You might want to look into the LXD-55 8 inch Schmitt-Newtonian. The scope uses the autostar goto system allowing for visual goto use (I'm not sure I'd try astro-photography of anything except planets and the moon with that mount).
You can get the scope for around $850 (plus shipping) and Meade as a deal on a large set of eyepieces for $100ish with the scope.
There is the issue of universal phone access. If a large segment of the market flees the existing carriers, it will become even more uneconomical to provide service to everyone in the US. The univeral access fees would have to be increased, putting the telcos at a further price disadvantage. I don't shed any tears for the telcos, but we should apply these special tax/surcharges without regard to the transport being used (land line, cell, voip, sat phone, whatever). A good compromise would be to levy the universal access fees on any dialable phone number (e.g. Vonage) but leave pure IP based service free (it would be difficult to inpossible to regulate anyway), and not impose any additional regulation on voip carriers.
About as sensible as Australian (state of Victoria, anyway) law. When I lived there a few years ago, suicide was legal but bungee jumping was illegal. How much sense does that make? I can only jump if I don't attach the safety harness.
It will be interesting to see if anyone builds a massive HyperTransport switch (probably a local switch for a blade frame with 1000bt between blade frames). The opteron looks like it could run without much in the way of chipset support (build in memory controller), and skipping all the unnecessary I/O would be pretty simple.
Of course, dumping all the heat would be an issue...
Take a look at 3ware (www.3ware.com). Their controllers cost a little more than the entry level promise ones, but they also walk all over them in terms of features and performance.
Maybe that's why they provide Photoshop-LE? At around $100 (less bundled with a scanner), Adobe is providing a pretty good deal.
Of course, if you need 3 or 4 color seperations, you should also be able to afford $1000.
If Photoshop was priced too high, nobody would buy it. That is clearly not the case.
For anyone considering fighting this, student information was being transferred over wireless connections at the University of Illinois on the PLATO system before 1992. While the wireless endpoints were not portable, this would invalidate most of the patent (IMHO).
Yes, but the vendor and product code are encoded into that MAC address. If you don't change the MAC address on the upsteam port of your NAT box, it is possible that the ISP can determine that you are using a NAT box.
This (of course) only applies to Broadband routers. If you are using a linux or windows box for NAT, then the MAC address will be one associated with a standard NIC. Most cablemodem users that are using NAT are using broadband routers, and unless the cable modem infrastructure is dispensing DHCP addresses by MAC address, those routers have the default MAC address. These are the people companies like Comcast will focus on (unless they just look at traffic levels and packet sniff to get an idea what you are up to).
The biggest bandwidth hogs on most ISP systems are alt.binaries.whatever downloaders, and PTP filesharing. Eliminating technical users with linux NAT boxes would not have a significant effect on their total bandwidth utilization.
Sorry, you don't get not TCP/IP works, but here is a quick explaination.
This explaination assumes static IP and a bridge-type cable modem (generally used in the @Home network).
Assuming that the first incoming packet is a TCP/IP connect request, the upstream router will look up the destination IP address in it's ARP table, not finding it, it sends out a broadcast packet called an ARP (address resolution protocol) on the subnet associated with your IP address. Your NAT box knows it's IP address, so it responds to the ARP request with it's MAC address. The router adds your NAT boxes MAC address to it's ARP table, and forwards the SYN packet (from the connect) and all future IP packets destined for your IP address to the MAC address in it's ARP table. Most IP packets (SYN/ACK associated with connect, TCP/IP payload packets and UDP packets) are not broadcast to your entire subnet, they are directed to your MAC address (TCP/IP would really suck if this was not the case).
Your machine does the same thing in determining which MAC addresses are associated with internal IP addresses (type arp -a to see a list if you are using windows).
Your MAC address is only known to the router on the subnet your IP address exists on, but in a cable-modem network, the upstream port MAC address is known to the ISP router it is connected to through the bridge (cable modem).
Yes this is/., and I have a library of good network books, the one I would recommend you take a look at is "Routing in the Internet" ISBN 0130226475. It has a complete and lucid explaination of bridging and routing.
One way they could detect NAT boxes is by looking at the MAC address. I suspect that most/all NAT boxes use MAC addresses in a predictable range based on Manufacturer and model.
To avoid this, get the MAC address from an old NIC, or a machine that will never be connected to the subnet on the cable-modem system, and (assuming your NAT box supports MAC spoofing) configure your NAT box to use that IP address.
More likely than not, the providers are too stupid to do the necessary research, and will look at the high bandwidth users and do a packet sniff to see what their activity looks like.
One of the big ideas of having a low radar profile is to be difficult for missiles to track. I believe pretty much all long range naval missiles (airborne) are radar guided. Sounds like a pretty good idea to me, whether you are undetectable by passive sonar or not.
Remember to put a couple of drops in ceilings in places that would provide ideal coverage for 802.11 access points. Ceiling mounted access points provide better coverage (fewer furniture and appliances to go through) and you will do wireless sooner or later.
True, but we have a system for dealing with unjust/unconstitutional laws (in the US at least) that is at least minimally functional.
We are free to break the law as a form of free speech, but have to be prepared to accept the concequences (plenty of precident for this).
Inciting others to break the law (I'm not a lawyer) would be really close to conspiracy, I believe that conspiracy is illegal when the crime is a felony, and that seems appropriate. If the act should not be criminal we need to solve that problem.
I have to disagree. Speech has to be more than harmful to be worthy of censorship. I would hate to have a site shut down because the speech was "harmful" to a political candidate, party or the like.
Inciting people to commit a crime is a reasonable place to draw the line, but harm and injury are way to subjective.
Another thing they are trying to prevent is a customer purchasing some expensive items, exiting the store, returning to the store with only the receipt, picking up a duplicate set of merchandise and exiting the store again. If you were smart and fast, it would be extreemly difficult to get caught without the marks on the receipt when exiting.
The 3ware Escalade controllers are worth a look. I suspect that most of the superiority of SCSI comes from Command Tagging, Out of order execution and scatter-gather DMA, combined with well designed controllers. The low price of "stupid" IDE controllers combined with the non-enterprise reputation of IDE limits the market for high end controllers (no such problem with scsi).
Well designed controllers like the escalades provide out of order execution, scatter gather, etc at the controller level, and offer a fully switched bus for all data. The 7000 series also have 64bit PCI support (and actually utilize it).
Forget the HPT36x and 37x controllers, as well as most Promise controllers, all the smarts is in the driver software and they suck performance-wise. High-end Adapted controller appear to be ok, but they are pricey compared to the 3ware controllers last time I looked.
One controller with one or two drives may be faster with SCSI, but dollar for dollar, 3ware and IDE walk all over them (particularly with database servers where you want a few spindles to minimize blocking seek activity.
Given the apparent level of technical expertise of these idiots, and their repugnant behaviour, I suspect that they may soon become the "victim" of community (vigilante) justice.
I suspect that it is a compatability mapping, there is a lot of code that expects the standard windows fonts to be around, not aliasing them you create unnecessary portability hassles.
I think the evaluation of the board members is a bit silly, but if people want to do something, get your corporate networks admins to blacklist doubleclick.com/.net, and its ilk on your firewall/proxy server. I run with cookie prompting just to ferret out these idiots and add them to the list.
Slashdot Mirror
You can get the scope for around $850 (plus shipping) and Meade as a deal on a large set of eyepieces for $100ish with the scope.
Dean
There is the issue of universal phone access. If a large segment of the market flees the existing carriers, it will become even more uneconomical to provide service to everyone in the US. The univeral access fees would have to be increased, putting the telcos at a further price disadvantage. I don't shed any tears for the telcos, but we should apply these special tax/surcharges without regard to the transport being used (land line, cell, voip, sat phone, whatever).
A good compromise would be to levy the universal access fees on any dialable phone number (e.g. Vonage) but leave pure IP based service free (it would be difficult to inpossible to regulate anyway), and not impose any additional regulation on voip carriers.
About as sensible as Australian (state of Victoria, anyway) law. When I lived there a few years ago, suicide was legal but bungee jumping was illegal. How much sense does that make? I can only jump if I don't attach the safety harness.
It will be interesting to see if anyone builds a massive HyperTransport switch (probably a local switch for a blade frame with 1000bt between blade frames). The opteron looks like it could run without much in the way of chipset support (build in memory controller), and skipping all the unnecessary I/O would be pretty simple.
Of course, dumping all the heat would be an issue...
Take a look at 3ware (www.3ware.com). Their controllers cost a little more than the entry level promise ones, but they also walk all over them in terms of features and performance.
If Photoshop was priced too high, nobody would buy it. That is clearly not the case.
BTW, this patent really sucks.
Fortunately (or unfortunately), the BSOD only appears on the primary monitor, no matter how many you have.
This (of course) only applies to Broadband routers. If you are using a linux or windows box for NAT, then the MAC address will be one associated with a standard NIC. Most cablemodem users that are using NAT are using broadband routers, and unless the cable modem infrastructure is dispensing DHCP addresses by MAC address, those routers have the default MAC address. These are the people companies like Comcast will focus on (unless they just look at traffic levels and packet sniff to get an idea what you are up to).
The biggest bandwidth hogs on most ISP systems are alt.binaries.whatever downloaders, and PTP filesharing. Eliminating technical users with linux NAT boxes would not have a significant effect on their total bandwidth utilization.
Assuming that the first incoming packet is a TCP/IP connect request, the upstream router will look up the destination IP address in it's ARP table, not finding it, it sends out a broadcast packet called an ARP (address resolution protocol) on the subnet associated with your IP address. Your NAT box knows it's IP address, so it responds to the ARP request with it's MAC address. The router adds your NAT boxes MAC address to it's ARP table, and forwards the SYN packet (from the connect) and all future IP packets destined for your IP address to the MAC address in it's ARP table. Most IP packets (SYN/ACK associated with connect, TCP/IP payload packets and UDP packets) are not broadcast to your entire subnet, they are directed to your MAC address (TCP/IP would really suck if this was not the case).
Your machine does the same thing in determining which MAC addresses are associated with internal IP addresses (type arp -a to see a list if you are using windows).
Your MAC address is only known to the router on the subnet your IP address exists on, but in a cable-modem network, the upstream port MAC address is known to the ISP router it is connected to through the bridge (cable modem).
Yes this is /., and I have a library of good network books, the one I would recommend you take a look at is "Routing in the Internet" ISBN 0130226475. It has a complete and lucid explaination of bridging and routing.
To avoid this, get the MAC address from an old NIC, or a machine that will never be connected to the subnet on the cable-modem system, and (assuming your NAT box supports MAC spoofing) configure your NAT box to use that IP address.
More likely than not, the providers are too stupid to do the necessary research, and will look at the high bandwidth users and do a packet sniff to see what their activity looks like.
One of the big ideas of having a low radar profile is to be difficult for missiles to track. I believe pretty much all long range naval missiles (airborne) are radar guided. Sounds like a pretty good idea to me, whether you are undetectable by passive sonar or not.
Remember to put a couple of drops in ceilings in places that would provide ideal coverage for 802.11 access points. Ceiling mounted access points provide better coverage (fewer furniture and appliances to go through) and you will do wireless sooner or later.
We are free to break the law as a form of free speech, but have to be prepared to accept the concequences (plenty of precident for this).
Inciting others to break the law (I'm not a lawyer) would be really close to conspiracy, I believe that conspiracy is illegal when the crime is a felony, and that seems appropriate. If the act should not be criminal we need to solve that problem.
I have to disagree. Speech has to be more than harmful to be worthy of censorship. I would hate to have a site shut down because the speech was "harmful" to a political candidate, party or the like.
Inciting people to commit a crime is a reasonable place to draw the line, but harm and injury are way to subjective.
Another thing they are trying to prevent is a customer purchasing some expensive items, exiting the store, returning to the store with only the receipt, picking up a duplicate set of merchandise and exiting the store again. If you were smart and fast, it would be extreemly difficult to get caught without the marks on the receipt when exiting.
This is only true if there are two bodies in the system. Add a moon (or two), and you end up with many orbit shapes.
Well designed controllers like the escalades provide out of order execution, scatter gather, etc at the controller level, and offer a fully switched bus for all data. The 7000 series also have 64bit PCI support (and actually utilize it).
Forget the HPT36x and 37x controllers, as well as most Promise controllers, all the smarts is in the driver software and they suck performance-wise. High-end Adapted controller appear to be ok, but they are pricey compared to the 3ware controllers last time I looked.
One controller with one or two drives may be faster with SCSI, but dollar for dollar, 3ware and IDE walk all over them (particularly with database servers where you want a few spindles to minimize blocking seek activity.
Given the apparent level of technical expertise of these idiots, and their repugnant behaviour, I suspect that they may soon become the "victim" of community (vigilante) justice.
I suspect that it is a compatability mapping, there is a lot of code that expects the standard windows fonts to be around, not aliasing them you create unnecessary portability hassles.
I think the evaluation of the board members is a bit silly, but if people want to do something, get your corporate networks admins to blacklist doubleclick.com/.net, and its ilk on your firewall/proxy server. I run with cookie prompting just to ferret out these idiots and add them to the list.