The movie was inspired by an older story, 'The Marching Morons.' It was proven a long time ago with simple studies that intelligence and number of children are negatively correlated.
1. If God exists, God could prove his existance easily (Write a message on the moon, personally appear to every individual one earth at once, etc)
2. No such proof has been provided, as evidenced by the great diversity of religious beliefs.
3. Therefore, either:
a. God doesn't exist.
or
b. God exists, but wants to keep his existance secret.
4. If a, God doesn't exist. I win.
If b, God does exist, but not the God of Christianity nor any other major religion that believes in an interventionist God,
It's a computed hologram. The idea has been around for a while as a way to make a true 3D display, but held back by two missing technologies: A ridiculously high resolution screen, and a ridiculous amount of processing power to drive it. They have solved both, the latter by the use of a multi-GPU computer. Impressive. It's not practical yet, but it's a good start. Throw maybe a hundred times the processing power at it, and an even higher resolution display so you can do blue and green laser holography too, and it could produce an image indistinguishable from placeing a real object behind the screen.
I doubt it'd be a ban. It'd just impose extremally extensive logging requirements. Not by refering to technology, but just requireing all ISPs have the ability to uniquely identify any user given a time and IP address. How the ISPs go about doing that is their problem. It could be done for NAT at some expense, but for PAT it'd be completly impractical - it'd just leave the ISPs with no choice but to not use PAT, even if that means finally moving to IPv6.
IPv4 wasn't designed to use NAT at all. NAT is an improvised technique that allowed IPv4 to continue to grow far beyond it's original design specifications. Networking professionals do not like it, because it breaks a lot of protocols, but it's the only way the internet can continue to function right now. The alternative is IPv6, but that is a very expensive thing to deploy and would bring many troubles of it's own during the transition period. So the options are to either continue deploying NAT, which is cheap and reliable at the expense of breaking a lot of protocols and crippling the internet in future, or deploying IPv6 which will produce a far superior internet in five years but in the meantime result in customers asking why things arn't working properly. There isn't a business case for IPv6, because the RoI period is so long - the IPv4 internet isn't going to collapse just yet, though it will inevitably happen one day.
With Skype, the two endpoints both negociate with the server to agree on a UDP port - then send to each other via UDP. They are basically tricking the NAT routers at each into thinking the other end accepted a UDP connection. It works surprisingly well.
Those customers will still be very annoyed when their IM file transfer services stop working. Though I imagine if it becomes a significent problem, The major IM network operators will revise their protocols in some way - maybe mutual UDP connections like Skype uses.
If any major ISP does this, then next legislative session some politician will just propose a law to make it illegal, on the grounds that it makes it impossible to track down pedophiles. The bill will pass on a unaminous vote with support from all parties, because no politician wants to be seen defending said pedophiles.
Hmm... carrier-level NAT would also make tracking people online next to impossible. Could we have finally found something that will convince non-technical types of the need to move to IPv6? 'Deploy the new protocol, or the evil pedos will never be caught?'
Two problems:
1. The value of the work your CPU can do is probably less than the extra power it'll consume. Maybe the GPU could it, but then:
2. You are not a supercomputer. Computing power is cheap - unless you're running a cluster of GPUs, it could take a very long time for you to earn even enough to be worth the cost of the payment transaction.
What you are talking about is selling CPU time. It's only had one real application since the days of the mainframe days, and that's in cloud computing as it offers the ability to buy instantly if the customer has a sudden need for more (Eg, Slashdot just linked to their site). It just isn't economically viable right now, because anyone who needs so much processing power they might need to buy it can probably just go and buy their own cluster.
"At one point or another, the common man needs to set up a state that works for his interests."
They tried that already, a few times. It didn't work out very well. The idea may have merit in theory, but so far efforts at implimentation have been less than successful.
"I am sure that the fact that it is still possible for a person to grow up poor and with determination and hard work become rich is something that you either
do not believe in or something that you do not believe happens."
Possible, yes, but rare. The unfortunate fact remains that children of the very rich basically have it made. Unless they really screw up, they can be guaranteed of a comfortably wealthy life. Everyone else can only work hard for a living - and no matter how hard they work, it still takes a lot of luck as well to advance to the higher income levels.
We've an economy built on this assumption now. If everyone were to stop wasteing money on useless junk, then we'd probably see a total economic collapse within six months as hundreds of millions of junk-manufacturers around the world lost their jobs.
That's how it works for the early-release things, where leaks and screeners rule. But once the movie is out on blu-ray, anyone can make a rip and upload it.
Why would they produce something else? If the effect of p2p were gone completly, then artistic and creative movies would make more... and so would the safe, mindless crap. The mindless crap comes ahead still. Some producers and directors really are in it for the art, but the executives who decide what gets made arn't interested in that. All they care aboue is how much the movie will cost, and how much it will make.
They can't be sniffing all the traffic - reassembling TCP on that scale just isn't practical. Far too much data. I wouldn't be surprised if there were something like this operating on email, though - as any attachment has to go through the SMTP server, it would be easy to check them there.
And advertising or market research. If an ISP has extensive monitoring and logging installed anyway, why not? They are paying for it, they'd like to see some return. Just runs the logs through a minimal anonymiser and sell to a market research agency, so they can ask important questions like 'do people who visit Apple's website tend to google for information on Android phones first, or just go straight to the iPhone?'
Depends if they just want to mandate retention of DHCP logs. Useful as it is to be able to match up an IP address to a customer, they may be thinking of other things they could request. For example: "Jonny Pervert is probably a pedophile. Please tell us every email address he has sent email to in the last two years, the subject line and the size and filenames of attachments, so we can see if he emailed any child porn to his pedophile friends."
Slashdot Mirror
Have you considered the possibility that there is no 'why?' You exist, things happen, and there is no great purpose to it?
The movie was inspired by an older story, 'The Marching Morons.' It was proven a long time ago with simple studies that intelligence and number of children are negatively correlated.
1. If God exists, God could prove his existance easily (Write a message on the moon, personally appear to every individual one earth at once, etc)
2. No such proof has been provided, as evidenced by the great diversity of religious beliefs.
3. Therefore, either:
a. God doesn't exist.
or
b. God exists, but wants to keep his existance secret.
4. If a, God doesn't exist. I win.
If b, God does exist, but not the God of Christianity nor any other major religion that believes in an interventionist God,
I don't think they care as much about money as the non-religious. They think God will provide for them, somehow.
It's a computed hologram. The idea has been around for a while as a way to make a true 3D display, but held back by two missing technologies: A ridiculously high resolution screen, and a ridiculous amount of processing power to drive it. They have solved both, the latter by the use of a multi-GPU computer. Impressive. It's not practical yet, but it's a good start. Throw maybe a hundred times the processing power at it, and an even higher resolution display so you can do blue and green laser holography too, and it could produce an image indistinguishable from placeing a real object behind the screen.
I doubt it'd be a ban. It'd just impose extremally extensive logging requirements. Not by refering to technology, but just requireing all ISPs have the ability to uniquely identify any user given a time and IP address. How the ISPs go about doing that is their problem. It could be done for NAT at some expense, but for PAT it'd be completly impractical - it'd just leave the ISPs with no choice but to not use PAT, even if that means finally moving to IPv6.
Not to be confused with the rouge admin, who is rather less stealthy.
IPv4 wasn't designed to use NAT at all. NAT is an improvised technique that allowed IPv4 to continue to grow far beyond it's original design specifications. Networking professionals do not like it, because it breaks a lot of protocols, but it's the only way the internet can continue to function right now. The alternative is IPv6, but that is a very expensive thing to deploy and would bring many troubles of it's own during the transition period. So the options are to either continue deploying NAT, which is cheap and reliable at the expense of breaking a lot of protocols and crippling the internet in future, or deploying IPv6 which will produce a far superior internet in five years but in the meantime result in customers asking why things arn't working properly. There isn't a business case for IPv6, because the RoI period is so long - the IPv4 internet isn't going to collapse just yet, though it will inevitably happen one day.
With Skype, the two endpoints both negociate with the server to agree on a UDP port - then send to each other via UDP. They are basically tricking the NAT routers at each into thinking the other end accepted a UDP connection. It works surprisingly well.
Those customers will still be very annoyed when their IM file transfer services stop working. Though I imagine if it becomes a significent problem, The major IM network operators will revise their protocols in some way - maybe mutual UDP connections like Skype uses.
If any major ISP does this, then next legislative session some politician will just propose a law to make it illegal, on the grounds that it makes it impossible to track down pedophiles. The bill will pass on a unaminous vote with support from all parties, because no politician wants to be seen defending said pedophiles.
Hmm... carrier-level NAT would also make tracking people online next to impossible. Could we have finally found something that will convince non-technical types of the need to move to IPv6? 'Deploy the new protocol, or the evil pedos will never be caught?'
Two problems:
1. The value of the work your CPU can do is probably less than the extra power it'll consume. Maybe the GPU could it, but then:
2. You are not a supercomputer. Computing power is cheap - unless you're running a cluster of GPUs, it could take a very long time for you to earn even enough to be worth the cost of the payment transaction.
What you are talking about is selling CPU time. It's only had one real application since the days of the mainframe days, and that's in cloud computing as it offers the ability to buy instantly if the customer has a sudden need for more (Eg, Slashdot just linked to their site). It just isn't economically viable right now, because anyone who needs so much processing power they might need to buy it can probably just go and buy their own cluster.
"At one point or another, the common man needs to set up a state that works for his interests."
They tried that already, a few times. It didn't work out very well. The idea may have merit in theory, but so far efforts at implimentation have been less than successful.
"I am sure that the fact that it is still possible for a person to grow up poor and with determination and hard work become rich is something that you either do not believe in or something that you do not believe happens."
Possible, yes, but rare. The unfortunate fact remains that children of the very rich basically have it made. Unless they really screw up, they can be guaranteed of a comfortably wealthy life. Everyone else can only work hard for a living - and no matter how hard they work, it still takes a lot of luck as well to advance to the higher income levels.
Ever seen the default services on a Windows box? A lot of linux distros are almost as bad.
Which makes Second Life a MUCK for the dyslexic. And those of short attention span.
Would you like to drop the firewalls, then? Perimeter security isn't a complete security solution, but it's still a major part.
Also spr.ctrl-c.liu.se 23. Lots of geeky types there.
muck.furry.com 8888
"consumption = good"
We've an economy built on this assumption now. If everyone were to stop wasteing money on useless junk, then we'd probably see a total economic collapse within six months as hundreds of millions of junk-manufacturers around the world lost their jobs.
That's how it works for the early-release things, where leaks and screeners rule. But once the movie is out on blu-ray, anyone can make a rip and upload it.
Why would they produce something else? If the effect of p2p were gone completly, then artistic and creative movies would make more... and so would the safe, mindless crap. The mindless crap comes ahead still. Some producers and directors really are in it for the art, but the executives who decide what gets made arn't interested in that. All they care aboue is how much the movie will cost, and how much it will make.
They can't be sniffing all the traffic - reassembling TCP on that scale just isn't practical. Far too much data. I wouldn't be surprised if there were something like this operating on email, though - as any attachment has to go through the SMTP server, it would be easy to check them there.
And advertising or market research. If an ISP has extensive monitoring and logging installed anyway, why not? They are paying for it, they'd like to see some return. Just runs the logs through a minimal anonymiser and sell to a market research agency, so they can ask important questions like 'do people who visit Apple's website tend to google for information on Android phones first, or just go straight to the iPhone?'
Depends if they just want to mandate retention of DHCP logs. Useful as it is to be able to match up an IP address to a customer, they may be thinking of other things they could request. For example: "Jonny Pervert is probably a pedophile. Please tell us every email address he has sent email to in the last two years, the subject line and the size and filenames of attachments, so we can see if he emailed any child porn to his pedophile friends."