It turns out that NAT46 (IPv4 client talking to IPv6 host) and NAT64 (IPv6 client talking to IPv4 host) are quite different beasts. The reason has mostly to do with DNS. For NAT46, the NAT has to intercept the DNS queries and try to perform some industrial gauge magic.
Basically, it doesn't work.
The RFC that originally described NAT46 is now deprecated, once it was shown that it doesn't work.
NAT46 doesn't work and thus doesn't exist.
The only sane use for LSN is to assist the transition to IPv6, understanding that as a transition mechanism it is not perfect.
XP doesn't support IPSEC on IPV6 either, which I believe is mandatory for a 'real' IPV6 implementation?
Then again, its IPSEC support on IPV4 is pretty awful anyway.
Correct, IPSEC support is mandatory, even (as I understand it) if the 'support' consists of declining all crypto offers. I'm not aware if XP conforms to the letter of the requirement or not here. Nor do I know if Vista/Seven conforms.
Newtonian. I could have done the relativistic calculation, but really, there is no point. Both Newton and Einstein return the result 'infeasibly large amounts of energy'.
In other words, unless we can fundamentally change some assumptions ("Let us assume a 1 pico-gram astronaut...") we are not making the trip in 'only' two decades.
Assuming the vessel had the mass of the space shuttle, at 1g the energy required to do that would be approximately 2,304,558,096 times the Nagasaki A-bomb.
m = 104,328kg
a = g = 9.80665ms^-2
20ly = 1.89E+17m
Nagasaki A-bomb = 80TJ.
I have plenty of respect for the guy's technical prowess. He was definitely also in the right place at the right time but also undoubtedly technically brilliant. And yet he runs his career like a schoolboy. You just don't go around openly rubbishing former employers like that as it makes prospective employers wary. After all you'll probably rubbish them when you're done too. I wonder how many opportunities he's missed acting that way.
Yes, the EP must approve (almost) all international treaties that the commission negotiates, the ACTA treaty is among these.
Now, the EP have several options if they really want to force their will through. These include:
1. A vote of no confidence, which would get the commission sacked.
2. Try the old methods of Tiberius Gracchus and veto everything that comes out as a proposal from the commission or the council.
Perhaps the grades could be "Excellent", "Awesome", "Doing Really Very Well" and "Not Left Behind", so as to comply with government standards for education.
I think you mean't "Disruptive", "Over-acheved", "Achieved"and "Not yet achieved".
I have had no contact with [record company] in 10 years. Nor do I wish to have any, unless I'm accompanied by at least two lawyers, an accountant and a behavioural psychologist.
I seem to recall such a thing in my youth, but now, there is nothing worth listening to.
That's the real problem---finding new music. The last radio station I enjoyed was run by a record producer who did it for love and as a vehicle for his ego. Sometimes you'd listen and all there was would be a drunken rant, in which case---come back tomorrow. The rest of the time was a vast amount of amazingly diverse material, old and new. Most of which was OK, some of which I hated, and some of which I loved. I discovered several new bands, and old bands that were new to me. Most importantly, the music was never bland, and the guy (and his helpers) vibrated with passion.
Then he died.
They sold the station and the frequency went to a boring hard-rock-and-nothing-but-hard-rock-we-are-so-hardcore-and-cool-and-like-dude terminally boring. Bletch.
Radio nowadays is run by droids who aim to maximize the monetization of the target demographic for the benefit of the shareholders through targeted focus groups in order to minimize risk, leveraging economies of scale to squeeze out costs...
Go and listen to a live band, radio is dead. Requiescant in pace.
Being a musician is something you do because you can't imagine doing anything else.
If you are very good, and somewhat lucky, you might make enough to scrape a subsistence living. A very, very few will make enough to live 'comfortably' (or what would be comfortable if they weren't always on the road). But your chances are probably better of being struck by lightning. A statistically insignificant number will become rich and famous. Of those, most will probably be ravaged by drugs and crippling emotional problems.
Add to this an industry that for some reason seems to attract some of the worst specimens of humanity this side of a war crimes trial and you seriously wonder why there isn't a Surgeon General's warning on every musical instrument. (I'm not necessarily referring to the musicians here by the way, but to the rest of the industry, and these people may only be a leaven, but nevertheless they seem to be disproportionally represented).
A musician I know of retired from his band and took up commercial fishing. He describes being at sea in a storm, hauling in nets; bitterly cold; hands cut to pieces; in significant danger; and being violently seasick. At which point he decided the music business might not be so bad after all.
Really, musicians do it because they are driven to it---and the world is a far better face because of it. They do it because they love it.
Hmm. I appear to have been misinformed. My recollection stems from a long time ago (it was something I read---on paper!) Looking at some current on-line sources for Joyce contradicts my exact assertion.
However, http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/dickens/pva/pva74.html describes earlier shenanigans, including the hoops that trans Atlantic authors had to jump to in order to protect copyright. There is also the statement there that the US laws were in place to protect the printing industry.
In the past, when the US did not conform to the Berne Convention, it was US law that in order to be copyrighted in the US, a work had to be published in the US within 1 year of being published elsewhere. As a net importer of content at the time this obviously benefitted the US. It meant that publishers could print works in the US without paying anything to the author as long as they hadn't published in the US. It was basically protectionism for the US printing industry. It also led to the farcical situation that piratical publishers were selling unauthorized copies of 'Ulysses' that James Joyce could do nothing to prevent because all attempts by him to import and publish the work in the US were stymied by the US Customs, which seized all copies at the border on the grounds of obscenity. (He did eventually manage to get copies into the US and shut down the unauthorized copies).
So, your position has merit, but I suspect that the rest of the world would react by instantly removing copyright from all US produced works.:)
There is is another right, that many people people confuse with ownership. That is the right of attribution---the right to be identified as the author of the work. That is some of what the 'Moral Right' in the Berne Convention addresses. Note that it is not however a property right. You can't sell it. You can't change history, so you can't sell the right to have produced the work.
When you publish the work, it becomes part of the world.
If you consider pre-printing: a wandering minstrel might perform a piece they had written. If the audience liked it, they paid for the performance. Anyone could take the piece and perform it themselves---being paid for their performance. They might modify it and improve it. But, to claim they wrote it originally would be plagiarism. Post-printing though, it became possible to copy the words, and the words themselves acquired a value beyond the paper they were written upon.
Since the power then resided with the printer, rather than the author, copyright was instituted as a way to change the balance. However, in granting copyright to the author, the right to modify and improve was removed from the listener. Since all arts and literature must build on what has gone before, copyright must therefor be limited---a balance. Copyright is in fact theft---theft of the rights of the recipient, rights upon which all progress in arts and science ultimately depends; theft justified only if the overall value to society outweighs the harm done.
Slashdot Mirror
Basically, it doesn't work.
The RFC that originally described NAT46 is now deprecated, once it was shown that it doesn't work.
NAT46 doesn't work and thus doesn't exist.
The only sane use for LSN is to assist the transition to IPv6, understanding that as a transition mechanism it is not perfect.
XP doesn't support IPSEC on IPV6 either, which I believe is mandatory for a 'real' IPV6 implementation?
Then again, its IPSEC support on IPV4 is pretty awful anyway.
Correct, IPSEC support is mandatory, even (as I understand it) if the 'support' consists of declining all crypto offers. I'm not aware if XP conforms to the letter of the requirement or not here. Nor do I know if Vista/Seven conforms.
Win/XP has fine IPv6 support except that it can only query DNS over IPv4 transport. That is, you can't run a pure IPv6 + Windows XP environment.
"Good artists copy, great artists steal"
In other words, unless we can fundamentally change some assumptions ("Let us assume a 1 pico-gram astronaut...") we are not making the trip in 'only' two decades.
E = m * a * d
If we use 104,328kg for the mass, then that's 1.94E+23J at 1g acceleration for 20ly.
E = mc^2
m = 1.94E+23/(c*c), halved if you pick up your matter in the form of space dust on the way.
m = 104,328kg
a = g = 9.80665ms^-2
20ly = 1.89E+17m
Nagasaki A-bomb = 80TJ.
I have plenty of respect for the guy's technical prowess. He was definitely also in the right place at the right time but also undoubtedly technically brilliant. And yet he runs his career like a schoolboy. You just don't go around openly rubbishing former employers like that as it makes prospective employers wary. After all you'll probably rubbish them when you're done too. I wonder how many opportunities he's missed acting that way.
Yeah, look what happened to Tony Li. Oh, wait...
your turn...
Yes, the EP must approve (almost) all international treaties that the commission negotiates, the ACTA treaty is among these.
Now, the EP have several options if they really want to force their will through. These include:
1. A vote of no confidence, which would get the commission sacked. 2. Try the old methods of Tiberius Gracchus and veto everything that comes out as a proposal from the commission or the council.
--
"Europaeus sum!"
ACTA Delenda Est!
The current prospect is that you also get to pay for the privilege of having your face stomped.
Perhaps the grades could be "Excellent", "Awesome", "Doing Really Very Well" and "Not Left Behind", so as to comply with government standards for education.
I think you mean't "Disruptive", "Over-acheved", "Achieved"and "Not yet achieved".
See RFC 1925, rule 3.
From faq-04:
I have had no contact with [record company] in 10 years. Nor do I wish to have any, unless I'm accompanied by at least two lawyers, an accountant and a behavioural psychologist.
I seem to recall such a thing in my youth, but now, there is nothing worth listening to.
That's the real problem---finding new music. The last radio station I enjoyed was run by a record producer who did it for love and as a vehicle for his ego. Sometimes you'd listen and all there was would be a drunken rant, in which case---come back tomorrow. The rest of the time was a vast amount of amazingly diverse material, old and new. Most of which was OK, some of which I hated, and some of which I loved. I discovered several new bands, and old bands that were new to me. Most importantly, the music was never bland, and the guy (and his helpers) vibrated with passion.
Then he died.
They sold the station and the frequency went to a boring hard-rock-and-nothing-but-hard-rock-we-are-so-hardcore-and-cool-and-like-dude terminally boring. Bletch.
Radio nowadays is run by droids who aim to maximize the monetization of the target demographic for the benefit of the shareholders through targeted focus groups in order to minimize risk, leveraging economies of scale to squeeze out costs...
Go and listen to a live band, radio is dead. Requiescant in pace.
They've gone down 2km. That's still about half the depth of the 3.9km TauTona mine, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TauTona and far short of the 11km of the Challenger http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Challenger_Deep. Now if there were some caves below the oceanic trenches...
By administrative tasks I meant things like writing reports about your work, as opposed to doing your work.
You can't steal from the public domain. ...
But you can steal 'the public domain'.
The law doth punish man or woman
That steals the goose from off the common,
But lets the greater felon loose
That steals the common from the goose. http://www.wealthandwant.com/docs/Goose_commons.htm
If a tree falls in the forest, but there is no one there to hear it, does someone still owe ASCAP royalties?
(And if Milli Vanilli http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milli_Vanilli fall in the forest, does someone else make a sound?)
If you are very good, and somewhat lucky, you might make enough to scrape a subsistence living. A very, very few will make enough to live 'comfortably' (or what would be comfortable if they weren't always on the road). But your chances are probably better of being struck by lightning. A statistically insignificant number will become rich and famous. Of those, most will probably be ravaged by drugs and crippling emotional problems.
Add to this an industry that for some reason seems to attract some of the worst specimens of humanity this side of a war crimes trial and you seriously wonder why there isn't a Surgeon General's warning on every musical instrument. (I'm not necessarily referring to the musicians here by the way, but to the rest of the industry, and these people may only be a leaven, but nevertheless they seem to be disproportionally represented).
A musician I know of retired from his band and took up commercial fishing. He describes being at sea in a storm, hauling in nets; bitterly cold; hands cut to pieces; in significant danger; and being violently seasick. At which point he decided the music business might not be so bad after all.
Really, musicians do it because they are driven to it---and the world is a far better face because of it. They do it because they love it.
However, http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/dickens/pva/pva74.html describes earlier shenanigans, including the hoops that trans Atlantic authors had to jump to in order to protect copyright. There is also the statement there that the US laws were in place to protect the printing industry.
My apologies.
So, your position has merit, but I suspect that the rest of the world would react by instantly removing copyright from all US produced works. :)
There is is another right, that many people people confuse with ownership. That is the right of attribution---the right to be identified as the author of the work. That is some of what the 'Moral Right' in the Berne Convention addresses. Note that it is not however a property right. You can't sell it. You can't change history, so you can't sell the right to have produced the work.
When you publish the work, it becomes part of the world.
If you consider pre-printing: a wandering minstrel might perform a piece they had written. If the audience liked it, they paid for the performance. Anyone could take the piece and perform it themselves---being paid for their performance. They might modify it and improve it. But, to claim they wrote it originally would be plagiarism. Post-printing though, it became possible to copy the words, and the words themselves acquired a value beyond the paper they were written upon.
Since the power then resided with the printer, rather than the author, copyright was instituted as a way to change the balance. However, in granting copyright to the author, the right to modify and improve was removed from the listener. Since all arts and literature must build on what has gone before, copyright must therefor be limited---a balance. Copyright is in fact theft---theft of the rights of the recipient, rights upon which all progress in arts and science ultimately depends; theft justified only if the overall value to society outweighs the harm done.
Yesterday, upon the stair
I saw a man who wasn't there.
He wasn't there again today.
I think he's from the NSA.