But would that really bother most people? I'd wager the number of people who want to run 3+ disks (2 x 6 Gbps, 1+ 3 Gbps) at full capacity AND graphics at full capacity are a pretty small number who wouldn't buy these systems to begin with.
The point isn't that the Russian strategy accomplished anything besides killing a lot of Chechens, destroying a couple of trillion rubles worth of infrastructure and fueling an internal terrorist/separatist movement for the next century.
But to the Russians, it was a measure of success -- Chechnya was firmly under their control, the organized armed resistance was crushed and they had a local strongman running the show. Sporadic troubles from the Caucuses are nothing new, and I don't think they take them all that seriously until it becomes a "you look weak" PR issue -- ie, bombs blowing up trains, Opera Houses held hostage, airport terminals bombed -- basically terrorism in Moscow.
Basically it reflects the Russian brutalist approach to everything.
The Russians believe their strategy "worked" in Chechnya -- bomb the cities to the stone age, kill anyone who doesn't cooperate, and arm a local force whose existence depends on you and their willingness to do whatever it takes to suppress dissent.
My sense is they think they could probably crush any kind of Iranian aggression just as easily.
I find that surprising; I would think that there would be a blanket law making it illegal to smuggle prohibited items into a prison, with "prohibited" being whatever the warden or prison commissioner decided was prohibited.
The notion that you have to smuggle an item into prison even though it is legal to posses in prison seems strange as well.
That's important, because your theory makes the assumption that all users of this toolbar are Google users... but why would they install the Bing toolbar?
You're presuming that some meaningful percentage of search toolbar installs are the result of search fans installing their favorite search site's toolbar as part of some deliberate act.
I think the reality is that the overwhelming majority of search toolbars are "cramware" tacked on and defaulted to install as part of some other product. I think there may be some small percentage of Google toolbar installs that happened a long time ago when popup blocking was desired.
But Bing? How many people have said "Oooh, Bing. I want the toolbar! let's install it on purpose." 5? 10?
There was an article in the NY Times about Major League Baseball doing this for EVERY CAMERA ANGLE for EVERY PLAY, with full metadata for everything happening, including what crazy shit people write on signs.
Apparently it was all in queryable database so that you could find out, say, what happened when Batter X faced Pitcher Y on Team Z in Stadium 2.
Heh, all Watchguard products ship with a number of features enabled which will stop forwarding traffic if the conditions are met.
It's been an issue lately with UDP Flood control from *inside* the network -- it's been killing internal DNS requests and resulting in "network is down" complaints.
...nature of the filing, does anyone have complete confidence that any automated billing system is 100% accurate or that the system is designed so that when errors occur, they are always in the favor of the customer?
In a past life, I was responsible for a our Qwest billing (formerly Northwestern Bell). Our customer service record was like a stack of paper 40-50 sheets thick, and we weren't really that big of a company.
This leads me to believe that these systems, especially at older companies, are deeply complex and probably rife with errors, especially given the monthly death march deadlines to get billing out.
There's probably not malice involved, but even if there was how would you know it was malice without some low-level audit that exposed a variable named "$nonsense_charge_to_inflate_profits_and_exec_compensation"?
This also leads me to believe that these systems should be audited by a third-party not answerable to the company being audited and possibly with criminal penalties associated with billing errors that can be proven to be false and intentional.
I agree with you almost completely, but to take the devil's advocate position, I have seen firewalls, deployed generally correctly, that did have hard-to-configure "default security settings" that, if triggered cleverly, could aid or add to a DDoS attack.
And it's not that the admin was brain dead, the box was weak or even a bad product, either -- the default settings make sense for a sort of general network deployment but probably not for a site likely for a DDoS attack.
My sense is that network engineering for a high profile, DDoS-likely website is like race-prepping a car, and that because you can't race a car off the showroom floor doesn't make the car poorly designed.
Environmental activists DO shoulder some of the blame.
Rather than being against poor safety at existing reactors, against existing reactor designs, environmentalists simply choose to be against nuclear power, period, and to their credit, did a great job of poisoning nuclear power in the minds of the American public and politicians.
They did not say "We favor new nuclear designs" or "These other designs are superior" or "If we fixed these issues in our existing plants" -- all things that may have created a positive image of nuclear power and promoted alternative designs.
In fact, it strikes me that the environmental movement has actually gotten worse over time. Instead of being against the worst pollution or in favor of realistic base load power generation alternatives, they embrace solutions that will never supply base load power and instead pursue some kind of murky, neo-luddite anti-modernism as the answer to a future without base load power generation.
It's a fake future that can't and won't exist outside of a science fiction movie.
Of the three people I knew that did it, only one would I consider having a decent personality, and she was unsuccessful -- and she's otherwise very socially active (well liked, tons of friends, etc).
My sense is that too many people go into looking for something specific, as part of a larger life agenda involving long-term life & family choices or to find some kind of fulfillment they think they are missing.
I think these people are disappointed the most but mostly because their goals are unrealistic, either online or in real life.
It's funny, but I've heard both the "easy success" story and the "impossible to find anyone" story from both men and women.
One guy I know did multiple dating sites for at least 18 months. This guy is successful computer programmer who also had a law degree, in fantastic shape, very broad interests in terms of movies, music, etc. He went on a half-dozen "coffee" dates and the closest he came to a meaningful relationship was a 3-4 month relationship with a girl with herpes.
His complaint was that he found matching difficult, and when he did find matches he felt that there was just too much competition -- 1 girl for 100 guys, and his perception was they just picked the richest/best looking, etc.
Another guy said he went out on "dates" at least 3-4 times per month, and said he had sex with about 1/3 the girls he "dated" but hadn't gotten involved in a long term relationship. Even if he's exaggerating, he was doing well despite being an accountant/finance flunky, not very attractive, about 50 pounds overweight and so on.
My sister in law did it for a long time and never had any success -- a couple of dates, but nothing lasting more than 3-4 dates. She's attractive, a school teacher who owns her own home and is very "together" and not some kind of emotional basket case / cat lady. As far as I know, she was looking for a more "serious" type of a relationship and not just hooking up (my wife won't let me ask...)
My guess is the gimmick is to not be too hung up on "perfection" either in similarity or in looks, and be willing to try dating people just for fun, but I have a difficult time reconciling all the conflicting stories. I suspect its still easier for women than for men, since culturally we're still a little man-chases-woman. I have a hard time with the notion that you can get easy sex, but when I think about my pre-internet dating habits, it was unusual to date someone more than a couple of times and not have sex with them, and the more I'm exposed to the generation just younger than mine the more surprised at how much less sexually inhibited they are than we were, and we thought we were uninhibited.
The problem being that the ISPs realize that even with public addresses, most (an overwhelming majority?) of their customers are just that -- "content consumers who sit behind a glorified television."
The first thing is to blame the chart maker for not having any education in how to visually display quantitative information and for not putting any thought into people trying to read the chart and differentiate between a number of very similar colors.
There's a number of things the chart could have that would have helped -- ensure no two similar colors are close (black and brown should be in the top band instead of 3 blues), callouts to indicate which line was which instead of relying on a color-coded legend.
The next thing to blame is Excel. Excel should be reprogrammed so that once the first six or eight easily distinguished colors are used, additional chart elements should switch to a patterned line/fill (and a different color). This by itself would solve all the problems and make uneducated chart makers look a lot smarter.
What's worrying to me is that we are making Facebook posts 'equal' with normal language and communication.
My sense from being 40 and using Facebook for a couple of years is that people are (like in any non-face-face posting/forum/communication) prone to posting things that they would not otherwise say.
Furthermore, I think the "culture" of Facebook rewards provocativeness and certain amount of outrageousness. A posting of "Woke up with a headache, showered, ate a smoothie and drove to work" would be ignored while "Woke up with a ringing hangover and on the drive just about got run off the road by some asshole that I wanted to kill" might attract responses.
The problem is that while both statements are right, the former more likely represents the person's actual life, general personality and likely attitude towards others; the latter represents a more "gonzo" version that will attract attention but doesn't really represent the person well.
I think this is different, too, than the usual "smoking a bong on Facebook" because that represents a real action, not just an exaggerated version of normalcy.
....and I've been down to visit a couple of times.
When we go hiking in the Coronado National Forest, it's staggering the number of Border Patrol officers/vehicles/activity we see along 92 between Bisbee and Sierra Vista.
I don't know how you could get away with anything on that stretch of the border, but given the close proximity of Naco, MX and Naco, AZ, maybe just getting over the fence is all that matters, since the fence is pretty much the width of the border there.
Do they actually put things like power generation underground? I can see where that would add a ton of complexity (emissions, fuel storage, fire suppression, air intake) and that's assuming the topside isn't overly hostile (ie, radiation, active military combat, etc) and you can tap it for air supply, water supply, etc.
Whenever I've seen the topic covered, it always seems like it makes more sense to build larger empty areas underground (or use pre-existing ones in caverns) and then fill those areas with mobile-home type structures so you have less work to do trying to deal with moisture, air quality and so on.
For one person at the time, nothing, but that isn't the issue.
The issue is what they aren't doing to prevent burglary and make burglars likely to get caught and make trafficking in stolen goods much more difficult.
What they COULD be doing:
1) increased patrols in residential areas overall -- more patrols make burglars nervous and less likely to commit burglaries.
2) Intensive patrols in areas that have experienced burglaries. Burglars tend towards being active in specific geographic areas.
3) Much more intensive scrutiny of known fences, pawn shops and even Craigslist stings for items recently stolen with known identification.
With the resources we waste on drug crimes, this could be done trivially, and it would make burglary a far riskier proposition.
My sense is that the "need" for ISPs to do their work for them indicates that law enforcement could better utilize their limited resources.
Maybe spend fewer resources on enforcing, say, drug laws, marijuana specifically, and more time and resources on other crimes that actually hurt people?
And I don't necessarily mean physical crimes (assault, murder) -- how about simple burglary or breaking and entering?
A neighbor's house got broken into; the daughter's laptop was stolen and the window to her room was damaged beyond repair. She needed a laptop for school and, obviously, the window needed replacement. So they're out $3k they don't necessarily have and/or she falls behind in school or they can't close the window to her room, none of which are very palatable choices, especially in a Minnesota winter.
Yet, when they called the cops they got two nice guys who gave them a case number and took the laptop S/N "on the very slim chance it turns up."
So, basically there's no resources to do extra patrols or extra investigators but plenty of guys to take down pot dealers. Yay.
Take a closer look at Home Depot or Lowes the next time you're in there. Philips screws are common, but for decking applications, especially for the tools contractors use (long strips of screws for repetitive screwing in specialized screw guns) they are almost all square drive or torx. In fact, many of the decking screws come with a free bit in every box of 200 or so.
I had a deck built in 2003, 800+ sq ft, and all they used were square drive screws. The carpenter said they haven't built a deck with philips head screws in a long time -- it was actually more common to use a air nailer than philips head screws.
No commercial carpenter would waste time sharpening any bit -- replacements are cheaper than down time sharpening a 50 cent bit.
In my personal experience, square drive almost never torques out -- instead I usually break the screw before it torques out.
Slashdot Mirror
But would that really bother most people? I'd wager the number of people who want to run 3+ disks (2 x 6 Gbps, 1+ 3 Gbps) at full capacity AND graphics at full capacity are a pretty small number who wouldn't buy these systems to begin with.
Can you tell me what "maneuvering" you want to do you can't do on an iPhone or iPad?
The point isn't that the Russian strategy accomplished anything besides killing a lot of Chechens, destroying a couple of trillion rubles worth of infrastructure and fueling an internal terrorist/separatist movement for the next century.
But to the Russians, it was a measure of success -- Chechnya was firmly under their control, the organized armed resistance was crushed and they had a local strongman running the show. Sporadic troubles from the Caucuses are nothing new, and I don't think they take them all that seriously until it becomes a "you look weak" PR issue -- ie, bombs blowing up trains, Opera Houses held hostage, airport terminals bombed -- basically terrorism in Moscow.
Basically it reflects the Russian brutalist approach to everything.
Hubris, perhaps?
The Russians believe their strategy "worked" in Chechnya -- bomb the cities to the stone age, kill anyone who doesn't cooperate, and arm a local force whose existence depends on you and their willingness to do whatever it takes to suppress dissent.
My sense is they think they could probably crush any kind of Iranian aggression just as easily.
I find that surprising; I would think that there would be a blanket law making it illegal to smuggle prohibited items into a prison, with "prohibited" being whatever the warden or prison commissioner decided was prohibited.
The notion that you have to smuggle an item into prison even though it is legal to posses in prison seems strange as well.
You mean smuggling contraband to a prison isn't already illegal, regardless of what the contraband is?
That's important, because your theory makes the assumption that all users of this toolbar are Google users... but why would they install the Bing toolbar?
You're presuming that some meaningful percentage of search toolbar installs are the result of search fans installing their favorite search site's toolbar as part of some deliberate act.
I think the reality is that the overwhelming majority of search toolbars are "cramware" tacked on and defaulted to install as part of some other product. I think there may be some small percentage of Google toolbar installs that happened a long time ago when popup blocking was desired.
But Bing? How many people have said "Oooh, Bing. I want the toolbar! let's install it on purpose." 5? 10?
There was an article in the NY Times about Major League Baseball doing this for EVERY CAMERA ANGLE for EVERY PLAY, with full metadata for everything happening, including what crazy shit people write on signs.
Apparently it was all in queryable database so that you could find out, say, what happened when Batter X faced Pitcher Y on Team Z in Stadium 2.
Heh, all Watchguard products ship with a number of features enabled which will stop forwarding traffic if the conditions are met.
It's been an issue lately with UDP Flood control from *inside* the network -- it's been killing internal DNS requests and resulting in "network is down" complaints.
...nature of the filing, does anyone have complete confidence that any automated billing system is 100% accurate or that the system is designed so that when errors occur, they are always in the favor of the customer?
In a past life, I was responsible for a our Qwest billing (formerly Northwestern Bell). Our customer service record was like a stack of paper 40-50 sheets thick, and we weren't really that big of a company.
This leads me to believe that these systems, especially at older companies, are deeply complex and probably rife with errors, especially given the monthly death march deadlines to get billing out.
There's probably not malice involved, but even if there was how would you know it was malice without some low-level audit that exposed a variable named "$nonsense_charge_to_inflate_profits_and_exec_compensation"?
This also leads me to believe that these systems should be audited by a third-party not answerable to the company being audited and possibly with criminal penalties associated with billing errors that can be proven to be false and intentional.
Drain the battery dead.
I agree with you almost completely, but to take the devil's advocate position, I have seen firewalls, deployed generally correctly, that did have hard-to-configure "default security settings" that, if triggered cleverly, could aid or add to a DDoS attack.
And it's not that the admin was brain dead, the box was weak or even a bad product, either -- the default settings make sense for a sort of general network deployment but probably not for a site likely for a DDoS attack.
My sense is that network engineering for a high profile, DDoS-likely website is like race-prepping a car, and that because you can't race a car off the showroom floor doesn't make the car poorly designed.
Environmental activists DO shoulder some of the blame.
Rather than being against poor safety at existing reactors, against existing reactor designs, environmentalists simply choose to be against nuclear power, period, and to their credit, did a great job of poisoning nuclear power in the minds of the American public and politicians.
They did not say "We favor new nuclear designs" or "These other designs are superior" or "If we fixed these issues in our existing plants" -- all things that may have created a positive image of nuclear power and promoted alternative designs.
In fact, it strikes me that the environmental movement has actually gotten worse over time. Instead of being against the worst pollution or in favor of realistic base load power generation alternatives, they embrace solutions that will never supply base load power and instead pursue some kind of murky, neo-luddite anti-modernism as the answer to a future without base load power generation.
It's a fake future that can't and won't exist outside of a science fiction movie.
Of the three people I knew that did it, only one would I consider having a decent personality, and she was unsuccessful -- and she's otherwise very socially active (well liked, tons of friends, etc).
My sense is that too many people go into looking for something specific, as part of a larger life agenda involving long-term life & family choices or to find some kind of fulfillment they think they are missing.
I think these people are disappointed the most but mostly because their goals are unrealistic, either online or in real life.
It's funny, but I've heard both the "easy success" story and the "impossible to find anyone" story from both men and women.
One guy I know did multiple dating sites for at least 18 months. This guy is successful computer programmer who also had a law degree, in fantastic shape, very broad interests in terms of movies, music, etc. He went on a half-dozen "coffee" dates and the closest he came to a meaningful relationship was a 3-4 month relationship with a girl with herpes.
His complaint was that he found matching difficult, and when he did find matches he felt that there was just too much competition -- 1 girl for 100 guys, and his perception was they just picked the richest/best looking, etc.
Another guy said he went out on "dates" at least 3-4 times per month, and said he had sex with about 1/3 the girls he "dated" but hadn't gotten involved in a long term relationship. Even if he's exaggerating, he was doing well despite being an accountant/finance flunky, not very attractive, about 50 pounds overweight and so on.
My sister in law did it for a long time and never had any success -- a couple of dates, but nothing lasting more than 3-4 dates. She's attractive, a school teacher who owns her own home and is very "together" and not some kind of emotional basket case / cat lady. As far as I know, she was looking for a more "serious" type of a relationship and not just hooking up (my wife won't let me ask...)
My guess is the gimmick is to not be too hung up on "perfection" either in similarity or in looks, and be willing to try dating people just for fun, but I have a difficult time reconciling all the conflicting stories. I suspect its still easier for women than for men, since culturally we're still a little man-chases-woman. I have a hard time with the notion that you can get easy sex, but when I think about my pre-internet dating habits, it was unusual to date someone more than a couple of times and not have sex with them, and the more I'm exposed to the generation just younger than mine the more surprised at how much less sexually inhibited they are than we were, and we thought we were uninhibited.
The problem being that the ISPs realize that even with public addresses, most (an overwhelming majority?) of their customers are just that -- "content consumers who sit behind a glorified television."
When it was called "Jurassic Park".
The first thing is to blame the chart maker for not having any education in how to visually display quantitative information and for not putting any thought into people trying to read the chart and differentiate between a number of very similar colors.
There's a number of things the chart could have that would have helped -- ensure no two similar colors are close (black and brown should be in the top band instead of 3 blues), callouts to indicate which line was which instead of relying on a color-coded legend.
The next thing to blame is Excel. Excel should be reprogrammed so that once the first six or eight easily distinguished colors are used, additional chart elements should switch to a patterned line/fill (and a different color). This by itself would solve all the problems and make uneducated chart makers look a lot smarter.
What's worrying to me is that we are making Facebook posts 'equal' with normal language and communication.
My sense from being 40 and using Facebook for a couple of years is that people are (like in any non-face-face posting/forum/communication) prone to posting things that they would not otherwise say.
Furthermore, I think the "culture" of Facebook rewards provocativeness and certain amount of outrageousness. A posting of "Woke up with a headache, showered, ate a smoothie and drove to work" would be ignored while "Woke up with a ringing hangover and on the drive just about got run off the road by some asshole that I wanted to kill" might attract responses.
The problem is that while both statements are right, the former more likely represents the person's actual life, general personality and likely attitude towards others; the latter represents a more "gonzo" version that will attract attention but doesn't really represent the person well.
I think this is different, too, than the usual "smoking a bong on Facebook" because that represents a real action, not just an exaggerated version of normalcy.
....and I've been down to visit a couple of times.
When we go hiking in the Coronado National Forest, it's staggering the number of Border Patrol officers/vehicles/activity we see along 92 between Bisbee and Sierra Vista.
I don't know how you could get away with anything on that stretch of the border, but given the close proximity of Naco, MX and Naco, AZ, maybe just getting over the fence is all that matters, since the fence is pretty much the width of the border there.
Do they actually put things like power generation underground? I can see where that would add a ton of complexity (emissions, fuel storage, fire suppression, air intake) and that's assuming the topside isn't overly hostile (ie, radiation, active military combat, etc) and you can tap it for air supply, water supply, etc.
Whenever I've seen the topic covered, it always seems like it makes more sense to build larger empty areas underground (or use pre-existing ones in caverns) and then fill those areas with mobile-home type structures so you have less work to do trying to deal with moisture, air quality and so on.
For one person at the time, nothing, but that isn't the issue.
The issue is what they aren't doing to prevent burglary and make burglars likely to get caught and make trafficking in stolen goods much more difficult.
What they COULD be doing:
1) increased patrols in residential areas overall -- more patrols make burglars nervous and less likely to commit burglaries.
2) Intensive patrols in areas that have experienced burglaries. Burglars tend towards being active in specific geographic areas.
3) Much more intensive scrutiny of known fences, pawn shops and even Craigslist stings for items recently stolen with known identification.
With the resources we waste on drug crimes, this could be done trivially, and it would make burglary a far riskier proposition.
My sense is that the "need" for ISPs to do their work for them indicates that law enforcement could better utilize their limited resources.
Maybe spend fewer resources on enforcing, say, drug laws, marijuana specifically, and more time and resources on other crimes that actually hurt people?
And I don't necessarily mean physical crimes (assault, murder) -- how about simple burglary or breaking and entering?
A neighbor's house got broken into; the daughter's laptop was stolen and the window to her room was damaged beyond repair. She needed a laptop for school and, obviously, the window needed replacement. So they're out $3k they don't necessarily have and/or she falls behind in school or they can't close the window to her room, none of which are very palatable choices, especially in a Minnesota winter.
Yet, when they called the cops they got two nice guys who gave them a case number and took the laptop S/N "on the very slim chance it turns up."
So, basically there's no resources to do extra patrols or extra investigators but plenty of guys to take down pot dealers. Yay.
I know it's still early, and there's no evidence, but there must be some kind of link, right?
Take a closer look at Home Depot or Lowes the next time you're in there. Philips screws are common, but for decking applications, especially for the tools contractors use (long strips of screws for repetitive screwing in specialized screw guns) they are almost all square drive or torx. In fact, many of the decking screws come with a free bit in every box of 200 or so.
I had a deck built in 2003, 800+ sq ft, and all they used were square drive screws. The carpenter said they haven't built a deck with philips head screws in a long time -- it was actually more common to use a air nailer than philips head screws.
No commercial carpenter would waste time sharpening any bit -- replacements are cheaper than down time sharpening a 50 cent bit.
In my personal experience, square drive almost never torques out -- instead I usually break the screw before it torques out.