What's the point of writing "G-d" for "God"? You clearly mean "God", and at some point that becomes such a common substitution that it's effectively equal to writing "God" in the first place. If it's a sin in your religion, to engrave his name or something like that, don't you think he'd be just as pissed that you invented an alternate spelling as a loophole?
You're looking at this backward. Girls are told they're supposed to aspire to beauty above all else. The idea here is to show them that you can have that without giving up intelligence.
A single voice isn't going to tell girls that they shouldn't want to be pretty. One well-spoken voice might convince a few that they can be pretty and smart.
What we really need is to have high schools that don't go out of their way to reinforce the perception that going to state for ****ball is the pinnacle of achievement.
OK, I'm dying to know: what sport at your high school is so unspeakably vulgar that you have to censor the name?
Sadly, judging from my experience in the restaurant, technology might actually be a better babysitter than some parents...
Watch an early Hollywood comedy sometime. There's usually a scene where the star is standing in line for something while the woman in front of him is busy yakking with a friend. The star watches in amusement or horror as the woman's rugrat pours ink in a show, or eats a houseplant, or drinks glue. Moral: poor parenting isn't a new invention.
Parents are starting to spank their kids again (in public no less, the horror!), sternly talking to them instead of baby talk and asking what their true feelings are, and generally raising children that aren't going to run out in the middle of the street and then stare at you like it was your fault that you almost hit them.
I don't claim to speak for a generation, but you pretty much pegged my parenting style and that of my friends (partially because we don't hang out with people that let their kids degenerate into brats). I want my kids to enjoy themselves and feel free to explore, sure, but at least as important to me is that they learn how to function in society. That doesn't mean turning them into little robots. It does mean, though, teaching them to respect the people around them and generally to act in such a way that adults don't mind having them around.
It'd be nice if my kids like me. If they don't like me because I swatted their butt for pulling cereal off the shelf at a grocery store, well, I can live with that.
Except that it doesn't. Packets from the external interface which are addressed to the internal network will go right through.
Not if those ports haven't been forwarded. That's the "accidental" part. If you don't have a mapping to internalsite.example.com:80, then external visitors can't get to it. That's basically the same functionality as a default-drop firewall, except that it's a happy side effect and not really by design (that's the "coincidental" part).
We're both saying the same thing, so I'm going to drop this now.
Maybe you can tell me what's the "right" implementation of end to end connectivity?
It's the same as the "right" implementation for IPv4: you drop everything inbound by default, then selectively expose the sockets that actually need external exposure. Anything else is an accident waiting to happen.
At this point, the only obvious solution to me is to implement NAT for ipv6, and have it on by default.
You misspelled "a firewall". If you had an IPv4 NAT that treated every host inside like it was in the DMZ, would that meet your security requirements? Of course not! It does nothing in and of itself. NAT is only coincidentally secure in that it accidentally provides some of the same protection as a "default drop" firewall.
to KDE from Gnome if the default media player can play DVD videos with menu support.
For the record, you know you can run software from either environment on the other, right? Switch to KDE and use your favorite Gnome DVD player, or stay where you are and start using Kaffeine. You'll miss a little bit of integration slickness by mixing and matching, but they'll still run well.
Mixing a file manager with a web browser? Not very UNIX-like.
I don't know - I thought it was pretty unixy. After all, it had one basic job description: asking one backend to fetch some information from various and sundry sources, then asking another to render it appropriately. It wrapped a whole lot of functionality, but Konqueror itself didn't do much more than pass data from one KPart to another and provide bookmarks.
If one of the girls he killed was my daughter and he got out of jail in 6 years... oh boy, don't even want to imagine how I would feel and just how much I would be willing to do.
On the plus side, no matter what you'd be willing to do, you can't get more than 25 years...
If it did, we wouldn't have IPv6. If you really work for a bank, you should be able to appreciate having IPSEC built right in as a mandatory part of the protocol. No more futzing around with various VPN hacks - just say "use this key for all traffic to this netblock" and enjoy.
The numbers can be kept in your head. Subnet math is easy.
If you have 1,000 hosts, it's a safe bet that you don't remember each's IPv4 address either. That's the whole point of DNS. And is "128-48" really that much harder to calculate than "32-19"? A subnet's a subnet, and 2**(max-prefixlen) will get you a netblock's size regardless of which protocol you're using.
but the people who would need to spend money to replace routers etc evidently don't see any benefit for themselves.
Well, one thing that this might do is give router manufacturers a kick in the pants to make IPv6 work well. Come 2009, any router that isn't IPv6-capable is officially obsolete according to the IETF. I don't think manufacturers will want their hardware written off before it even hits the shelves. Maybe it will turn out to be a checklist feature that no one actually uses, but I don't expect that to happen.
Prof. Bernstein pointed this out many years ago in http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/ipv6mess.html and there seems to have been no changes to make IPv6 deployable.
Dan's just a contrarian ass; always has been, always will be. For example, here's why he doesn't like IPv6:
Excerpt from a message I sent to the ngtrans mailing list on 2002.03.20:
(1) I'd like to connect my office computers to the IPv6 network, and make their services---the web server, for example, and the mail server---available to IPv6 clients around the world.
(2) I control the operating system and the applications. I am ready and willing to make various changes to the code.
(3) However, I refuse to provide any information to those programs beyond what they already have (such as my IPv4 addresses), and I refuse to do any work outside changing the programs themselves. I'm not going to ask my ISP for an IPv6 address, for example, and I'm not going to touch my DNS data.
Here's the big question: How do I achieve #1, taking advantage of #2, without violating #3?
In other words, "how can I run IPv6 without lifting a finger?" (or "how can I run IPv6 DNS without modifying my precious djbdns so that it supports AAAA records like every other server in the world?", despite what he says in #2). He goes on to explain why his dumb question isn't really dumb, even though it's still dumb.
Sure, you bring up some valid points. Don't make the mistake of bringing in DJB's opinions for support, though. Once he's decided that he doesn't like something, a team of wild horses can't make him change his mind.
IPv4 works for me today and will work for me in the future.
No it doesn't, and no it won't. Right now, only the relatively rich can afford more than a handful of public addresses, so only they can afford to host the services they want (where "services" includes things like "being able to sync your smartphone's calendar with the office Exchange server", not just customer-centric applications). Also, it's all but impossible to do things like direct peer-to-peer VOIP between two random hosts behind NATted routers; you have to have a broker somewhere in the middle to know how to get to each end and to negotiate the connections.
This isn't going to get better. The NAT hack was able to keep things limping along for a few extra years, but we're living on borrowed time. You will be migrating off IPV6, and likely sooner rather than later. The only question is how you want to meet it: will you embrace the new system, or will you have to be dragged kicking and screaming?
It's just missing one thing: if everyone ignores the plan and does nothing instead, how is it going to be enforced?
Well, hypothetically, IPv6 netblocks should become cheaper than their scarce IPv4 counterparts. Coupled with vastly simplified client requirements (such as not having to figure out how to connect two machines that are behind NATs), an IPv6 network could be quite a bit cheaper than an IPv4-only setup.
If everyone ignores the plan, then nothing happens. Anyone who does along with it, though, will have a competitive advantage. I think the idea of all your competition benefitting while you're not is enough to get many companies onto the bandwagon.
From the blurb, if you're not a "server" I guess you don't need an IPv6 address... then again what does that even mean?
What are you talking about? IPv6 servers are worthless without IPv6 clients to connect to them. The implication is that you should start bringing IPv6 services online now so that when the clients are inevitably updated they'll have something to talk to.
Chances are that most software you use is already v6-capable. Pretty much all web browsers are, as is every mail and chat client I use. I'm starting to see an increasing percentage of inbound email on my server coming from other IPv6 hosts, so it looks like people are starting to make the transition.
In America they teach you to pursue the "American Dream." This guy does he gets 30 years, meanwhile the guy who rapes your preteen daughter gets 3-5.
The guy wasn't "just" a spammer. He ran an online pharmacy, and his assistant (whose children he tried to have killed) was responsible for procuring Vicodin for him to sell.
He was a fraud, a fugitive, and a would-be killer. He was also apparently willing to sell your teenage daughter real narcotics, and did so often enough that the gov't sold 1.6 million dollars worth of his cars at auction. Sorry, I can't drum up a lot of sympathy for him.
To read my post please enter the first word from pages 6, 27, and 32 from the manual.
The one saving grace of those systems was that storage was so expensive back then that the list of page/line/word triplets was small enough to fit on a notecard. Every time you'd type in a word, you'd write it and its location down. After about 20 entries, voila! You could pack the manual away and get on with things.
Or upload it as a text file so everyone else on the BBS could use it too. (Not that I ever did that, honest, mom!)
I don't rember ever seeing DIVX ever being cracked.
According to one source, the average PC hard drive at the end of 1998 was 5.6GB. Low-MHz Pentium IIs had just been introduced. Few people had the storage capacity or processing power to crack a format that only lasted for about 6 months anyway.
I use a Microsoft Trackball Optical on my Linux and OS X machines and absolutely love it. It was a little awkward for the first week or so, but now it's as seamless to me as a mouse ever was. No, my thumb doesn't get tired. Yes, my wrists feel better. They're apparently not everybody's cup of tea, but I absolutely love them.
A huge drawback to the palm-operated trackball the submitter seemed to be wanting is that you're always moving your fingers away from the action buttons. For example, clicking a menu then coming back to where you were involves: rolling your hand upward until the heel of your hand is on the trackball and your fingers are out of position to click; lifting your hand; moving it back to where you can click with your fingertips; rolling your hand downward until your fingertips are now on the ball and out of clicking position; lifting it; moving your hand back. Compare with the thumb-activated models: move your thumb then click.
I'm sure you could acclimate to that, but I'm comfortable enough with my thumb model that I wouldn't particularly want to learn.
Microsoft isn't all bad. They make some fine peripherals.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, we're beyond off-topic now, but here goes.
What's the point of writing "G-d" for "God"? You clearly mean "God", and at some point that becomes such a common substitution that it's effectively equal to writing "God" in the first place. If it's a sin in your religion, to engrave his name or something like that, don't you think he'd be just as pissed that you invented an alternate spelling as a loophole?
You're looking at this backward. Girls are told they're supposed to aspire to beauty above all else. The idea here is to show them that you can have that without giving up intelligence.
A single voice isn't going to tell girls that they shouldn't want to be pretty. One well-spoken voice might convince a few that they can be pretty and smart.
OK, I'm dying to know: what sport at your high school is so unspeakably vulgar that you have to censor the name?
And are any videos online?
One: it will get rid of Vista in the sense that Vista isn't ported to it.
Two: you'd reboot these things once every many months. Who cares if it takes half an hour each time?
Watch an early Hollywood comedy sometime. There's usually a scene where the star is standing in line for something while the woman in front of him is busy yakking with a friend. The star watches in amusement or horror as the woman's rugrat pours ink in a show, or eats a houseplant, or drinks glue. Moral: poor parenting isn't a new invention.
I don't claim to speak for a generation, but you pretty much pegged my parenting style and that of my friends (partially because we don't hang out with people that let their kids degenerate into brats). I want my kids to enjoy themselves and feel free to explore, sure, but at least as important to me is that they learn how to function in society. That doesn't mean turning them into little robots. It does mean, though, teaching them to respect the people around them and generally to act in such a way that adults don't mind having them around.
It'd be nice if my kids like me. If they don't like me because I swatted their butt for pulling cereal off the shelf at a grocery store, well, I can live with that.
Not if those ports haven't been forwarded. That's the "accidental" part. If you don't have a mapping to internalsite.example.com:80, then external visitors can't get to it. That's basically the same functionality as a default-drop firewall, except that it's a happy side effect and not really by design (that's the "coincidental" part).
We're both saying the same thing, so I'm going to drop this now.
As long as we're snipping the important parts to alter the message. :-)
It's the same as the "right" implementation for IPv4: you drop everything inbound by default, then selectively expose the sockets that actually need external exposure. Anything else is an accident waiting to happen.
At this point, the only obvious solution to me is to implement NAT for ipv6, and have it on by default.You misspelled "a firewall". If you had an IPv4 NAT that treated every host inside like it was in the DMZ, would that meet your security requirements? Of course not! It does nothing in and of itself. NAT is only coincidentally secure in that it accidentally provides some of the same protection as a "default drop" firewall.
Do you, umm, have a list of who's in which set? (stares at feet)
For the record, you know you can run software from either environment on the other, right? Switch to KDE and use your favorite Gnome DVD player, or stay where you are and start using Kaffeine. You'll miss a little bit of integration slickness by mixing and matching, but they'll still run well.
I don't know - I thought it was pretty unixy. After all, it had one basic job description: asking one backend to fetch some information from various and sundry sources, then asking another to render it appropriately. It wrapped a whole lot of functionality, but Konqueror itself didn't do much more than pass data from one KPart to another and provide bookmarks.
On the plus side, no matter what you'd be willing to do, you can't get more than 25 years...
I sure do. Apple screwed up an implementation and therefore no one else will ever be able to get it right.
Similarly, Nimda, Blaster, and SQLSlammer permanently ended the use of webservers, operating systems, and databases.
If it did, we wouldn't have IPv6. If you really work for a bank, you should be able to appreciate having IPSEC built right in as a mandatory part of the protocol. No more futzing around with various VPN hacks - just say "use this key for all traffic to this netblock" and enjoy.
The numbers can be kept in your head. Subnet math is easy.If you have 1,000 hosts, it's a safe bet that you don't remember each's IPv4 address either. That's the whole point of DNS. And is "128-48" really that much harder to calculate than "32-19"? A subnet's a subnet, and 2**(max-prefixlen) will get you a netblock's size regardless of which protocol you're using.
Well, one thing that this might do is give router manufacturers a kick in the pants to make IPv6 work well. Come 2009, any router that isn't IPv6-capable is officially obsolete according to the IETF. I don't think manufacturers will want their hardware written off before it even hits the shelves. Maybe it will turn out to be a checklist feature that no one actually uses, but I don't expect that to happen.
Dan's just a contrarian ass; always has been, always will be. For example, here's why he doesn't like IPv6:
In other words, "how can I run IPv6 without lifting a finger?" (or "how can I run IPv6 DNS without modifying my precious djbdns so that it supports AAAA records like every other server in the world?", despite what he says in #2). He goes on to explain why his dumb question isn't really dumb, even though it's still dumb.
Sure, you bring up some valid points. Don't make the mistake of bringing in DJB's opinions for support, though. Once he's decided that he doesn't like something, a team of wild horses can't make him change his mind.
No it doesn't, and no it won't. Right now, only the relatively rich can afford more than a handful of public addresses, so only they can afford to host the services they want (where "services" includes things like "being able to sync your smartphone's calendar with the office Exchange server", not just customer-centric applications). Also, it's all but impossible to do things like direct peer-to-peer VOIP between two random hosts behind NATted routers; you have to have a broker somewhere in the middle to know how to get to each end and to negotiate the connections.
This isn't going to get better. The NAT hack was able to keep things limping along for a few extra years, but we're living on borrowed time. You will be migrating off IPV6, and likely sooner rather than later. The only question is how you want to meet it: will you embrace the new system, or will you have to be dragged kicking and screaming?
Well, hypothetically, IPv6 netblocks should become cheaper than their scarce IPv4 counterparts. Coupled with vastly simplified client requirements (such as not having to figure out how to connect two machines that are behind NATs), an IPv6 network could be quite a bit cheaper than an IPv4-only setup.
If everyone ignores the plan, then nothing happens. Anyone who does along with it, though, will have a competitive advantage. I think the idea of all your competition benefitting while you're not is enough to get many companies onto the bandwagon.
What are you talking about? IPv6 servers are worthless without IPv6 clients to connect to them. The implication is that you should start bringing IPv6 services online now so that when the clients are inevitably updated they'll have something to talk to.
Chances are that most software you use is already v6-capable. Pretty much all web browsers are, as is every mail and chat client I use. I'm starting to see an increasing percentage of inbound email on my server coming from other IPv6 hosts, so it looks like people are starting to make the transition.
The guy wasn't "just" a spammer. He ran an online pharmacy, and his assistant (whose children he tried to have killed) was responsible for procuring Vicodin for him to sell.
He was a fraud, a fugitive, and a would-be killer. He was also apparently willing to sell your teenage daughter real narcotics, and did so often enough that the gov't sold 1.6 million dollars worth of his cars at auction. Sorry, I can't drum up a lot of sympathy for him.
The one saving grace of those systems was that storage was so expensive back then that the list of page/line/word triplets was small enough to fit on a notecard. Every time you'd type in a word, you'd write it and its location down. After about 20 entries, voila! You could pack the manual away and get on with things.
Or upload it as a text file so everyone else on the BBS could use it too. (Not that I ever did that, honest, mom!)
According to one source, the average PC hard drive at the end of 1998 was 5.6GB. Low-MHz Pentium IIs had just been introduced. Few people had the storage capacity or processing power to crack a format that only lasted for about 6 months anyway.
The new Core Duos pull more current than you'd expect.
I use a Microsoft Trackball Optical on my Linux and OS X machines and absolutely love it. It was a little awkward for the first week or so, but now it's as seamless to me as a mouse ever was. No, my thumb doesn't get tired. Yes, my wrists feel better. They're apparently not everybody's cup of tea, but I absolutely love them.
A huge drawback to the palm-operated trackball the submitter seemed to be wanting is that you're always moving your fingers away from the action buttons. For example, clicking a menu then coming back to where you were involves: rolling your hand upward until the heel of your hand is on the trackball and your fingers are out of position to click; lifting your hand; moving it back to where you can click with your fingertips; rolling your hand downward until your fingertips are now on the ball and out of clicking position; lifting it; moving your hand back. Compare with the thumb-activated models: move your thumb then click.
I'm sure you could acclimate to that, but I'm comfortable enough with my thumb model that I wouldn't particularly want to learn.
Microsoft isn't all bad. They make some fine peripherals.