I guess what I meant was that the Jews weren't the cause of the problem. From what I've read, the real cause was an unsatisfactory ending to WWI, really.
But I do suspect that a talented demagogue could construct a problem where none really exists. I would argue that gay rights (or legislating the lack thereof) is one such issue. Find a group of people who only want to mind their own business, and turn them into "culture killers" that must be stopped! Last I knew, none of them were telling me that I was wrong or sinful for being married to a woman, or otherwise infringing on others' ways of life.
If in a contented situation, it's probably always possible to manufacture discontent.
Think about demagogues. One key tool is to stir up your population hating someone else, so they'll give you the power to fix the "problem" you just created out of thin air. At the risk of running askance of Godwin's Law, think about the H-guy and the Jews prior to WWII. They were no threat, but they were a convenient bogeyman, and served as a target for hatred.
I remember watching some of the cartoons with my kids years ago, thinking about how politically incorrect they'd become. Babar is taken to civilization and is subsequently "taken" by it. Upon return to the jungle he begins "civilizing" it, in the process bringing environmental devastation and warfare. Parading the opposing rhinoceros leader through town in a cage was just a bit over the top.
Seeing a cartoon made in a different era in the overly politically correct 90's is an interesting contrast in extremes, made all the more fun by it's all being so French in origin.
Since you have first dismissed the study, then go on to dig out alternative explanations, I'll make the potentially unjustified assumption that you're a Conservative. (Note the capital "C".)
In that case, you don't believe in Global Warming, therefore you've just thrown out your third alternative explanation.
I think I've got OpenVPN using its default UDP on port 1194, not a TCP connection.
But what's more interesting is that the tunnel continues to work from my employer, just not from my mother's house. (Roadrunner) If they're going to engage in filtering, it makes sense to filter content sourced from a home ISP harder than from a F500 company.
Classically IPSEC has been harder to set up, because it doesn't just use other ports, it uses other protocols. It needs extra support in the routing to make it work, but then again routers have been taking IPSEC into account for some time. Part of the reason for going OpenVPN was the sheer simplicity of setup and operation. (Another was that the OpenVPN author really understands IPSEC, and feels that it's unnecessarily complex. OpenVPN is the response to that complexity.)
As for TCP vs UDP vs IPSEC, a while back my employer used IPSEC. A year or 2 back, we moved to a proprietary UDP-connected system similar to OpenVPN. More recently they've added HTTP and HTTPS support, so they're adding TCP. On the same trip when I was having trouble connecting to my home with OpenVPN, I was also unable to connect to my employer with the UDP-connected client. I'll be visiting again soon, and plan to try the HTTP/HTTPS connection.
Verizon has been courting me with offers lately, because at one point I would have jumped in a minute. The prime reason I never did before was that they kept giving "This LOW price for 2 years!" types of ads, with no notice whatsoever would happen AFTER those 2 years. Recently they began sending ads that would give me the same kind of price for life. But then that interacts with another pending issue. Verizon is trying to sell our landlines to Fairpoint. I don't know why Verizon is trying so hard now to sell DSL to me, unless part of the deal value turns out to be based on the number of broadband users. Nor do I now if there is fine print about the "price for life" being only with Verizon, so it doesn't matter once Fairpoint takes over.
Once upon a time I was happy about the idea of the Fairpoint takeover. They're not Verizon, and they seemed to specialize in smaller markets, so maybe they'd be a better fit for our area. But then I start hearing things to the tune that they're essentially a pyramid scheme. So for the moment I'm going to sit tight with Comcast, and see what I do after the sale happens or fails to happen. Meanwhile one of my friends is utterly delighted with Burlington Telecom, but I'm not in Burlington.
I have an OpenVPN endpoint on my home system, so I can get access to my IMAP server wherever I am.
From my desk at work, it continues to work flawlessly.
From my mother's house it has worked flawlessly in the past, but on the last visit it didn't. It seemed to have MTU problems, in that I could do simple DNS lookups, and I could SSH into one of my home systems over the VPN. But the moment I go to move any quantity of data, it freezes up. I tried the suggested OpenVPN MTU fixes and they didn't work, though I don't know if they have to be applied at both ends. At the time, obviously I couldn't change the server endpoint settings.
Now I'm beginning to wonder if it's really this new filtering that's hitting me.
I can accept what you say. I guess I'm an ignorant ticket buyer.
But perception is important, and what I wrote is exactly how it's perceived. As far as I know, there's "coach" and "first class", with maybe "business" thrown in. Maybe my ticket does have "U" or "Q" or "S" on there but it's apparently part of a long alphanumeric string that is apparently useless to the casual traveler. Once upon a time, I read/heard articles on how the airlines practice "yield management" with their ticket prices, in an effort to maximize revenue per flight, yet not fly empty seats.
The information you speak of may not be opaque, but neither is it transparent. How did you find out? Is it standard across carriers, or does each carrier have different fares and different rules for each fare? Does knowing his enable you to get better rates for a given trip, or does it just let you know why you're paying what you have to pay?
My wife has also found that at some airlines, a one-way ticket is more expensive than a round-trip. But at other airlines, a round trip is booked as a pair of on-ways, so the price is exactly half.
Way back when, flying was a rare novelty, so it was inherently fun.
Today pretty much everything about it is a hassle, so it's only worth flying when constrained by time, or when other driving just isn't practical. I've done long-haul Greyhound long ago, and to be honest that wasn't so hot, either. I've never traveled by train, just taken tourist-type train rides.
As an aside, the annoyance starts when you book a flight. My wife has checked it out, and for at least one airline, the magic interval is three-weeks-and-a-day. Booking closer than that, the rates are outrageous. That is, except for a flight with an empty seat that is so close in time that you can't even get to the airport. One thing we've realized is that it appears that they accept new bookings right up to flight time, even for full flights. For the prices they charge for a near-in booking, they can bump someone, give them a free flight at the longer-term booking rates, and still make more money on that seat.
Then there's TSA, and the overloaded ATC delays, and the overloaded airports, etc, etc, etc.
Flying is just a way to get from point A to point B when other means won't work out.
I claim memory fault, and the right to have memory faults at 50+. Either that or not really paying close attention in the first place. It's interesting that this is a problem when the day periods are close. If the day periods too far apart, you just develop the policies and procedures up-front instead of adapting to the local day.
A talk being given by one of the geologists (Jim Bell) on the Spirit/Opportunity teams. (He was also selling and signing the book of the same name.) A few little tidbits from the talk...
One of the rovers (Spirit?) has blown a motor on a front wheel. As a result, it's normal mode of travel is now backwards. Also as a result, it tends to drag a groove in the Martian soil. In a recent transit, they were taking photographs of where they'd been and realized that the dragging wheel had exposed a different layer of soil, significantly different from the surface layer. Had the wheel not been dragging, they never would have discovered this.
Choosing a landing site is a tug-of-war between the engineers and geologists. The engineers want to land someplace safe, so they can make it in one piece and functional. The geologists want to land someplace interesting. Usually "interesting" and "safe" are opposites. It's a compromise.
Likewise, choosing what to look at is a compromise between safety and interesting. They've recently taken one of the rovers (Opportunity?) into a crater, realizing that they may not be able to get it out. But they've done all of the doable stuff nearby, the crater is compellingly interesting, and if they don't make it out, it's been a good run, and there's more to do in the crater.
The rovers are really slow. You may hear it, but it doesn't hit home until you've seen a visual demonstration of how slow those things are.
The rovers had been "wintering over," and they were worried about them getting enough sunlight to keep from getting too cold. While the Jim Bell was on the road for this book tour, and before the engagement I was at, they'd reacquired contact.
During the early days of the mission, the scientists were on Martian time, living 27 hour days. After the first few weeks, they settled out procedures and policies to allow them to go back on Earth time.
It's that tiny copy of the page source that's imaged on the back of your eyeball, on the retina.
That's the illegal copy. Sound doesn't make any sort of copy inside the ears, otherwise no doubt the RIAA would be serving subpoenas on peoples' cochlea as "illegal devices".
That looks like they've put flash and nspluginwrapper into the non-free branch of the regular repository. I had to run a script, which required development tools that weren't installed by default. Not really hard to do, but clearly beyond the Ubuntu target audience.
Next question... I set my daughter up with Feisty to take away to college, but since it was a dual-core machine I used an amd64 install. It took jumping through a few hoops to get flash running. I had to load development tools so I could build nspluginwrapper to run flash. It was all web search, and the only part that Synaptic helped with was the development tools. The rest was on the command line.
Will the update to Gutsy Gibbon break all of this?
In retrospect, I should have set her up with an x86 install. Will an x86 install still take advantage of dual-core?
Let's pretend that the Democrats do check Bush's power on some piece of legislation.
All the administration needs to do is "permit" on attack to succeed, and they've destroyed the Democrats and guaranteed their ability to get ANYTHING in the name of anti-terrorism, without significant debate.
Personally, I think we need to introduce legislation pronouncing Bush as "King" or "Supreme Ruler" for the duration of his election, above the law. Then enumerate some of his "powers", which just happen to correspond to what he is currently doing. Things like: * Rewriting scientific reports to fit with religious dogma or business interests * Suspend inconvenient portions of the Constitution * Eliminate accountability to the other 2 branches
I set my daughter up with Ubuntu when she went to University this fall. I also gave her 3 flash memory keys, 2 for backup and 1 for transporting files, because she doesn't have a printer. She had no problems moving her OO files onto the flash key, but when she went to the public "groovix" Linux machine that also had OO, she had no idea how to get access to the flash key. If I could sit at the system I could probably figure it out, but that's not an option at the moment, and depending on how the system is set up it may not be possible.
So she uses OO to save as.doc, put that on the flash key, and prints it on her roommates PC. I'd suggested she save as.doc and use one of the campus PCs, but her roommate has a printer, so this works.
Quick, file a business process patent on "Evolution by natural selection as a mechanism for Intelligent Design." Recent patent reform in the US changes things from first-to-invent to first-to-file. Since the above business process is critical to all the mechanisms of nature that we're copying, we can cut off any infringement suits by the Intelligent Designer at the knees with this one.
First, most people don't really trust their computers anyway, because they don't understand them. So the "trust degradation" of giving Microsoft free rein is minimal, maybe even negative, because "At least Microsoft understands my computer, and if anyone can keep it running, they can." Basically it's responsibility transferral for something they don't understand.
Second, there are cases where trust is absolutely required. A few I can think of are medical/HIPPA, military, and media. In a way, the first 2 embody opposite requirements from the 3rd. The first 2 absolutely require data integrity and system control, and the machine owner is central, in control, and responsible. There seems to be quite a difference between medical and military usages, and IMHO it's because medical usage grew out of IT departments, where such things were understood. It appears that military usage grew out of command/control and procurement, where they weren't. As a result, there's no shortage of people waiting to see the fireworks between Microsoft an HIPPA for the former, and the Win-Yorktown and all of our current cyber-security fears for the latter.
As for the 3rd example of trust mentioned above, you can find DRM arguments all over on/.
Sure looks like it does. But it appears that the patch may be needed for some chipsets. I need the patch for Intel ICH4, but not for an SMP deskside. Do you know what chipset you have?
Interesting. I had to apply the patch, at the very least because my laptop has an ICH4 chipset. That chipset doesn't officially support the HPET, but if you apply the patch it works.
The other day on the powertop mailing list the HPET guy said that it was getting merged in 2.6.24. But come to think of it, my SMP deskside at work has run HPET with no patches.
The HPET stuff is now scheduled for merge into the 2.6.24 kernel. I've had to patch my earlier kernels to get HPET, which as you say is really necessary for tickless to do its stuff. The article suggests that this is a stock Gutsy installation. But then again, most distros do a bit of custom patching of their kernels. In particular, Gentoo does not include the HPET patch.
So the question here: Does the Gutsy kernel have the HPET patch applied?
If not, then these power numbers are definitely pessimistic, presuming that they move to an HPET kernel (2.6.24+) as it's available.
Someone here with a Gutsy system should run "powertop" on it, and let us know. IIRC, powertop suggested that I use the HPET, and with a little digging I found that a patch was needed, and took care of it.
For that matter, if this is Unified (el-cheapo) Memory Architecture, and you've got "video memory" that you're not using, take a look in the BIOS and see if there's some way to dedicate less system memory for video. Giving the memory back to the system would be far better than trying to use it through the video subsystem.
Slashdot Mirror
Well this has simply got to be stopped!
Haven't they heard that we're now an ownership society?
Stuff like this is supposed to be owned by publishers!
I guess what I meant was that the Jews weren't the cause of the problem. From what I've read, the real cause was an unsatisfactory ending to WWI, really.
But I do suspect that a talented demagogue could construct a problem where none really exists. I would argue that gay rights (or legislating the lack thereof) is one such issue. Find a group of people who only want to mind their own business, and turn them into "culture killers" that must be stopped! Last I knew, none of them were telling me that I was wrong or sinful for being married to a woman, or otherwise infringing on others' ways of life.
If in a contented situation, it's probably always possible to manufacture discontent.
I respectfully disagree...
Think about demagogues. One key tool is to stir up your population hating someone else, so they'll give you the power to fix the "problem" you just created out of thin air. At the risk of running askance of Godwin's Law, think about the H-guy and the Jews prior to WWII. They were no threat, but they were a convenient bogeyman, and served as a target for hatred.
I thought it was "Babar", not "BarBar".
I remember watching some of the cartoons with my kids years ago, thinking about how politically incorrect they'd become. Babar is taken to civilization and is subsequently "taken" by it. Upon return to the jungle he begins "civilizing" it, in the process bringing environmental devastation and warfare. Parading the opposing rhinoceros leader through town in a cage was just a bit over the top.
Seeing a cartoon made in a different era in the overly politically correct 90's is an interesting contrast in extremes, made all the more fun by it's all being so French in origin.
Since you have first dismissed the study, then go on to dig out alternative explanations, I'll make the potentially unjustified assumption that you're a Conservative. (Note the capital "C".)
In that case, you don't believe in Global Warming, therefore you've just thrown out your third alternative explanation.
I think I've got OpenVPN using its default UDP on port 1194, not a TCP connection.
But what's more interesting is that the tunnel continues to work from my employer, just not from my mother's house. (Roadrunner) If they're going to engage in filtering, it makes sense to filter content sourced from a home ISP harder than from a F500 company.
Classically IPSEC has been harder to set up, because it doesn't just use other ports, it uses other protocols. It needs extra support in the routing to make it work, but then again routers have been taking IPSEC into account for some time. Part of the reason for going OpenVPN was the sheer simplicity of setup and operation. (Another was that the OpenVPN author really understands IPSEC, and feels that it's unnecessarily complex. OpenVPN is the response to that complexity.)
As for TCP vs UDP vs IPSEC, a while back my employer used IPSEC. A year or 2 back, we moved to a proprietary UDP-connected system similar to OpenVPN. More recently they've added HTTP and HTTPS support, so they're adding TCP. On the same trip when I was having trouble connecting to my home with OpenVPN, I was also unable to connect to my employer with the UDP-connected client. I'll be visiting again soon, and plan to try the HTTP/HTTPS connection.
Verizon has been courting me with offers lately, because at one point I would have jumped in a minute. The prime reason I never did before was that they kept giving "This LOW price for 2 years!" types of ads, with no notice whatsoever would happen AFTER those 2 years. Recently they began sending ads that would give me the same kind of price for life. But then that interacts with another pending issue. Verizon is trying to sell our landlines to Fairpoint. I don't know why Verizon is trying so hard now to sell DSL to me, unless part of the deal value turns out to be based on the number of broadband users. Nor do I now if there is fine print about the "price for life" being only with Verizon, so it doesn't matter once Fairpoint takes over.
Once upon a time I was happy about the idea of the Fairpoint takeover. They're not Verizon, and they seemed to specialize in smaller markets, so maybe they'd be a better fit for our area. But then I start hearing things to the tune that they're essentially a pyramid scheme. So for the moment I'm going to sit tight with Comcast, and see what I do after the sale happens or fails to happen. Meanwhile one of my friends is utterly delighted with Burlington Telecom, but I'm not in Burlington.
I have an OpenVPN endpoint on my home system, so I can get access to my IMAP server wherever I am.
From my desk at work, it continues to work flawlessly.
From my mother's house it has worked flawlessly in the past, but on the last visit it didn't. It seemed to have MTU problems, in that I could do simple DNS lookups, and I could SSH into one of my home systems over the VPN. But the moment I go to move any quantity of data, it freezes up. I tried the suggested OpenVPN MTU fixes and they didn't work, though I don't know if they have to be applied at both ends. At the time, obviously I couldn't change the server endpoint settings.
Now I'm beginning to wonder if it's really this new filtering that's hitting me.
I can accept what you say. I guess I'm an ignorant ticket buyer.
But perception is important, and what I wrote is exactly how it's perceived. As far as I know, there's "coach" and "first class", with maybe "business" thrown in. Maybe my ticket does have "U" or "Q" or "S" on there but it's apparently part of a long alphanumeric string that is apparently useless to the casual traveler. Once upon a time, I read/heard articles on how the airlines practice "yield management" with their ticket prices, in an effort to maximize revenue per flight, yet not fly empty seats.
The information you speak of may not be opaque, but neither is it transparent.
How did you find out?
Is it standard across carriers, or does each carrier have different fares and different rules for each fare?
Does knowing his enable you to get better rates for a given trip, or does it just let you know why you're paying what you have to pay?
I suspect it depends on the particular airline.
My wife has also found that at some airlines, a one-way ticket is more expensive than a round-trip. But at other airlines, a round trip is booked as a pair of on-ways, so the price is exactly half.
Way back when, flying was a rare novelty, so it was inherently fun.
Today pretty much everything about it is a hassle, so it's only worth flying when constrained by time, or when other driving just isn't practical. I've done long-haul Greyhound long ago, and to be honest that wasn't so hot, either. I've never traveled by train, just taken tourist-type train rides.
As an aside, the annoyance starts when you book a flight. My wife has checked it out, and for at least one airline, the magic interval is three-weeks-and-a-day. Booking closer than that, the rates are outrageous. That is, except for a flight with an empty seat that is so close in time that you can't even get to the airport. One thing we've realized is that it appears that they accept new bookings right up to flight time, even for full flights. For the prices they charge for a near-in booking, they can bump someone, give them a free flight at the longer-term booking rates, and still make more money on that seat.
Then there's TSA, and the overloaded ATC delays, and the overloaded airports, etc, etc, etc.
Flying is just a way to get from point A to point B when other means won't work out.
I claim memory fault, and the right to have memory faults at 50+. Either that or not really paying close attention in the first place. It's interesting that this is a problem when the day periods are close. If the day periods too far apart, you just develop the policies and procedures up-front instead of adapting to the local day.
A talk being given by one of the geologists (Jim Bell) on the Spirit/Opportunity teams. (He was also selling and signing the book of the same name.) A few little tidbits from the talk...
One of the rovers (Spirit?) has blown a motor on a front wheel. As a result, it's normal mode of travel is now backwards. Also as a result, it tends to drag a groove in the Martian soil. In a recent transit, they were taking photographs of where they'd been and realized that the dragging wheel had exposed a different layer of soil, significantly different from the surface layer. Had the wheel not been dragging, they never would have discovered this.
Choosing a landing site is a tug-of-war between the engineers and geologists. The engineers want to land someplace safe, so they can make it in one piece and functional. The geologists want to land someplace interesting. Usually "interesting" and "safe" are opposites. It's a compromise.
Likewise, choosing what to look at is a compromise between safety and interesting. They've recently taken one of the rovers (Opportunity?) into a crater, realizing that they may not be able to get it out. But they've done all of the doable stuff nearby, the crater is compellingly interesting, and if they don't make it out, it's been a good run, and there's more to do in the crater.
The rovers are really slow. You may hear it, but it doesn't hit home until you've seen a visual demonstration of how slow those things are.
The rovers had been "wintering over," and they were worried about them getting enough sunlight to keep from getting too cold. While the Jim Bell was on the road for this book tour, and before the engagement I was at, they'd reacquired contact.
During the early days of the mission, the scientists were on Martian time, living 27 hour days. After the first few weeks, they settled out procedures and policies to allow them to go back on Earth time.
It's that tiny copy of the page source that's imaged on the back of your eyeball, on the retina.
That's the illegal copy. Sound doesn't make any sort of copy inside the ears, otherwise no doubt the RIAA would be serving subpoenas on peoples' cochlea as "illegal devices".
That looks like they've put flash and nspluginwrapper into the non-free branch of the regular repository. I had to run a script, which required development tools that weren't installed by default. Not really hard to do, but clearly beyond the Ubuntu target audience.
Next question... I set my daughter up with Feisty to take away to college, but since it was a dual-core machine I used an amd64 install. It took jumping through a few hoops to get flash running. I had to load development tools so I could build nspluginwrapper to run flash. It was all web search, and the only part that Synaptic helped with was the development tools. The rest was on the command line.
Will the update to Gutsy Gibbon break all of this?
In retrospect, I should have set her up with an x86 install.
Will an x86 install still take advantage of dual-core?
Let's pretend that the Democrats do check Bush's power on some piece of legislation.
All the administration needs to do is "permit" on attack to succeed, and they've destroyed the Democrats and guaranteed their ability to get ANYTHING in the name of anti-terrorism, without significant debate.
Personally, I think we need to introduce legislation pronouncing Bush as "King" or "Supreme Ruler" for the duration of his election, above the law. Then enumerate some of his "powers", which just happen to correspond to what he is currently doing. Things like:
* Rewriting scientific reports to fit with religious dogma or business interests
* Suspend inconvenient portions of the Constitution
* Eliminate accountability to the other 2 branches
>Legal immunity doesn't mean you're not scumbags.
No, but it means that they don't have to care.
To paraphrase, "Legal immunity means never having to say you're sorry."
I set my daughter up with Ubuntu when she went to University this fall. I also gave her 3 flash memory keys, 2 for backup and 1 for transporting files, because she doesn't have a printer. She had no problems moving her OO files onto the flash key, but when she went to the public "groovix" Linux machine that also had OO, she had no idea how to get access to the flash key. If I could sit at the system I could probably figure it out, but that's not an option at the moment, and depending on how the system is set up it may not be possible.
.doc, put that on the flash key, and prints it on her roommates PC. I'd suggested she save as .doc and use one of the campus PCs, but her roommate has a printer, so this works.
So she uses OO to save as
Quick, file a business process patent on "Evolution by natural selection as a mechanism for Intelligent Design." Recent patent reform in the US changes things from first-to-invent to first-to-file. Since the above business process is critical to all the mechanisms of nature that we're copying, we can cut off any infringement suits by the Intelligent Designer at the knees with this one.
Two points...
/.
First, most people don't really trust their computers anyway, because they don't understand them. So the "trust degradation" of giving Microsoft free rein is minimal, maybe even negative, because "At least Microsoft understands my computer, and if anyone can keep it running, they can." Basically it's responsibility transferral for something they don't understand.
Second, there are cases where trust is absolutely required. A few I can think of are medical/HIPPA, military, and media. In a way, the first 2 embody opposite requirements from the 3rd. The first 2 absolutely require data integrity and system control, and the machine owner is central, in control, and responsible. There seems to be quite a difference between medical and military usages, and IMHO it's because medical usage grew out of IT departments, where such things were understood. It appears that military usage grew out of command/control and procurement, where they weren't. As a result, there's no shortage of people waiting to see the fireworks between Microsoft an HIPPA for the former, and the Win-Yorktown and all of our current cyber-security fears for the latter.
As for the 3rd example of trust mentioned above, you can find DRM arguments all over on
Sure looks like it does. But it appears that the patch may be needed for some chipsets. I need the patch for Intel ICH4, but not for an SMP deskside. Do you know what chipset you have?
Interesting. I had to apply the patch, at the very least because my laptop has an ICH4 chipset. That chipset doesn't officially support the HPET, but if you apply the patch it works.
The other day on the powertop mailing list the HPET guy said that it was getting merged in 2.6.24. But come to think of it, my SMP deskside at work has run HPET with no patches.
The HPET stuff is now scheduled for merge into the 2.6.24 kernel. I've had to patch my earlier kernels to get HPET, which as you say is really necessary for tickless to do its stuff. The article suggests that this is a stock Gutsy installation. But then again, most distros do a bit of custom patching of their kernels. In particular, Gentoo does not include the HPET patch.
So the question here: Does the Gutsy kernel have the HPET patch applied?
If not, then these power numbers are definitely pessimistic, presuming that they move to an HPET kernel (2.6.24+) as it's available.
Someone here with a Gutsy system should run "powertop" on it, and let us know. IIRC, powertop suggested that I use the HPET, and with a little digging I found that a patch was needed, and took care of it.
For that matter, if this is Unified (el-cheapo) Memory Architecture, and you've got "video memory" that you're not using, take a look in the BIOS and see if there's some way to dedicate less system memory for video. Giving the memory back to the system would be far better than trying to use it through the video subsystem.