making it to the destination unless you delay them accordingly.
As I understand it, QUIC is largely about multiplexing - downloading all 35 files needed for a page concurrently. The test was the opposite of what QUIC is designed for
TCP handles one file at at a time* - first download the html, then the logo, then the background, then the first navigation button ....
QUIC gets all of those page elements at the same time, over a single connection. The problem with TCP and the strength of QUIC is exactly what TFA chose NOT to test. By using a single 10 MB file, their test is the opposite of web browsing and doesn't test the innovations in QUIC.
* browsers can negotiate multiple TCP connections, which is a slow way to retrieve many small files.
What the hell are you talking about? You're conflating HTTP with TCP. TCP has no such limitation. TCP doesn't deal in files at all.
Give H1B holders who blow the whistle on their employers violating the law (overworking them, or claiming and paying them as if it were a much lower skilled job that in reality is higher skilled, the employer just wanted to scare off US workers, etc.) either fast-path to a Green Card, double the pay (paid by fines) they would have earned, and/or freedom to move to a different employer for their stay.
I.e. change the incentives for H1B visa holders to rat out misbehaving employers, rather than being scared to say anything because they loose if they do.
That's like saying cops as a whole won't abuse power if we listen to the rare whistle blowers every now and then. When the system itself is abusable by design, 4 or 5 honest actors aren't going to fix that, you have to fix the system.
There is a pretty easy cure for all of this...
Just re-write the H1-B laws so that all H1-B workers must be paid 20% more than industry standard for the region or area the job is located in. That, or have a 20-40% premium on each worker's salary paid by the hiring company as an excise tax.
I bet that shit would stop cold right away.
It isn't enough. A lot of the draw of H1B is the lack of mobility. Let them freely change jobs and allow them to have a 1 year grace period between jobs if they've been in their first job for a year.
That's great and all until you look at scale. It simply doesn't, and this is coming from someone who did strategic planning for a CLEC. That's the entire point of using the term natural monopoly.
Or Carbon Monoxide.
No, because carbon monoxide is toxic, meaning exposure to it is dangerous, while sufficient nitrogen just dominates the partial pressure to the point where the environment becomes anoxic, so all you have to do is vent the nitrogen when done, while the CO you have to take care to deal with.
So you choose to speed, and drive without mandated insurance, and somehow this is government oppression that you be forced to not endanger others or maintain liability insurance, and then when cited for it, ignored the penalties and act like a victim when the consequences of your actions catch you?
Seriously, you're part of the problem in this country.
Sure. you buy a house for $50,000 in 1973, then 40 years later sell it for $250,000, an inflation calculator will indicate an almost imperceptible change in "value" (in 2013 dollars), but you'll be taxed on the inflation (on not, if you live there as a homestead, and meet other rules).
Capital gains is a tax on the inflation. They don't calculate the capital gains on the "real" gain, but the dollar gain.
You are obviously the person that doesn't understand it. If I don't understand it, explain how I'm wrong. Go ahead. I'll be waiting.
That is actually a really good point.
Is indexing the cost basis against something like CPI something that has been proposed as law before?
I know I personally would absolutely support that change, although I would like to see CG rates be more in line with income rates as a compromise, as the goal was never meant to tax base value of long term assets, but specifically to tax value gained over the time.
Last I checked, it's quite easy to move to Somalia.
So based on that I assume you consider the Islamic Courts Union -- the radical Islamic group that seeks to control Somalia -- to be a... corporation? Not a government (or aspiring government)?
Somalia does not suck because of corporations, it sucks because of its government(s). People like you think of Somalia as a governmental vacuum but that's just ignorant of the real situation.
The point isn't move to Somalia because it sucks, the point is move to Somalia if you want to ignore government. It sucks precisely because the government is ineffective, and that is exactly what a country with no effective government turns into. Sure it has a government, but under the same argument, so does Afghanistan, or hell, even SeaLand had a government for years.
If you wish not to do business with a corporation that is your right. Try doing that with governments(local, state or federal).
Last I checked, it's quite easy to move to Somalia.
This is a strong indicator that environmental factors are in play in pump failures -- and the first one that comes to mind for me is EMI; that's why hospitals ask you to turn off cell phones. They can screwup devices a lot less sensitive than an insulin pump, and they're only pumping out a few hundred mW of RF when active.
If you only knew a quarter of the reality of how much RF energy is pumped through hospitals by the various competing crap wifi/nursecall/monitoring systems they install, you'd totally freak out.
Perhaps most remarkably, Into Darkness is not even the first weird amalgam of The Wrath of Khan and The Undiscovered Country in the Star Trek film catalogue; that honour belongs to Nemesis .
Nemesis ranks up there with the last Matrix movie though. It was horrible.
Wrath of Khan is probably the most memorable moment of the entire franchise's universe. My point was, Star Trek wasn't turned into war operas by anything recent. It's been that way ever since it had a 2 hour format.
He already turned Star Trek into a battle-oriented space opera. If anything that shows he has a decent handle of what Star Wars is. More than he has on Star Trek at least.
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Any entry level chemist and minimal funding can make several flavors of nasty agents, including the sarin they are discussing.
Heck some cults have done it in the past, and used them, I just can't for the life of me remember their name(s) at the moment.
Watch a video of sarin exposure and you'll understand. It's particularly nasty.
Hi, I'm science, have we met?
Only if you define "Godwin" as a blindingly obvious collection of falsehoods and scaremongering to foster a worldview that benefits it's producers financially at the expense of basically everyone else.
Really? Really? You're gonna slam the WSJ as impossible partisan and site the NYT as a no-partisan source?
Um, yes?
Just because you see issue in a specific source because it disagrees with your world view, does not mean that it is actually biased.
I don't believe hand grenades have the same warning on them.
As a former Marine, I have some experience with hand grenades, and I can assure you that every case of grenades comes with an entire booklet of warnings, written in dense legalese.
and you have to read all of it within ten seconds
Actually, the directions clearly say that shalt thou count to three. No more. No less. Three shalt be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three.
Of course we can control our environment. It is trivial. At the small scale just start smoking in bed until your home (environment) catches fire. Big change, man-made. One person can overturn a truck carrying pesticide so that it flows into a river which poisons downstream land and farms.
Now I know you're talking about very large scale environment. One human doesn't have a lot of power to affect the very large scale environment, but 4 billion humans do. Humans absolutely have destroyed many environments already. We've drained marshes and created deserts. Arrival of Europeans to America has caused massive change. Most of Europe used to be one large forest. We created the dustbowl in America in recent history. Humans have cause huge changes in the past and the evidence is very clear that humans are greatly exacerbating the current climate change.
Yes, we need to adapt. But we need to stop doing the stupid stuff that is encouraging the climate change. You can't just keep using your 10mpg SUV and importing your food from the other side of the globe while shouting out the window "not my fault!"
Every time I see one of these humans can't change weather cranks, I just hear "Black Blizzard" in my head. Congress actually debated this very issue till one side said "look out the window, and you can see my home state of Kansas blowing by". Some people just refuse to listen to facts and cling to their beliefs until they personally experience just how wrong they are.