"jokes" that try to reduce human beings to white meat.
Isn't this a bit racial? Akin to suggesting that attempting to reduce human beings to dark meat is not an issue and would be as acceptable as the jokes someone may not like but it's Ok to tell them?
OK, I'm confused how this could be considered racial. I thought all humans had white meat, and it was just the skin color that changed between races. Can anyone who has fried up a non-european human recently comment on the color of the meat? I don't have any experience in this area myself.
To add to the confusion: it looks like a terminology mostly applicable to bird/poultry meat, but even the chefs and nutritionists aren't very clear of what white/dark meat terms would mean.
The debate is mainly one of semantics as nutritionists consider all meat from mammals to be "red meat" while this is not the case in other fields such as husbandry, biology, genetics, physiology, etc.
(and I strongly feel the field of "ethics of joking" belongs to the enumeration above).
Now, it totally eluded me how "jokes that try to reduce human beings to poultry breast meat" may gain a sexual connotation - letting aside this is actually impossible (different species and genes and all that), in my mind such jokes would pertain to a certain branch of black humor; e.g. answering to your question: "sorry, can't help, I myself didn't try to fry a non-caucasian".
In an attempt to resolve my state of confusion, I felt free to choose whatever semantic/connotation would have a remote chance in causing offense. As in "reducing humans to white meat only is prejudicial against all other types on meat. We hold these truths as self-evident, that all meats are created equal, etc."
"jokes" that try to reduce human beings to white meat.
Isn't this a bit racial? Akin to suggesting that attempting to reduce human beings to dark meat is not an issue and would be as acceptable as the jokes someone may not like but it's Ok to tell them?
So do MTCP developers see solutions for any of these problems on the horizon?
I'm in no way affiliated or knowledgeable in MPTCP - so I may be wrong - but from what I got from their presentation, MCTCP is not actually designed with the NFS-like usecase in mind (even if it may be used for such), but with the more "common" usecase of a mobile device able to use either/both cellular and WiFI networking.
The second thing that I saw as peculiar: it is not even supported by a network protocol (like IP is supporting TCP/UDP/SCTP/etc), but is supported by TCP. While it will have to deal somehow with re-assembling back a stream from packets streams over different paths, in itself it will be as prone to HOL as the bunch of underlying individual TCP streams which support those different paths. That is, assuming the head-of-line is send on one path and that path involves a HOL-blocking, then it doesn't matter if the other paths have lower latencies, the entire original stream will be HOL-blocked
Coincidence: I'm waiting for my ProLiant N40L G7 MicroServer to be delivered early next week; ordered with 3 WD NAS grade HDD-es (the micro-server: $200. The HDD-es: $450+ all 3) Guess for what I'll use it and how I'll be testing MPTCP soon?
If you aren't browsing over a VPN with HTTPS / SSL and transmitting all your data encrypted by this point you ought to be.
Why? After all, if you have nothing to hide and you set your evil bit to zero, the DHS won't intercept your traffic.
I mean: nobody is so crazy to waste citizens' money on intercepting and storing everyone's communication, the investment and maintenance cost will be everly increasing. And for what? After all it is only the traffic caused by hackers that would be interesting, not honest citizens' traffic. And the institutions/companies have already organized their own defense, as any good citizen does (e.g. installing locks and buying riffles); this along with paying their taxes (for supporting the infrastructure development and research and whatnot), behaving responsibly (e.g. avoiding the externalization of their cost of environment protection or defending their infrastructure), etc.
For those wanting to try, their install howto. Seems supported on:
1. Linux - either debian binaries or compiling from source. Both kernel module and UserSpace ways.
2. Virtualized Linuxes - their example is provided for Amazon EC2
3. Mac OSX - but, obviously, not on iPhone (I estimate slim chances for this to happen in the near future - it's a technology disruptive for the mobile providers income, as it makes the multi-pathing over cell/WiFi hot-spots transparent to end user)
4. Android (Opinion: see? This is one of the reasons relying on "walled gardens" is bad: you have to wait for the mercy of the garden lord to benefit from something).
If cell manufacturers designed their equipment and built the right drivers
And if Apple refuses to implement it, you will still be able to grab an Android, compile/install the MPTCP stack and do it (without waiting for Apple to resist the mobile providers pressure in not supporting a feature that would hurt their bottom line. Or, for the matter, wait for the mobile providers to upgrade their towers and hurt their bottom line by themselves).
In my understanding, this will still rely on multiple IP addresses (not using a single IP address for all the network connections). The difference: it will ride on top of multiple TCP/IP connections - assuming they are available - to multiplex their different paths into a single socket connection (that is: no API changes).
Sort of: if both WiFi and cell channels are available (think: wandering in a shopping mall with public hotspots), one's Android mobile will use both of them in the same time to manage one's plot in Farmville (or to download the MP3's using that magnet from the PirateBay, or placing whatever buy/sell orders on stock exchange); if one walks out of WiFi spot coverage, the mobile will use only what's available - the cell connection.
Why I used android in my example? Well, it's a Linux kernel, the first implementation is already available. Besides, that should be great news for Google: their "goggles" will be able to transmit what you see much faster and reliable. What I understand from the MCTCP guys' presentation makes me believe MPTCP is able to cope with the use and drop from use of multiple dynamically IP addresses (are assigned to the many network devices one's mobile has): thus stepping from one hot-spot to another will not impede Google's capability to receive the data from your (their?) glasses.
without every user making 3 connects to view their friends cat picture.
Rest assured: there'll be a single connection using a cell tower. A second flow will be made using the connection with nearby WiFI hot-spot, and Tiffany's chatting to her buddy sitting next to her will be really faster (without quotes); even better, the above will happen without Tiffany knowing or the extra requirement for Tiffany to have a geek father that's not lazy and does have spare time (even if one may wonder what to what good being a geek will be in the future).
yes, I know etherchannel load balancing... but maybe that would be easier to "fix" than inventing something that mostly exists.... 10 years ago.
Do you also know the nowadays mobile devices? Wouldn't it be nice to use both WiFi and mobile wireless communication in the same time without special equipment from Cisco? Even more: transparent to you when you step from on public WiFi hot-spot coverage into another and be assigned with new IP address?
1. SCTP - identified by a protocol number (132) - acts at the network layer. If a router along the route refuses SCTP, you are screwed; Advantage: is capable of UDP as well).
2. MPTCP - relies on pure TCP for all the connection (acts at the transport layer and fixes the protocol to TCP) and set in place conventions between client-server to discuss over multiple paths. Advantage: no sane public network will try to block it (pretty much like using http on port 80). Disadvantage: TCP only.
"such as antibiotic treatments used as placebos for vial infections.""
With proper sterilization techniques, you wouldn't get infections from vials in the first place.
You entirely missed the point: vials are the infecting bit, not the vector/carrier. As in: "crawling with or being overwhelmed by vials".
And, yes, antibiotics are useless for this case, as vials are usually made of glass and glass is not affected by antibiotics. A better treatment is the copious application of vigorous hammer strokes over all the vial infected parts of the patient.
Waiting for some bright minds in Congress to start holding hearings into whether Communist OSs like Linux are responsible for cyberterrorism.
Yes!... and quickly indict Shuttleworth for high treason: it's clearly high tech terrorism. Better still he and his family must be treated as al-Aulaqi family was; the president has the authority, after all it's a clear and immediate threat.
I showed possible and (in my opinion) probable explanations on why the SK computers may have stopped working (and I even admit I might be wrong). From my perspective, would be enough to at least cast a doubt on the assumption it was an act of "aggression".
I'm seeing you in sticking to your position of attempting to infer an intentional attack and decline any possibility it may have just an act of incompetence.
The malware, detected proactively by Sophos products as Mal/EncPk-ACE, has been dubbed "DarkSeoul" by experts analysing its code at SophosLabs.
What's curious is that the malware is not particularly sophisticated. Sophos products have been able to detect the malware for nearly a year, and the various commands embedded in the malicious code have not been obfuscated.
For this reason, it's hard to jump to the immediate conclusion that this was necessarily evidence of a "cyberwarfare" attack coming from North Korea.
Backing up the evidence that the attack was targeted against South Korean computers, Sophos experts have determined that "DarkSeoul" attempts to disable two popular anti-virus products developed in the country: AhnLab and Hauri AV.
I'm also seeing you in putting words into my mouth and constructing a straw man for you to have something to demolish
But... all the above makes me curious: did you acquire a taste for yellow snow or do they feed you well to make the snow yellow?
From where I am sitting, this is a redux of USSR/the west, only we are at 1947, with USSR making lots of promises while pushing massive spying operations on their friends.
And, indeed, heaps of good resulted from the clash during '60-ies (with the NK being a very result of it).
Well, at least the music is still nice and somehow relevant ("Watch out where those huskies go" springs into mind), even if a pity I can't see a revival of the flower-power movement with the nowadays generation (e.g. I guess "Hair" lyrics would cause too much of outrage today, even be borderline to crime)
I wouldn't be surprised to hear about a really bad windows update for the Korean edition either (MS has more backdoors on computers running Windows than China would ever hope to have. But... yeah... being scared of China is more enticing, I reckon).
My money is on Seagate Barracuda as I've had one sort of fail (it won't boot - the BIOS says it's not there, but the filesystem is fine and accessible once a LiveCD is booted instead) just the other day.
What makes Seagate Barracuda-s spinning in SK more special than in other places in this world?
when computers and net are so ubiquitously integrated in society's life that can offer support for an attack. Too pity human nature didn't evolve past Neolithic: we continue to attack each other, even if examples show alternatives are possible
Slashdot Mirror
Water.
Sugar beet is less land demanding than corn, but has higher water needs.
"jokes" that try to reduce human beings to white meat.
Isn't this a bit racial? Akin to suggesting that attempting to reduce human beings to dark meat is not an issue and would be as acceptable as the jokes someone may not like but it's Ok to tell them?
OK, I'm confused how this could be considered racial. I thought all humans had white meat, and it was just the skin color that changed between races. Can anyone who has fried up a non-european human recently comment on the color of the meat? I don't have any experience in this area myself.
To add to the confusion: it looks like a terminology mostly applicable to bird/poultry meat, but even the chefs and nutritionists aren't very clear of what white/dark meat terms would mean.
The debate is mainly one of semantics as nutritionists consider all meat from mammals to be "red meat" while this is not the case in other fields such as husbandry, biology, genetics, physiology, etc.
(and I strongly feel the field of "ethics of joking" belongs to the enumeration above).
Now, it totally eluded me how "jokes that try to reduce human beings to poultry breast meat" may gain a sexual connotation - letting aside this is actually impossible (different species and genes and all that), in my mind such jokes would pertain to a certain branch of black humor; e.g. answering to your question: "sorry, can't help, I myself didn't try to fry a non-caucasian".
In an attempt to resolve my state of confusion, I felt free to choose whatever semantic/connotation would have a remote chance in causing offense.
As in "reducing humans to white meat only is prejudicial against all other types on meat. We hold these truths as self-evident, that all meats are created equal, etc."
"jokes" that try to reduce human beings to white meat.
Isn't this a bit racial? Akin to suggesting that attempting to reduce human beings to dark meat is not an issue and would be as acceptable as the jokes someone may not like but it's Ok to tell them?
The implementation includes a solution to overcome HOL-blocking by reinjecting the blocking data-segment on the lower-latency path.
Have a look at our scientific paper, which explains this mechanism: http://inl.info.ucl.ac.be/publications/how-hard-can-it-be-designing-and-implementing-deployable-multipath-tcp
Oh, wow! Thanks.
What the hell is PyCon and why it dangles?
So do MTCP developers see solutions for any of these problems on the horizon?
I'm in no way affiliated or knowledgeable in MPTCP - so I may be wrong - but from what I got from their presentation, MCTCP is not actually designed with the NFS-like usecase in mind (even if it may be used for such), but with the more "common" usecase of a mobile device able to use either/both cellular and WiFI networking.
The second thing that I saw as peculiar: it is not even supported by a network protocol (like IP is supporting TCP/UDP/SCTP/etc), but is supported by TCP. While it will have to deal somehow with re-assembling back a stream from packets streams over different paths, in itself it will be as prone to HOL as the bunch of underlying individual TCP streams which support those different paths.
That is, assuming the head-of-line is send on one path and that path involves a HOL-blocking, then it doesn't matter if the other paths have lower latencies, the entire original stream will be HOL-blocked
Coincidence: I'm waiting for my ProLiant N40L G7 MicroServer to be delivered early next week; ordered with 3 WD NAS grade HDD-es (the micro-server: $200. The HDD-es: $450+ all 3)
Guess for what I'll use it and how I'll be testing MPTCP soon?
If you aren't browsing over a VPN with HTTPS / SSL and transmitting all your data encrypted by this point you ought to be.
Why? After all, if you have nothing to hide and you set your evil bit to zero, the DHS won't intercept your traffic.
I mean: nobody is so crazy to waste citizens' money on intercepting and storing everyone's communication, the investment and maintenance cost will be everly increasing.
And for what? After all it is only the traffic caused by hackers that would be interesting, not honest citizens' traffic. And the institutions/companies have already organized their own defense, as any good citizen does (e.g. installing locks and buying riffles); this along with paying their taxes (for supporting the infrastructure development and research and whatnot), behaving responsibly (e.g. avoiding the externalization of their cost of environment protection or defending their infrastructure), etc.
(grin)
For those wanting to try, their install howto. Seems supported on:
1. Linux - either debian binaries or compiling from source. Both kernel module and UserSpace ways.
2. Virtualized Linuxes - their example is provided for Amazon EC2
3. Mac OSX - but, obviously, not on iPhone (I estimate slim chances for this to happen in the near future - it's a technology disruptive for the mobile providers income, as it makes the multi-pathing over cell/WiFi hot-spots transparent to end user)
4. Android (Opinion: see? This is one of the reasons relying on "walled gardens" is bad: you have to wait for the mercy of the garden lord to benefit from something).
If cell manufacturers designed their equipment and built the right drivers
And if Apple refuses to implement it, you will still be able to grab an Android, compile/install the MPTCP stack and do it (without waiting for Apple to resist the mobile providers pressure in not supporting a feature that would hurt their bottom line. Or, for the matter, wait for the mobile providers to upgrade their towers and hurt their bottom line by themselves).
Sort of: if both WiFi and cell channels are available (think: wandering in a shopping mall with public hotspots), one's Android mobile will use both of them in the same time to manage one's plot in Farmville (or to download the MP3's using that magnet from the PirateBay, or placing whatever buy/sell orders on stock exchange); if one walks out of WiFi spot coverage, the mobile will use only what's available - the cell connection.
Why I used android in my example? Well, it's a Linux kernel, the first implementation is already available. Besides, that should be great news for Google: their "goggles" will be able to transmit what you see much faster and reliable. What I understand from the MCTCP guys' presentation makes me believe MPTCP is able to cope with the use and drop from use of multiple dynamically IP addresses (are assigned to the many network devices one's mobile has): thus stepping from one hot-spot to another will not impede Google's capability to receive the data from your (their?) glasses.
without every user making 3 connects to view their friends cat picture.
Rest assured: there'll be a single connection using a cell tower. A second flow will be made using the connection with nearby WiFI hot-spot, and Tiffany's chatting to her buddy sitting next to her will be really faster (without quotes); even better, the above will happen without Tiffany knowing or the extra requirement for Tiffany to have a geek father that's not lazy and does have spare time (even if one may wonder what to what good being a geek will be in the future).
yes, I know etherchannel load balancing ... but maybe that would be easier to "fix" than inventing something that mostly exists. ... 10 years ago.
Do you also know the nowadays mobile devices? Wouldn't it be nice to use both WiFi and mobile wireless communication in the same time without special equipment from Cisco? Even more: transparent to you when you step from on public WiFi hot-spot coverage into another and be assigned with new IP address?
Errata: not acts on but relies on/uses.
1. SCTP - identified by a protocol number (132) - acts at the network layer. If a router along the route refuses SCTP, you are screwed; Advantage: is capable of UDP as well).
2. MPTCP - relies on pure TCP for all the connection (acts at the transport layer and fixes the protocol to TCP) and set in place conventions between client-server to discuss over multiple paths. Advantage: no sane public network will try to block it (pretty much like using http on port 80). Disadvantage: TCP only.
"such as antibiotic treatments used as placebos for vial infections.""
With proper sterilization techniques, you wouldn't get infections from vials in the first place.
You entirely missed the point: vials are the infecting bit, not the vector/carrier. As in: "crawling with or being overwhelmed by vials".
And, yes, antibiotics are useless for this case, as vials are usually made of glass and glass is not affected by antibiotics. A better treatment is the copious application of vigorous hammer strokes over all the vial infected parts of the patient.
It is possible to somewhat merge the products in an intelligent way, while retaining their advantages for the hardware they work on.
You wish! Unfortunately, better chances are in having the progeny as ugly as the one parent and as stupid as the other.
But, he is not American and his company is Manx.
Bah... an insignificant detail
Besides, even better: no due process is required to send a drone after him
Waiting for some bright minds in Congress to start holding hearings into whether Communist OSs like Linux are responsible for cyberterrorism.
Yes!... and quickly indict Shuttleworth for high treason: it's clearly high tech terrorism. Better still he and his family must be treated as al-Aulaqi family was; the president has the authority, after all it's a clear and immediate threat.
I showed possible and (in my opinion) probable explanations on why the SK computers may have stopped working (and I even admit I might be wrong). From my perspective, would be enough to at least cast a doubt on the assumption it was an act of "aggression".
I'm seeing you in sticking to your position of attempting to infer an intentional attack and decline any possibility it may have just an act of incompetence.
The malware, detected proactively by Sophos products as Mal/EncPk-ACE, has been dubbed "DarkSeoul" by experts analysing its code at SophosLabs.
What's curious is that the malware is not particularly sophisticated. Sophos products have been able to detect the malware for nearly a year, and the various commands embedded in the malicious code have not been obfuscated.
For this reason, it's hard to jump to the immediate conclusion that this was necessarily evidence of a "cyberwarfare" attack coming from North Korea.
Backing up the evidence that the attack was targeted against South Korean computers, Sophos experts have determined that "DarkSeoul" attempts to disable two popular anti-virus products developed in the country: AhnLab and Hauri AV.
I'm also seeing you in putting words into my mouth and constructing a straw man for you to have something to demolish
But... all the above makes me curious: did you acquire a taste for yellow snow or do they feed you well to make the snow yellow?
From where I am sitting, this is a redux of USSR/the west, only we are at 1947, with USSR making lots of promises while pushing massive spying operations on their friends.
And, indeed, heaps of good resulted from the clash during '60-ies (with the NK being a very result of it).
Well, at least the music is still nice and somehow relevant ("Watch out where those huskies go" springs into mind), even if a pity I can't see a revival of the flower-power movement with the nowadays generation (e.g. I guess "Hair" lyrics would cause too much of outrage today, even be borderline to crime)
I wouldn't be surprised to hear about a really bad windows update for the Korean edition either (MS has more backdoors on computers running Windows than China would ever hope to have. But... yeah... being scared of China is more enticing, I reckon).
My money is on Seagate Barracuda as I've had one sort of fail (it won't boot - the BIOS says it's not there, but the filesystem is fine and accessible once a LiveCD is booted instead) just the other day.
What makes Seagate Barracuda-s spinning in SK more special than in other places in this world?
security experts say that this is an example of an advanced persistent threat.
Are you sure is not a botched antivirus/windows update that "cures a MBR infection"?
(the advanced persistent threat may be quite a justified description if running Windows - especially if it's XP)
when computers and net are so ubiquitously integrated in society's life that can offer support for an attack. Too pity human nature didn't evolve past Neolithic: we continue to attack each other, even if examples show alternatives are possible