Oh, so the villain in this movie goes *further* than creating a monopoly, using its power to force suppliers to put competitors out of business, using a file-system hack to implement long filenames, having Notepad write a BOM to UTF-8 files, and, finally, choosing Ballmer to run the business into the ground?
How will Bond ever defeat a villain with such technical skill?
That's all fair and well, but it doesn't change the fact that the statement you made to which I originally responded was factually incorrect. If it weren't, we'd still be voting for Whigs and Federalists.
Our constitution dictates a system of government which creates a system by which we believe we only have two options (look how old the Republicans and Democrats are).
I watched the video. It appears to be the same machine and software we are using here in SC, and the machine I was using did not alter any of my selections.
Showed up at 7:50, back on my way to work by 8:05. We use the opti-scan machines here (kind of like a Scantron), which I like as they're difficult to tamper with.
Was a bit confused when the lady at the polling station took my ID then asked me to recite my name and address... never had that happen before. I assume had my address not matched (I don't see the point in spending $20 on a new ID every time I move), I'd have caught some shit like I did last time*.
2008 election, the crotchety old bitch at the polling station tried to prevent me from voting because I was wearing this t-shirt. Fortunately, I had my shit together and know my rights.
For now, I for one am just glad that I can go back to watching broadcast television tomorrow, without being beaten about the face with nigh endless smear ads.
- fire up the Xbox with the Kinect unhooked, and let it run for a bit, keeping an eye on the packets (I don't know much about Xbox networking, but I would guess anything transmitted outside port 80 would be suspect)
XBox Live runs outside port 80, just as PSN. So you're going to always see "suspect" activity when you're logged in.
The Kinect has an additional port (1863) used for video chat. It might be used in this too. So I guess traffic on port 1863 when you're not video chatting would be odd.
So then, OP should be able to just plug port 1863 into the Wireshark filter and start cappin'.
This discussion is making me wish I had an Xbox, so I could try it out myself:(
If you would like to disprove a claim which, as far as I know, is basically everybody's experience please provide a citation.
In other words, you made a dubious claim based on purely anecdotal evidence, which, when asked for citation, you support the claim by restating that it's based on entirely anecdotal evidence, then expect the audience to provide your citation for you.
That's a hallmark of flawed thinking, and a poor show to boot.
Sounds like you don't understand my proposal. For one thing, we have multiple carriers and even when those share a tower and similar backhauls you still have each mobile pico-cell in emergency vehicles providing its own redundant path - you might lose a couple of pico-cells but not all of them.
I understand your proposal completely. I also understand that in the event of, say, an atmospheric nuclear detonation, or a 60-mile wide hurricane, that it won't friggin' work, a concept you seem to not be capable of grasping.
Are you serious? This past week I was completely unable to make or receive calls in an area of normal coverage. I live on the south shore of Long Island, NY.
You mean the area that got hit by the hurricane? What part of non-emergency conditions do fail to understand?
The part where non-emergency conditions are the exact opposite of the topic at hand?
- disconnect every other device on the network (not necessary, but will reduce background "noise" from unrelated traffic)
Hey, buddy, try reading the manual maybe? Perhaps it will save you from disconnecting "every other device on the network" and you will be smarter for it.
Ever try to listen for a single, particular voice in an extremely crowded room? Obviously not
Obama's also been willing to throw the middle class a bone every once in a while. Romney and his ilk seem to think that millionaires need all the help.
--Jeremy
An abusive husband is an abusive husband, whether or not he buys her flowers every once and a while.
In other words:
Don't bother keeping what works working, instead we should spend obscene amounts of money and manpower on some new, theoretical system that may or may not work.
Uh no. Maybe you haven't noticed but payphones are going away because nobody is willing to spend an obscene amount of money maintaining them because nobody uses them.
I also contend that the reason payphones are going away isn't because people don't use them (they do), but rather that telcos can't nickel and dime the user with unilateral contracts and outrageous data charges.
In other words:
Don't bother keeping what works working, instead we should spend obscene amounts of money and manpower on some new, theoretical system that may or may not work.
Uh no. Maybe you haven't noticed but payphones are going away because nobody is willing to spend an obscene amount of money maintaining them because nobody uses them.
Nobody uses nuclear weapons, either, but I bet you'd be hard pressed to convince any government to ditch their supply (or stop spending obscene amounts of money maintaining them) because of that fact.
What i propose is to tweak the system that works 99% of the time so that it works 100% of the time.
I'm going to start by making the point that without citation, I find the concept that the existing cellular infrastructure experiences 99% uptime utter malarkey.
Anyway, I agree that 100% availability is a good goal to have, even if it's not possible to achieve - you might be able to get 100% uptime in non-emergency scenarios, but there's no realistic way to guarantee that same availability during things like hurricanes and nuclear attacks... which is the entire point of this discussion: what the best solution is for an emergency scenario in which cellular networks are unavailable.
Also worth mention, abandoning the working POTS infrastructure and focusing 100% on cellular is putting all your eggs in one basket, a practice any emergency management expert will tell you is not good practice.
Don't bother keeping what works working, instead we should spend obscene amounts of money and manpower on some new, theoretical system that may or may not work.
I'm sure the buggy whip makers said something similar in their day.
buggy whips aren't a valid backup system to automobiles.
POTS infrastructure is a valid backup to over-congested cellular systems.
Instead of maintaining a system that is practically obsolete we should put the effort into making the newer system more robust.
In other words:
Don't bother keeping what works working, instead we should spend obscene amounts of money and manpower on some new, theoretical system that may or may not work.
Assuming they monitor continuously, or don't store -n- forward, or statistically sample. Just checking once for a short period of time isn't going to help.
If the device is being used as a real-time monitor of the room's occupants, I think it's safe to assume it would have be a continuous stream.
Slashdot Mirror
Socialist medicine has proven to fail (Canada)...
Obamacare is causing all small and medium sized hospitals to go bankrupt...
it's just a matter of how much free stuff we give to people who don't work for it before they die...
Considering your positions, I assume a request for citation will fall on deaf ears?
That's normally what happens when I ask bald-faced liars for reference, anyway.
Healthcare is always strapped for cash...
Huh, must be a British thing.
Oh, so the villain in this movie goes *further* than creating a monopoly, using its power to force suppliers to put competitors out of business, using a file-system hack to implement long filenames, having Notepad write a BOM to UTF-8 files, and, finally, choosing Ballmer to run the business into the ground?
How will Bond ever defeat a villain with such technical skill?
By throwing a chair, duh.
Did I say it refuted the video evidence?
That appeared to be the premise of your statement; otherwise, if that wasn't the point you were trying to make, why post anything at all? Boasting?
Damn straight, and don't you forget it.
That's all fair and well, but it doesn't change the fact that the statement you made to which I originally responded was factually incorrect. If it weren't, we'd still be voting for Whigs and Federalists.
A
Cable
Snake
The tangles and tangles make it almost impossible to move anything without spending twenty or thirty minutes under the desk.
So don't move stuff. Feng Shui and all that jazz.
Our constitution dictates a system of government which creates a system by which we believe we only have two options (look how old the Republicans and Democrats are).
No, it doesn't.
I watched the video. It appears to be the same machine and software we are using here in SC, and the machine I was using did not alter any of my selections.
... and? That somehow refutes the video evidence?
Showed up at 7:50, back on my way to work by 8:05. We use the opti-scan machines here (kind of like a Scantron), which I like as they're difficult to tamper with.
Was a bit confused when the lady at the polling station took my ID then asked me to recite my name and address... never had that happen before. I assume had my address not matched (I don't see the point in spending $20 on a new ID every time I move), I'd have caught some shit like I did last time*.
2008 election, the crotchety old bitch at the polling station tried to prevent me from voting because I was wearing this t-shirt. Fortunately, I had my shit together and know my rights.
That would seem to be in violation of our 1st Ammendment rights.
Only if you don't understand the 1st Amendment - no one is stopping you from telling anyone and everyone how you voted.
Still casting my vote on dead trees with ink.
and I hardly get much on myself in the process!
Yup, optical scan is the way to go.
Here here.
For now, I for one am just glad that I can go back to watching broadcast television tomorrow, without being beaten about the face with nigh endless smear ads.
- fire up the Xbox with the Kinect unhooked, and let it run for a bit, keeping an eye on the packets (I don't know much about Xbox networking, but I would guess anything transmitted outside port 80 would be suspect)
XBox Live runs outside port 80, just as PSN. So you're going to always see "suspect" activity when you're logged in. The Kinect has an additional port (1863) used for video chat. It might be used in this too. So I guess traffic on port 1863 when you're not video chatting would be odd.
So then, OP should be able to just plug
:(
port 1863
into the Wireshark filter and start cappin'.
This discussion is making me wish I had an Xbox, so I could try it out myself
Still drives me nuts, though.
Understandable - I feel the same way about people using the word, "Obamacare"
If you would like to disprove a claim which, as far as I know, is basically everybody's experience please provide a citation.
In other words, you made a dubious claim based on purely anecdotal evidence, which, when asked for citation, you support the claim by restating that it's based on entirely anecdotal evidence, then expect the audience to provide your citation for you.
That's a hallmark of flawed thinking, and a poor show to boot.
Sounds like you don't understand my proposal. For one thing, we have multiple carriers and even when those share a tower and similar backhauls you still have each mobile pico-cell in emergency vehicles providing its own redundant path - you might lose a couple of pico-cells but not all of them.
I understand your proposal completely. I also understand that in the event of, say, an atmospheric nuclear detonation, or a 60-mile wide hurricane, that it won't friggin' work, a concept you seem to not be capable of grasping.
Are you serious? This past week I was completely unable to make or receive calls in an area of normal coverage. I live on the south shore of Long Island, NY.
You mean the area that got hit by the hurricane? What part of non-emergency conditions do fail to understand?
The part where non-emergency conditions are the exact opposite of the topic at hand?
- disconnect every other device on the network (not necessary, but will reduce background "noise" from unrelated traffic)
Hey, buddy, try reading the manual maybe? Perhaps it will save you from disconnecting "every other device on the network" and you will be smarter for it.
Ever try to listen for a single, particular voice in an extremely crowded room? Obviously not
Obama's also been willing to throw the middle class a bone every once in a while. Romney and his ilk seem to think that millionaires need all the help.
--Jeremy
An abusive husband is an abusive husband, whether or not he buys her flowers every once and a while.
In other words: Don't bother keeping what works working, instead we should spend obscene amounts of money and manpower on some new, theoretical system that may or may not work.
Uh no. Maybe you haven't noticed but payphones are going away because nobody is willing to spend an obscene amount of money maintaining them because nobody uses them.
I also contend that the reason payphones are going away isn't because people don't use them (they do), but rather that telcos can't nickel and dime the user with unilateral contracts and outrageous data charges.
In other words: Don't bother keeping what works working, instead we should spend obscene amounts of money and manpower on some new, theoretical system that may or may not work.
Uh no. Maybe you haven't noticed but payphones are going away because nobody is willing to spend an obscene amount of money maintaining them because nobody uses them.
Nobody uses nuclear weapons, either, but I bet you'd be hard pressed to convince any government to ditch their supply (or stop spending obscene amounts of money maintaining them) because of that fact.
What i propose is to tweak the system that works 99% of the time so that it works 100% of the time.
I'm going to start by making the point that without citation, I find the concept that the existing cellular infrastructure experiences 99% uptime utter malarkey.
Anyway, I agree that 100% availability is a good goal to have, even if it's not possible to achieve - you might be able to get 100% uptime in non-emergency scenarios, but there's no realistic way to guarantee that same availability during things like hurricanes and nuclear attacks... which is the entire point of this discussion: what the best solution is for an emergency scenario in which cellular networks are unavailable.
Also worth mention, abandoning the working POTS infrastructure and focusing 100% on cellular is putting all your eggs in one basket, a practice any emergency management expert will tell you is not good practice.
In other words:
Don't bother keeping what works working, instead we should spend obscene amounts of money and manpower on some new, theoretical system that may or may not work.
I'm sure the buggy whip makers said something similar in their day.
buggy whips aren't a valid backup system to automobiles.
POTS infrastructure is a valid backup to over-congested cellular systems.
Analogy fail.
Instead of maintaining a system that is practically obsolete we should put the effort into making the newer system more robust.
In other words:
Don't bother keeping what works working, instead we should spend obscene amounts of money and manpower on some new, theoretical system that may or may not work.
You sound like my Congressman.
Assuming they monitor continuously, or don't store -n- forward, or statistically sample. Just checking once for a short period of time isn't going to help.
If the device is being used as a real-time monitor of the room's occupants, I think it's safe to assume it would have be a continuous stream.
Also a President that will "detain" anyone "suspected" of terrorism. If the rest of the world cant' be free, why should America?
... and by "detain," we of course mean "summarily execute with a drone strike"