The unmodified Xbox can't boot unsigned code. (insert handwave over detils here)
What is the Developer agreement like? Could an official XBox developer publish a title, complete with paying their tax to Micros~1, that was nothing more than a TFTP boot loader?
I was wondering if Rochester felt that one. When I went to RIT ('90-92), Loma Prieta was fresh in everyone's minds, and I was constantly asked about it. As if surviving that quake somehow defined my existence.
2. If for some weird reason, while you just sit somewhere fine and daddy, your ear just "blocks", like it does when water gets inside when you are in the bath or something.
Funny you mention this. Especially on the way home, I had a hell of a time keeping my ears cleared. I just blamed it on allergies.;)
Of course, I'm still having trouble, so either it is allergies, or that was just a foreshock...
It's simple. The east coast sucks for one fundamental reason. Your oceans are broken. Here on the proper coast, the sun sets over the ocean. This is one of those romantice devices that chicks go for. (Oh, wait, this is/. Never mind.)
I'm told that the sun rises over the oceans on that coast, but I've never been up that early.
Besides, you had a 5.0 near Plattsburgh last month, so save the "we don't have earthquakes" crap.
(And no, I won't claim we don't have tornados here. We do. There was one a few years ago that destroyed a couple of hot tubs.;)
If you actually read Ellison's original rant, he sued AOL because the infringing postings were "received as part of his subscription to AOL."
That's right kids, Ellison was connecting through AOL. The alleged infringer's ISP (Tehama County Online) rolled over immediately, and was thus spared inclusion in the lawsuit. AOL got sued because they carried the infringing bits to him at his request.
At worst, they failed to proactively remove the posts from their news spools.
What's shocking is that this is an analog capture device. First of all, it goes against the the notion that somehow digital copies are different, since this device doesn't get "pristine" digital copies of the content, it just captures them from analog inputs.
And that's where this gets really interesting. The Content Cartel can only infer that their precious content is actually being traded by circumstatial evidence. Sure, the box sent the right IR commands to set a cable box to channel 2. And it recorded for three hours while channel 2 was showing Return of the Jedi. But unless they force the box to send them a copy of the video as well, they have no way to know that the video on the Replay's disk is actually Return of the Jedi. For all they know, I could have the video input connected to a webcam pointed at my fish tank. And while that's copyrighted, (Berne Convention, you know) it's not copyrighted by THEM.
So they have only circumstantial evidence of infringement.
"SonicBlue stopped collecting data in May 2001..."
SonicBlue is being sued over the 4000 models, which didn't start shipping until November 2001. *This* device never collected any user data. Ever.
Re:A propos 80s: LaserDisks to FireWire, anyone?
on
Back on TV: Max Headroom
·
· Score: 4, Informative
There is no "better than connecting it to Video-In..."
Laserdiscs are, believe it or not, analog. (The video is, anyway, there were a few incarnations of digital audio.) Worse than that, they're composite video, so you need to decide whether the comb filter in your capture device is better than the one in your LD player. (Decide this by testing with a good monitor. Dot crawl sucks.)
I have a pretty sizeable collection of Laserdiscs, and keep meaning to start converting these to DVDR. I have this bizarre hangup that I need to move the AC3 audio, and I haven't found any way to capture AC3 with a S/PDIF card. (Pointers appreciated!)
The reality is that I should ignore that, since anything I might have with AC3/DTS is recent enough that it's likely to be rereleased anyway.
Back to your question, spend as much money as you can bear on the capture device, (I have a Director's Cut, but would get a DA-MAX if I were doing this for money.) think about a proc-amp (might not be necessary) and go for it.
You could even rig a "kill switch" function into an APRS message, so long as you don't mind the fact that any other amateur radio operator can send the same message. (Encryption is a no-no.)
Huh? While encryption is prohibited (and the FCC considered spread-spectrum to be encryption for far too long), authentication clearly is not. Otherwise, we'd all have to publish our autopatch codes.
But the argument that 1000BaseTX isn't a consumer product is entirely specious. Macs have GigE, and they're always dissed as "consumer" machines around here.
D-Link 1000BaseTX NIC's are $40 off the shelf. There's no good reason not to use a Gig chipset anymore.
Amen. The first thing I did when I got my new driver's licence was degauss it.
That said, I've never encountered a stripe reader anywhere except the grocery store, and then only when I write a paper check. And the grocery store is already "paying" me for my shopping habits. (Which I don't really care about)
Why does Katz still have a keyboard?
on
The Rise of CSI
·
· Score: 2
I guess I really shouldn't be surprised that Katz loves this show. Katz, like most of the rest of the US, seems incapable of using logic in any meaningful way.
Now, by way of introduction...
My name is Zandr, and I'm an HDaholic. At a recent event at our local PBS affiliate, I pointed out that if they put their HD camera on the roof, we'd probably watch the feed.
And CSI is beautifully shot and produced. I keep an episode around just for the interstitial flyovers of the Strip.
That's why it pains me to say that I simply can't watch CSI. I actually find forensics fascinating. I don't have a terribly strong stomach when it comes to things organic, so I think I'll stick to my current career, but my TiVo is usually madly collecting all the forensics specials off Discovery, et al. You can almost measure the production cycle of CSI by watching Discovery, and then seeing how long it takes before the same technique gets used on CSI. (I get about 8 weeks by this method.)
The problem is that CSI makes these incredible leaps of logic. One that comes to mind: They found peanut shells on a pair of shoes, and immediately concluded that the owner worked a concession stand. I'm sorry, have these people never been to a proper bar, where there's an inch of peanut shells on the floor at all times?
And then there's the downright bad science. There's one episode where they figure out where a boat drifted by setting up a washtub and a fan in the lab. Give me a break; throwing dice would be more accurate. Or "you look left when you're remembering, you look right when you're making it up." Polygraphs are pretty flakey devices, but now that we can just watch your eyes we're all set.
My wife watches it, but it's only really watchable with a PVR, since she has to pause the show every three minutes to ask why I just recoiled at the last leap of logic or horrible science.
While I agree with the sentiment, there's an obvious issue:
The exception being anonymous remailers. In which case the remailer identifies itself as such.
If there's a law against forging headers, the first thing the Staats^H^H^H^H^H^H FBI is going to do is use that law to shut down all the anonymous remailers they can find.
So, does anyone have a procmail recipe that chain-tests headers?
The other wonderful thing was having Mr. "I am a fucking network engineer" call up saying, "you don't need that computer name, I demand your supervisor!"
This is a direct result of conditioning by barely-literate front-line tech support.
I am a network engineer, and when I call tech support, I usually have a pretty good idea what's wrong. It's mind-numbing to call tech support to tell them that the DHCP offers coming from their server don't have the router option populated, and be asked if the modem is plugged in. By the time I reach someone with a clue, I'm usually out of patience.
Of course, I understand this completely. Anyone with a clue (myself included, once upon a time) doing tech support for end users (when most of the time the modem really isn't plugged in) will go completely batty in a week.
o A new address allocated from the server's pool of available
addresses; the address is selected based on the subnet from which
the message was received (if 'giaddr' is 0) or on the address of
the relay agent that forwarded the message ('giaddr' when not 0).
[...]
Note that, in some network architectures (e.g., internets with more
than one IP subnet assigned to a physical network segment), it may be
the case that the DHCP client should be assigned an address from a
different subnet than the address recorded in 'giaddr'. Thus, DHCP
does not require that the client be assigned as address from the
subnet in 'giaddr'. A server is free to choose some other subnet,
and it is beyond the scope of the DHCP specification to describe ways
in which the assigned IP address might be chosen.
DHCP is supposed to listen to giaddr, but it is allowed to assign a different address. The problem is that if you start doing this, you're very likely to end up assigning addresses to clients that can't be routed from the network where the client is located. @Home did this a lot, since they were trying to pick IP addresses for clients by looking at street addresses, cross referencing those to cable plant maps provided by the operators, and finally trying to correlate that with what they believed was the network configuration in the cable operator's headend. This worked about as well as you'd expect. The giaddr field would at least tell you what network the packet came from.
To your spoofing comment, DHCP shouldn't be used for authentication. Period. giaddr is harder to spoof because it's usually written by a relay agent. Client ID is written by a user typing into the "Computer Name" field. Which do you think is more secure?
No joke. The amazing thing about @Home was that they were all so damn arrogant, but didn't know $#!+.
I worked for a CMTS vendor for almost five years, and every contact with @Home was an exercise in insanity.
1: We were installing gear at an @Home site, and needed changes in the routing made to light up the new gear. Called the NOC a dozen times over the two days I was onsite with no response. I finally turned off one of the (redundant) power supplies on the @Home 7200 in the headend. Sure enough, the NOC called us within a minute. I had the guy who called find the Routing Diva (that's what her card said!) before I turned the supply back on.
2: They were constantly beating us up to make sure that the modems wouldn't bind to IP addresses learned from ARP, since then you could just statically configure an IP address you wanted to steal. No, they insisted that we sniff DHCP, that way their magical DHCP-integrated-with-billing server could be authoritative. We actually preferred using DHCP to ARP (since we had to relay DHCP anyway) and added a switch to disable learning from ARP. So far so good, except that their DHCP implementation was non-standard. It completely ignored giaddr, and assigned the IP based on client ID. (That caused countless other problems, as you might imagine...) Fine, except that the Client ID was also the hostname in @Home's DNS.
For those of you who lack a devious mind, this means that all you had to do was a reverse lookup on the address you wanted to steal, enter that as your client ID, and the DHCP would assign you the address you stole.
Your statements regarding S304 are so far off-base as to be funny.
For several reasons. Since you seem insistent on pressing this point, here goes:
You don't have any idea how the system works. This magical 304 register that you keep talking about has nothing to do with the speed of the system. The 304 register controlled the serial port speed and the serial port speed ONLY. If the 304 register was set to 28.8, then there would be very, very few computers that would even communicate the modem. You see, 28.8 is not a legal speed for a serial port. Don't believe me? Open Hyperterminal and try to set your serial port to 28800. You can't. 19200 or 38400, but not 28800 or 33600 or any other marketing-driven speed.
You're correct that the 28.8 and 33.6 numbers were driven by the state of the art for POTS modems, but that didn't have anything at all to do with S304, or for that matter system performance. When I was in tech support, I told people to expect 19200, because I believe in underpromising and overdelivering. Marketing didn't like it, but it's not like there was ever any real presence in marketing after Sandy left.
IIRC, the 304 register in the portables was set to ZERO by default. That's right, ZERO. But the modem still worked. Why? Because 304 doesn't have anything to do with the speed of the modem. And, (and you should remember this) if you set that register to 0, it would automatically set the DTE speed to match your computer. Nearly every serial modem sold to consumers does this, and Ricochet was no exception.
The over the air speed was 100kbps. The effective throughput of the system was around 20-30kbps. This was not because of the 304 register.
Besides, if you're correct, the system could never go faster than 9600, because that's what 304 in the poletops was set to. And don't give me the garbage about multiple poletops sending data to a single subscriber. The system would do that under some circumstances if it was running 200 or 201 code, but the 210 code forced all the traffic through the best node. This was done mostly to bound latency; the latency of the network was variable enough that TCP would behave badly, and 210 included a bunch of protocol changes to improve that. (And if you were there prior to 210, you'd know who I am)
So, why was throughput only 30% of the over the air rate? Because that's the nature of half-duplex packet-switched networks. Do you have an 802.11b card? Do you get 11Mb/s out of it? Lucent/DLink/Linksys/whomever must be trying to rip you off! Think back just a bit to 10Mb/s ethernet (10Base-T or 10Base-2). Did you ever get 10Mb/s out of it? Same with 100Base-TX, though things get dramatically better with full duplex and switches. Why is this? Because when you receive a packet, you need to acknowledge it. And in a half-duplex system, you can't be transmitting while you're receiving. And there's turnaround time in the radio. Add to this that latency really was variable over a pretty good range, so the TCP window size was flapping all over the place.
Amazing that Katin let you out of the training room...
You know, the more I think about this, the more I think we had to overlap at MCOM. Were you hired on Newton's watch? You knew Rick and Jax, who bailed out shortly after I left. You knew Chiponis, who started while I was still in TS, and you knew K10, who punched out for SLOtown around that same time. Did you know Noya? Or Kelly? Did you ever work across the street, or in San Jose?
Slashdot Mirror
So here's a thought.
The unmodified Xbox can't boot unsigned code. (insert handwave over detils here)
What is the Developer agreement like? Could an official XBox developer publish a title, complete with paying their tax to Micros~1, that was nothing more than a TFTP boot loader?
-Z
I was wondering if Rochester felt that one. When I went to RIT ('90-92), Loma Prieta was fresh in everyone's minds, and I was constantly asked about it. As if surviving that quake somehow defined my existence.
;)
Nice to know they have a data point now.
As there is probably more rain in Vancouver, WA then there is in Vancouver, BC...
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
2. If for some weird reason, while you just sit somewhere fine and daddy, your ear just "blocks", like it does when water gets inside when you are in the bath or something.
;)
Funny you mention this. Especially on the way home, I had a hell of a time keeping my ears cleared. I just blamed it on allergies.
Of course, I'm still having trouble, so either it is allergies, or that was just a foreshock...
It's simple. The east coast sucks for one fundamental reason. Your oceans are broken. Here on the proper coast, the sun sets over the ocean. This is one of those romantice devices that chicks go for. (Oh, wait, this is /. Never mind.)
;)
I'm told that the sun rises over the oceans on that coast, but I've never been up that early.
Besides, you had a 5.0 near Plattsburgh last month, so save the "we don't have earthquakes" crap.
(And no, I won't claim we don't have tornados here. We do. There was one a few years ago that destroyed a couple of hot tubs.
I've heard this before. This was going to put us all out of business when I was at Metricom in '96.
...but you knew that.
If you actually read Ellison's original rant, he sued AOL because the infringing postings were "received as part of his subscription to AOL."
That's right kids, Ellison was connecting through AOL. The alleged infringer's ISP (Tehama County Online) rolled over immediately, and was thus spared inclusion in the lawsuit. AOL got sued because they carried the infringing bits to him at his request.
At worst, they failed to proactively remove the posts from their news spools.
What's shocking is that this is an analog capture device. First of all, it goes against the the notion that somehow digital copies are different, since this device doesn't get "pristine" digital copies of the content, it just captures them from analog inputs.
And that's where this gets really interesting. The Content Cartel can only infer that their precious content is actually being traded by circumstatial evidence. Sure, the box sent the right IR commands to set a cable box to channel 2. And it recorded for three hours while channel 2 was showing Return of the Jedi. But unless they force the box to send them a copy of the video as well, they have no way to know that the video on the Replay's disk is actually Return of the Jedi. For all they know, I could have the video input connected to a webcam pointed at my fish tank. And while that's copyrighted, (Berne Convention, you know) it's not copyrighted by THEM.
So they have only circumstantial evidence of infringement.
You're really not paying attention.
"SonicBlue stopped collecting data in May 2001..."
SonicBlue is being sued over the 4000 models, which didn't start shipping until November 2001. *This* device never collected any user data. Ever.
There is no "better than connecting it to Video-In..."
Laserdiscs are, believe it or not, analog. (The video is, anyway, there were a few incarnations of digital audio.) Worse than that, they're composite video, so you need to decide whether the comb filter in your capture device is better than the one in your LD player. (Decide this by testing with a good monitor. Dot crawl sucks.)
I have a pretty sizeable collection of Laserdiscs, and keep meaning to start converting these to DVDR. I have this bizarre hangup that I need to move the AC3 audio, and I haven't found any way to capture AC3 with a S/PDIF card. (Pointers appreciated!)
The reality is that I should ignore that, since anything I might have with AC3/DTS is recent enough that it's likely to be rereleased anyway.
Back to your question, spend as much money as you can bear on the capture device, (I have a Director's Cut, but would get a DA-MAX if I were doing this for money.) think about a proc-amp (might not be necessary) and go for it.
Give them a day or two. My TiVo had it on the todo list before TechTV.com had the listings.
You could even rig a "kill switch" function into an APRS message, so long as you don't mind the fact that any other amateur radio operator can send the same message. (Encryption is a no-no.)
Huh? While encryption is prohibited (and the FCC considered spread-spectrum to be encryption for far too long), authentication clearly is not. Otherwise, we'd all have to publish our autopatch codes.
-Z
I'd love to use the Mac, since that's where the rest of my video tools are hosted, but there's no driver support for any HDTV tuner that I know of.
If you know of one, I'd love to know about it.
SCSI is debatable in the consumer space, I agree.
But the argument that 1000BaseTX isn't a consumer product is entirely specious. Macs have GigE, and they're always dissed as "consumer" machines around here.
D-Link 1000BaseTX NIC's are $40 off the shelf. There's no good reason not to use a Gig chipset anymore.
This is really disappointing. Just when I thought I found the right board to replace the P2B-LS in my HTPC. But...
Bzzzrt.
I still need more than 3PCI slots, even with the cool I/O on this mobo.
I need:
HiPix Card (HD Tuner Card)
Gig Ethernet (You try shuffling 16GB movies in HD around)
SCSI (DDS-4 for offline storage of said HD movies)
And it's full. No possibility of adding the next cool thing. I'd have to use an AIW if I wanted to use dScaler for DVDs, etc. etc.
Seems like omitting SCSI and GigE were severe oversights.
-Z
Sheesh. $599 was the price we were all promised on a preorder.
;)
Still, it would fit nicely in my collection of failed "appliances." I've got a nice spot between the iOpener and the DigMedia Music Store.
(Anyone know where I can get an eVilla?)
These are *very* good arguments, and me without any mod points today.
-Z
Amen. The first thing I did when I got my new driver's licence was degauss it.
That said, I've never encountered a stripe reader anywhere except the grocery store, and then only when I write a paper check. And the grocery store is already "paying" me for my shopping habits. (Which I don't really care about)
I guess I really shouldn't be surprised that Katz loves this show. Katz, like most of the rest of the US, seems incapable of using logic in any meaningful way.
Now, by way of introduction...
My name is Zandr, and I'm an HDaholic. At a recent event at our local PBS affiliate, I pointed out that if they put their HD camera on the roof, we'd probably watch the feed.
And CSI is beautifully shot and produced. I keep an episode around just for the interstitial flyovers of the Strip.
That's why it pains me to say that I simply can't watch CSI. I actually find forensics fascinating. I don't have a terribly strong stomach when it comes to things organic, so I think I'll stick to my current career, but my TiVo is usually madly collecting all the forensics specials off Discovery, et al. You can almost measure the production cycle of CSI by watching Discovery, and then seeing how long it takes before the same technique gets used on CSI. (I get about 8 weeks by this method.)
The problem is that CSI makes these incredible leaps of logic. One that comes to mind: They found peanut shells on a pair of shoes, and immediately concluded that the owner worked a concession stand. I'm sorry, have these people never been to a proper bar, where there's an inch of peanut shells on the floor at all times?
And then there's the downright bad science. There's one episode where they figure out where a boat drifted by setting up a washtub and a fan in the lab. Give me a break; throwing dice would be more accurate. Or "you look left when you're remembering, you look right when you're making it up." Polygraphs are pretty flakey devices, but now that we can just watch your eyes we're all set.
My wife watches it, but it's only really watchable with a PVR, since she has to pause the show every three minutes to ask why I just recoiled at the last leap of logic or horrible science.
While I agree with the sentiment, there's an obvious issue:
The exception being anonymous remailers. In which case the remailer identifies itself as such.
If there's a law against forging headers, the first thing the Staats^H^H^H^H^H^H FBI is going to do is use that law to shut down all the anonymous remailers they can find.
So, does anyone have a procmail recipe that chain-tests headers?
-Z
The other wonderful thing was having Mr. "I am a fucking network engineer" call up saying, "you don't need that computer name, I demand your supervisor!"
This is a direct result of conditioning by barely-literate front-line tech support.
I am a network engineer, and when I call tech support, I usually have a pretty good idea what's wrong. It's mind-numbing to call tech support to tell them that the DHCP offers coming from their server don't have the router option populated, and be asked if the modem is plugged in. By the time I reach someone with a clue, I'm usually out of patience.
Of course, I understand this completely. Anyone with a clue (myself included, once upon a time) doing tech support for end users (when most of the time the modem really isn't plugged in) will go completely batty in a week.
From 4.3.1:
DHCP is supposed to listen to giaddr, but it is allowed to assign a different address. The problem is that if you start doing this, you're very likely to end up assigning addresses to clients that can't be routed from the network where the client is located. @Home did this a lot, since they were trying to pick IP addresses for clients by looking at street addresses, cross referencing those to cable plant maps provided by the operators, and finally trying to correlate that with what they believed was the network configuration in the cable operator's headend. This worked about as well as you'd expect. The giaddr field would at least tell you what network the packet came from.
To your spoofing comment, DHCP shouldn't be used for authentication. Period. giaddr is harder to spoof because it's usually written by a relay agent. Client ID is written by a user typing into the "Computer Name" field. Which do you think is more secure?
No joke. The amazing thing about @Home was that they were all so damn arrogant, but didn't know $#!+.
I worked for a CMTS vendor for almost five years, and every contact with @Home was an exercise in insanity.
1: We were installing gear at an @Home site, and needed changes in the routing made to light up the new gear. Called the NOC a dozen times over the two days I was onsite with no response. I finally turned off one of the (redundant) power supplies on the @Home 7200 in the headend. Sure enough, the NOC called us within a minute. I had the guy who called find the Routing Diva (that's what her card said!) before I turned the supply back on.
2: They were constantly beating us up to make sure that the modems wouldn't bind to IP addresses learned from ARP, since then you could just statically configure an IP address you wanted to steal. No, they insisted that we sniff DHCP, that way their magical DHCP-integrated-with-billing server could be authoritative. We actually preferred using DHCP to ARP (since we had to relay DHCP anyway) and added a switch to disable learning from ARP. So far so good, except that their DHCP implementation was non-standard. It completely ignored giaddr, and assigned the IP based on client ID. (That caused countless other problems, as you might imagine...) Fine, except that the Client ID was also the hostname in @Home's DNS.
For those of you who lack a devious mind, this means that all you had to do was a reverse lookup on the address you wanted to steal, enter that as your client ID, and the DHCP would assign you the address you stole.
So I just reread this, and it sure looks like you were saying that Jax and Rick were dead weight.
Nothing could be farther from the truth.
And if you were there in '96, we certainly worked together.
-Zandr
Your statements regarding S304 are so far off-base as to be funny.
For several reasons. Since you seem insistent on pressing this point, here goes:
You don't have any idea how the system works. This magical 304 register that you keep talking about has nothing to do with the speed of the system. The 304 register controlled the serial port speed and the serial port speed ONLY. If the 304 register was set to 28.8, then there would be very, very few computers that would even communicate the modem. You see, 28.8 is not a legal speed for a serial port. Don't believe me? Open Hyperterminal and try to set your serial port to 28800. You can't. 19200 or 38400, but not 28800 or 33600 or any other marketing-driven speed.
You're correct that the 28.8 and 33.6 numbers were driven by the state of the art for POTS modems, but that didn't have anything at all to do with S304, or for that matter system performance. When I was in tech support, I told people to expect 19200, because I believe in underpromising and overdelivering. Marketing didn't like it, but it's not like there was ever any real presence in marketing after Sandy left.
IIRC, the 304 register in the portables was set to ZERO by default. That's right, ZERO. But the modem still worked. Why? Because 304 doesn't have anything to do with the speed of the modem. And, (and you should remember this) if you set that register to 0, it would automatically set the DTE speed to match your computer. Nearly every serial modem sold to consumers does this, and Ricochet was no exception.
The over the air speed was 100kbps. The effective throughput of the system was around 20-30kbps. This was not because of the 304 register.
Besides, if you're correct, the system could never go faster than 9600, because that's what 304 in the poletops was set to. And don't give me the garbage about multiple poletops sending data to a single subscriber. The system would do that under some circumstances if it was running 200 or 201 code, but the 210 code forced all the traffic through the best node. This was done mostly to bound latency; the latency of the network was variable enough that TCP would behave badly, and 210 included a bunch of protocol changes to improve that. (And if you were there prior to 210, you'd know who I am)
So, why was throughput only 30% of the over the air rate? Because that's the nature of half-duplex packet-switched networks. Do you have an 802.11b card? Do you get 11Mb/s out of it? Lucent/DLink/Linksys/whomever must be trying to rip you off! Think back just a bit to 10Mb/s ethernet (10Base-T or 10Base-2). Did you ever get 10Mb/s out of it? Same with 100Base-TX, though things get dramatically better with full duplex and switches. Why is this? Because when you receive a packet, you need to acknowledge it. And in a half-duplex system, you can't be transmitting while you're receiving. And there's turnaround time in the radio. Add to this that latency really was variable over a pretty good range, so the TCP window size was flapping all over the place.
Amazing that Katin let you out of the training room...
You know, the more I think about this, the more I think we had to overlap at MCOM. Were you hired on Newton's watch? You knew Rick and Jax, who bailed out shortly after I left. You knew Chiponis, who started while I was still in TS, and you knew K10, who punched out for SLOtown around that same time. Did you know Noya? Or Kelly? Did you ever work across the street, or in San Jose?