I don't know the percentages, but if you were to transfer power from say Mexico to Canada under this scenario, your energy losses would be huge.
if one was to transfer energy from Mexico to Canada (and only God knows why we would do this), it would be transfered from the Mexican border, to the American border. The American border would then sell it up the chain. In the end, it would be an American Border state, that would sell to Canada...the idea of the power is that it is the same, but in reality, it wouldnt be...
Great idea, but power simply can't be distributed over that great a distance.
oh no? as far as I can tell, Canada (where I live) sells power to the US quite frequently, and vice-versa, depending on the month, and whose reactors are up/down.
the whole power grid allows for this type of 'sharing', but it co$t$ to buy it..... (mainly because you need it, and we got it , economy.)
Remember that guy in Superman IV that was like, solar-powered or something? i thought superman IV was the old good cop/bad cop version...ie - -- good Superman/Bad Superman....
of course, all of the superman movies kinda sucked...so can't actually remember... oh, wait, superman 2 was good...with those 3 bad asses, that looked like the guy off the fleetwood mac cover..
interesting points.... i hadn't seen this perpective---(leave it to slashdot for a bit of enlightenment) it will be nice to see how this all unfolds..... now, back to the greater truth---pingpong (which rocks by the way)
no, but the whole principle of a free market economy means that they WILL be buying products with the money they earn. These purchases will, in turn, keep the market rolling. This is simple, yet fundamental principle of economics in general.
so, what this means is this: If half of the population is unemployed, what the hell are the rich producing that someone will purchase? NOTHING. Cause NO ONE is buying!! When no one buys anything, how does the rich man make money? He CANNOT.
Simple.
We have to stop thinking of this as a Rich/Poor thing, and think of how the economy works like Nature -- its bloody cyclical, in that one thing always depends on another...if that harmony is disrupted, you have catastrophy.
then it wont matter who has money, and who doesn't.
this is kinda silly. who takes trips to see geeky shit???
not i, for one.... especially if you are coming to Canada. Don't miss what we have here: - - NATURE -- MOUNTAINS -- FORESTS -- HUGE LAKES -- COTTAGE COUNTRY --BEER --BEER --BEER -- BEER....
er, go to the Ontario Science Centre. you'll like it.
i know that this is partly an attempt for humour..however, there are valid reasons why we 'shouldn't' rocket our garbage to some unknown solar system....
a - we'd be exporting our problem, and turning space into our wasteland (if the garbage didnt make it to a star for burning), much like we have done to our water systems for centuries...
b - (more importantly) we'd be exporting minerals/energy/work etc. etc. from our planet. One thing that remains a constant here on earth, is the matter. as part of grade 10 science, we all know that matter can be neither destroyed, nor created. what we have is what we have. soooo, if we start sending our garbage 'off-site', technically we'd be losing 'matter'. this 'could' have serious side affects in the future (much like the side-affects of putting garbage into the ground and covering it with dirt).
im sure there are other reasons...but i have to eat my lunch. (read:no more that i can think of).
however, i see some confusion in your user base --- on one hand, we see your mother trying to upload anything (which im sure it will be hard, NO MATTER what protocol you use, and im not being personal) and on the other hand, we talk about port forwarding to internal servers.
for the most part, and i'd be a bit slim on this number, but 80-90 percent of people who buy dsl/routers, with the built in firewall, simply have all of the ports closed. They arent trying, and usually dont have a server to port forward to...let alone their Desktop... however, if they needed to, the setup of the router is identical to iptables setup. you tell the interface what port you need opened, and to where...its quite simple really. ----and who port forwards filesharing?
agreed that NAT isnt extremely elegant...but, there really should only be a single point of reference for smaller networks...in fact, even in large networks, with routed IPs, they too only have a single or few points of reference to the internet....these are the basis for security...
as for SSHD, it is rather easy to recall 5 machines (from the other post) -- just put them in order....port 1001, 1002,1003,1004,1005. whats so hard about '-p 1001'? its only an extra 6 strokes...and if you create a little script, called 'firewall', or a script called 'webserver' and a script called 'mailserver' you dont even need to type or remember anything. its already done....
ofcourse, these _are_ 'work arounds', but isnt that what Linux is?
the answers to these questions, and more, can be found on the internet.
the sshd thing is simple to solve. change the bloody port on each server. do you have to use 22?
fsck ftp. use sftp. and scp.
NAT!=firewall, but NAT + IPTABLES does. so, dont expect to get hacked, unless the hacker is quite good --- and most of them routers/dsl modems, etc, have this built in.
some people need a few more ips for SSL, this I will grant you, because of the nature of the protocol, but...aside from that, you can serve up hundreds of websites on the same IP. those that require IPs for SSL should get them. Not everyone on this planet needs an SSL enabled website, or even an IP, let alone 100.
... make these decisions based on popularity and dependency
i just thought of something....just get a bunch of other packages that depend on your package....and bingo!! you'll be included right away....ofcourse, this is what leads to dependency hell, but, whadda you care? you just want to get your package in a main distro, then get a good job, make lots of money.......
if there was no Isreal, would there be a 'Palestinian Liberation' organization? Better yet, lets say that Isreal is called Laersi, and is continually being populated by the Swej. I can guarantee you that this organization would be hell bent on getting the bloody Sjew out of Laersi.
the points about the British Mandate are fine, but not of particular interest to us, right now. More interesting would be looking into Bin Laden/Al QUeada. If they didn't have to worry about disrupting the West, theoretically because they didn't exist (in our fake world that i have just created for our conversation), they may be spending more time and effort on ruling the countries that they occupy. this they have already done, and certainly could do. History has shown us that it is perfectly okay to takeover a nation and rule it....much like the Manchus in China....
what this has to do with the US is simple. If the US didnt interfere(read:foregin policy) they wouldn't have to contend with Al Queada, because they would be too busy conquering their own...
since the US has poked their nose into Middle Eastern affairs, the rules of the game have changed.
if you have a problem your webservers, you examine the situation, and provide an analytical solution to your problem.
if you have a problem with inner-city slums, etc... the proper way to approach it is not to simply ignore the problem, dump money on the problem, etc... the approach is the same, analytical. find out where the bottle-neck is, and pump up the bandwidth to that area.
the same goes for extremists. do you honestly believe that Al-Quaeda would even exist if the American foreign policy was different? Not bloody likely....More often than not, they would be a small band of activists, with little support.
fixing the foreign policy from 'slash and burn' to democratic exploitation, would probably be a step in the right direction.
just like the Romans, who had their opposition; If the Romans did not expand, their opposition would have been minimized. THis is one example of repeated history. Take a look at history, then talk about extremists, and why they act the way they do.
killed by some inner city negroes and don't want to die from from some extremist groups.
imagine that...the risk one takes to be alive.
gimme a break pal. (unless this is a joke) if you don't want to get killed, do something about it, ie - fix the problems with the 'inner city negroes' so that they don't kill you... - fix your foreign policy so that extremist groups have NO reason to be extreme. game, set, match.
No person out in the real world could be this naive. bin Laden trained somewhere between 70 and 100 thousand terrorists. It would be stupid in the extreme to believe that none of those guys (and girls?) are right here in the US.
either this guy works for the Bush Administration, or has been severly brainwashed... they are infiltrating powerplants as much as there are Weapons of Mass destruction in Iraq. SOrry to say, but the Department of Defense has the American public wrapped around its Fear Finger.
moderators, mod parent properly. this is 'Funny' or 'insightful', not 'troll'. You may not like what has been said, but it has a volume of truth to it.
se which is not representative for the general web.
as at has already been stated, many websites already block Google from its content. In fact, it is quite easy to do. So, does this mean that we already don't see a general representation of the web?
it is a simple 'deny' the googlebots from crawling the site. its easy to do, and everyone's doing it.
anything that can be done, however remotely possible, will eventually be done.
funny you should mention this, because the other day, i scratched my balls. not just any ball scratch, one that sent some electrostatic energy to my keyboard. In THAT instant, my phone rang, my DSL went down, my cable went up, my speakers went dead, my other hand touch the chassis of my new dell, --- and up in smoke it went- not to mention frying my pubes.
they better get a recall in on those bloody things.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know the percentages, but if you were to transfer power from say Mexico to Canada under this scenario, your energy losses would be huge.
if one was to transfer energy from Mexico to Canada (and only God knows why we would do this), it would be transfered from the Mexican border, to the American border. The American border would then sell it up the chain. In the end, it would be an American Border state, that would sell to Canada...the idea of the power is that it is the same, but in reality, it wouldnt be...
this way, losses would be minimal...
Great idea, but power simply can't be distributed over that great a distance.
oh no? as far as I can tell, Canada (where I live) sells power to the US quite frequently, and vice-versa, depending on the month, and whose reactors are up/down.
the whole power grid allows for this type of 'sharing', but it co$t$ to buy it.....
(mainly because you need it, and we got it , economy.)
Remember that guy in Superman IV that was like, solar-powered or something?
i thought superman IV was the old good cop/bad cop version...ie - -- good Superman/Bad Superman....
of course, all of the superman movies kinda sucked...so can't actually remember...
oh, wait, superman 2 was good...with those 3 bad asses, that looked like the guy off the fleetwood mac cover..
interesting points....
i hadn't seen this perpective---(leave it to slashdot for a bit of enlightenment)
it will be nice to see how this all unfolds.....
now, back to the greater truth---pingpong
(which rocks by the way)
Do people go around buying workers?
no, but the whole principle of a free market economy means that they WILL be buying products with the money they earn. These purchases will, in turn, keep the market rolling. This is simple, yet fundamental principle of economics in general.
so, what this means is this: If half of the population is unemployed, what the hell are the rich producing that someone will purchase? NOTHING. Cause NO ONE is buying!!
When no one buys anything, how does the rich man make money? He CANNOT.
Simple.
We have to stop thinking of this as a Rich/Poor thing, and think of how the economy works like Nature -- its bloody cyclical, in that one thing always depends on another...if that harmony is disrupted, you have catastrophy.
then it wont matter who has money, and who doesn't.
arrrrrgggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhh
another SCO story!!!!!!!!!!
BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM
(poster, in a fit of rage, blasts bystanders)
now...find that Daryl guy.....
its quite amazing how we have coped for many hundreds of years, yet, in the next 20, we'll go belly-up.
come on people - -the market regulates everything...how do people buy machines if there is NO INCOME?
do machines buy machines?
not bloody likely.
this is kinda silly. who takes trips to see geeky shit???
not i, for one....
especially if you are coming to Canada. Don't miss what we have here: - - NATURE -- MOUNTAINS -- FORESTS -- HUGE LAKES -- COTTAGE COUNTRY --BEER --BEER --BEER -- BEER....
er,
go to the Ontario Science Centre. you'll like it.
i know that this is partly an attempt for humour..however, there are valid reasons why we 'shouldn't' rocket our garbage to some unknown solar system....
a - we'd be exporting our problem, and turning space into our wasteland (if the garbage didnt make it to a star for burning), much like we have done to our water systems for centuries...
b - (more importantly) we'd be exporting minerals/energy/work etc. etc. from our planet. One thing that remains a constant here on earth, is the matter. as part of grade 10 science, we all know that matter can be neither destroyed, nor created. what we have is what we have. soooo, if we start sending our garbage 'off-site', technically we'd be losing 'matter'. this 'could' have serious side affects in the future (much like the side-affects of putting garbage into the ground and covering it with dirt).
im sure there are other reasons...but i have to eat my lunch. (read:no more that i can think of).
the AC post made me laugh...
i guess he wasnt following the thread.
anywho...my point is this: NAT should be used in conjunction with a firewall. it just makes sense...
we'll agree to disagree
and on a lighter note --- WinSCP2.2 is available and is a really easy to use app for windows...
might make your life easier with mom.
cheers!
you make some very valid points.
however, i see some confusion in your user base ---
on one hand, we see your mother trying to upload anything (which im sure it will be hard, NO MATTER what protocol you use, and im not being personal) and on the other hand, we talk about port forwarding to internal servers.
for the most part, and i'd be a bit slim on this number, but 80-90 percent of people who buy dsl/routers, with the built in firewall, simply have all of the ports closed. They arent trying, and usually dont have a server to port forward to...let alone their Desktop...
however, if they needed to, the setup of the router is identical to iptables setup. you tell the interface what port you need opened, and to where...its quite simple really.
----and who port forwards filesharing?
agreed that NAT isnt extremely elegant...but, there really should only be a single point of reference for smaller networks...in fact, even in large networks, with routed IPs, they too only have a single or few points of reference to the internet....these are the basis for security...
as for SSHD, it is rather easy to recall 5 machines (from the other post) -- just put them in order....port 1001, 1002,1003,1004,1005. whats so hard about '-p 1001'? its only an extra 6 strokes...and if you create a little script, called 'firewall', or a script called 'webserver' and a script called 'mailserver' you dont even need to type or remember anything. its already done....
ofcourse, these _are_ 'work arounds', but isnt that what Linux is?
dude
the answers to these questions, and more, can be found on the internet.
the sshd thing is simple to solve. change the bloody port on each server. do you have to use 22?
fsck ftp. use sftp. and scp.
NAT!=firewall, but NAT + IPTABLES does.
so, dont expect to get hacked, unless the hacker is quite good --- and most of them routers/dsl modems, etc, have this built in.
some people need a few more ips for SSL, this I will grant you, because of the nature of the protocol, but...aside from that, you can serve up hundreds of websites on the same IP. those that require IPs for SSL should get them. Not everyone on this planet needs an SSL enabled website, or even an IP, let alone 100.
... make these decisions based on popularity and dependency
i just thought of something....just get a bunch of other packages that depend on your package....and bingo!! you'll be included right away....ofcourse, this is what leads to dependency hell, but, whadda you care? you just want to get your package in a main distro, then get a good job, make lots of money.......
your all gay
i think you mean - "you're all gay"
not "all your corel are..."
I don't know about you, but I don't have the time or patience to read crap. And I'm pretty sure that was my whole point, if you read my pos
;)
and yet, you manage to find time to read SLashdot......
is it april fools day?
oh wait, its july....i guess its just fools day...
microsoft and security - -- the oxymoron of the millenia...
you make valid points, however,
if there was no Isreal, would there be a 'Palestinian Liberation' organization? Better yet, lets say that Isreal is called Laersi, and is continually being populated by the Swej. I can guarantee you that this organization would be hell bent on getting the bloody Sjew out of Laersi.
the points about the British Mandate are fine, but not of particular interest to us, right now. More interesting would be looking into Bin Laden/Al QUeada. If they didn't have to worry about disrupting the West, theoretically because they didn't exist (in our fake world that i have just created for our conversation), they may be spending more time and effort on ruling the countries that they occupy. this they have already done, and certainly could do. History has shown us that it is perfectly okay to takeover a nation and rule it....much like the Manchus in China....
what this has to do with the US is simple. If the US didnt interfere(read:foregin policy) they wouldn't have to contend with Al Queada, because they would be too busy conquering their own...
since the US has poked their nose into Middle Eastern affairs, the rules of the game have changed.
my post was meant more like this:
if you have a problem your webservers, you examine the situation, and provide an analytical solution to your problem.
if you have a problem with inner-city slums, etc... the proper way to approach it is not to simply ignore the problem, dump money on the problem, etc... the approach is the same, analytical. find out where the bottle-neck is, and pump up the bandwidth to that area.
the same goes for extremists. do you honestly believe that Al-Quaeda would even exist if the American foreign policy was different? Not bloody likely....More often than not, they would be a small band of activists, with little support.
fixing the foreign policy from 'slash and burn' to democratic exploitation, would probably be a step in the right direction.
just like the Romans, who had their opposition; If the Romans did not expand, their opposition would have been minimized. THis is one example of repeated history. Take a look at history, then talk about extremists, and why they act the way they do.
killed by some inner city negroes and don't want to die from from some extremist groups.
imagine that...the risk one takes to be alive.
gimme a break pal. (unless this is a joke) if you don't want to get killed, do something about it, ie - fix the problems with the 'inner city negroes' so that they don't kill you...
- fix your foreign policy so that extremist groups have NO reason to be extreme.
game, set, match.
No person out in the real world could be this naive. bin Laden trained somewhere between 70 and 100 thousand terrorists. It would be stupid in the extreme to believe that none of those guys (and girls?) are right here in the US.
either this guy works for the Bush Administration, or has been severly brainwashed...
they are infiltrating powerplants as much as there are Weapons of Mass destruction in Iraq. SOrry to say, but the Department of Defense has the American public wrapped around its Fear Finger.
moderators, mod parent properly. this is 'Funny' or 'insightful', not 'troll'. You may not like what has been said, but it has a volume of truth to it.
will they finally be including IPSEC directly into the kernel??
se which is not representative for the general web.
as at has already been stated, many websites already block Google from its content. In fact, it is quite easy to do. So, does this mean that we already don't see a general representation of the web?
it is a simple 'deny' the googlebots from crawling the site. its easy to do, and everyone's doing it.
In Soviet Russia, kids have you!
anything that can be done, however remotely possible, will eventually be done.
funny you should mention this, because the other day, i scratched my balls.
not just any ball scratch, one that sent some electrostatic energy to my keyboard. In THAT instant, my phone rang, my DSL went down, my cable went up, my speakers went dead, my other hand touch the chassis of my new dell, ---
and up in smoke it went- not to mention frying my pubes.
they better get a recall in on those bloody things.
(sarcasm tags are hidden from view)