Multiple redundant (and automatic) routes to IRC servers can be set up using D:Lines (available in ircU based ircds) for auto-routing.
It works like this (I think):
A hub server has a set of D:Lines specifying the hub servers (with corresponding C/N/H:Lines) it should attempt to connect to. It goes down this list in order, i.e. it tries the first server, it there is no response, it jumps to the next entry, etc.
Used in conjunction with a latency detecting mechanism, I would think that this could be a good solution for a p2p gaming network. If a hub dropped out, or became really laggy, the leaves could reroute themselves onto different hubs.
No, what it means is that I don't work for a dot-bomb. My (current) job expects me to work 12 hour days. Being a contractor, I don't qualify for company-sponsored training, until I've accumulated 1000 hours overtime (which is how they'll pay for the training, I guess.) And even then, I won't be able to take the test on the client's time. I'll have to take it on one of my days off, when I'm usually sleeping.
I'm not afraid, I know full well that I could go out and pass an MCSE, a CNE, and an A+ right now. I just don't have the time, money, or a big dick complex, like you seem to have.
It's pretty easy to speak on it when I've seen dozens of uncertified freaks out perform certified freaks. Really says something about the test, don't you think?
And yes, I have the right to complain when I've had MCSEs waste my valuable time, because they don't know the first damned thing about a C:\> prompt.
I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with getting certified... but it's not the be all, end all, of computer knowledge. The cert can only give you the basics (if that.) After that, you need to go out and improve those skills.
Read my reply earlier in this thread. These tests are nothing more than the same thing you did in high school and college: cram for the test then forget anything. This doesn't mean that people who have them don't know anything, but it doesn't mean they necessarily mean they know anything either.
In the end, all it really means is that you had the time and money to go out and get certified, while I was doing my job, learning the real thing hands on, and paying my bills.
Watch it, I've met too many of you MS certified freaks that don't know what the hell you're doing to buy the "You're just too scared to take the test" bit.
Perfect example. When I got out of high school, I got a job working for the department of defense the good old fasioned way (I knew someone on the inside.) No certification, just 6 years of home experience under my belt. A month later, they hired an MCSE. Guess who ended up training who, who's beeper was going off all the time to help the other, and who screwed up less.
I'll give you a hint: It wasn't the MCSE. And this was in a strictly MS shop (we had finished migrating from Netware 3/4 shortly before this guy came on.)
Now, I don't see anything wrong with getting certified. In fact, one day when I have the motivation, time, and money, I will go out and get an MCSE, a CNE/CNA, an A+, a CCNP/CCNA, and now this Linux+ cert. But not having those pieces of paper doesn't mean I don't know what I'm doing (with the exception of the CCNE/CCNA... I don't know the first thing about setting up a router.:p)
Well, I have Comcast@Home cable service, and I have had absolutely zero problems using Linux on it. You just have to configure the system to use DHCP (and that's not hard.:))
In fact, the one time I had to have a technician to the house to fix a hardware problem (the equipment on the pole was *ancient*) he took one look at my machine and asked "Which distro?"
From http://www.usps.gov/history/his3.htm#REORG (a government site):
"In May 1969, four months after he became a member of President
Richard Nixon's Cabinet, Postmaster General Winton M. Blount proposed a
basic reorganization of the Post Office Department. The President asked
Congress to pass the Postal Service Act of 1969, calling for removal of
the Postmaster General from the Cabinet and creation of a
self-supporting postal corporation wholly owned by the federal
government."
So while you are correct in saying that the USPS isn't a gov't institution (anymore,) it IS owned by the U.S. gov't, hence, completely under the gov't's control (to my thinking.)
And reflecting on that, maybe that would be the best way to go with a gov't funded ISP. Set it up as a corporation that is wholly owned by the gov't, as opposed to making it a part of the gov't.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
And I'd say that freedom of any and all religions is an essential liberty, seeing as it's part of the First Amendment, and all.
So you're saying that because we have the U.S. mail, we live in a socialist system?
I like what the poster above you said. Have the gov't provide a baseline service (U.S. Mail/U.S. Broadband.) Then if you want your packages/packets to get around a little faster, or you want slightly higher quality, you go with a private provider (UPS/@Home.)
The gov't already DOES compete in some areas, and you don't see the other competitors dying off. Last time I checked, UPS and FedEx are doing fine.
The one thing that would worry me is that since the gov't owns the infrastructure, they would more than likely have the right to filter it as they see fit. I'd want to see legislation passed saying that filtering was the responsibility of the end-user only, before a public network went up.
You have a Blessed day also, and God Bless America.
You know, I recently had a bad experience with a girl. Being very musically oriented, I associated quite a bit of music with this girl (even went so far as to compile two CDs worth of music that made me think about her for her birthday.)
I don't talk to her very much now, and hearing some of that same music is, to me, now unbearable. In particular, the local station here plays "Drops of Jupiter" by Train, which I associate with her, a lot. You know what I do? I don't demand that the station stop playing the song, I just turn the volume on my radio down until the song is over.
Now, I have no problem with being sensitive to the people who've been vicitmized by this tragedy, but I don't think any of them are really worrying about what's being played on the radio right now. And they surely haven't lost their ability to turn their volume down.
Also, who told these guys at ClearChannel what songs would offend the victims of 9/11/01? "Imagine"? "What A Wonderful World"? "New York, New York"? "Sunday Bloody Sunday"? "Tuesday's Gone"? Hell, I've listened to some of those songs in the past week, along with others on the list that I've failed to mention. None of them have made me overtly think about the tragedy (it's been at the back of my head the entire time.) And some of them were genuinely uplifting.
How about letting the victims decide what they want to hear, instead of telling them "No, we think this song will be bad for you, so we're not going to let you listen to it."? ClearChannel could actually be making it worse for some people who listen to music for a sort of emotional release.
"Rooster" is an account by Jerry Cantrell about his father's experiences during the Korean (?) war... I guess I can understand how someone might find it offensive right now.
This is not to say I agree with it being on a "banned list," and I'm glad that the local rock station here in Philly, WMMR, isn't affiliated with ClearChannel.
That was my original thought, but, I have to agree with the people posting here. Build a New World Trade Center... what could better show that we will *NOT* accept this kind of behavior, that we are strong in every sense of the word, and we will live on, no matter what.
But a memorial in the lobby would definitely be a good thing.
Now now, there's no place for racism here. If you look through my post history, you'll see that I'm baying for blood (and not making any bones about it!) just like everyone else.
But not because the people who did this are Muslim, or Arab, or whatever. It is because they REFUSE to act in a civilized manner. And when you are dealing with barbarians who insist on killing you, to the point of not caring if they die in the attempt or not, the only civilized thing to do is kill them first.
This shouldn't be about racism. It should be about removing a scourge from the world.
I don't care if they think they're going to Allah. They're gone from this world, hence not a problem anymore.
Also, don't use the word "Islamic" to describe these people, even if you tack "Fundamentalist" to it. It's a slander to one of the greatest, most tolerant, and most peaceful religions on the planet.
Pigs like the ones who committed this atrocity do nothing but pervert and slander Islam.
No, the assholes who did this started it. We'd just making sure it doesn't happen again.
Be rational people. It's an ugly world out there, to be sure. Utopian solutions have been proven time and time again not to work. So the only way to stop this is to resort to violence. As distasteful as that is, sometimes it is necessary.
The only way to be *absolutely* sure that this doesn't happen again is to make sure that those who would attempt terrorist actions are too scared (of losing their lives, of their families losing their lives, of failing, whatever) that they won't even try. We *MUST* as a civilized people, eradicate this kind of barbarism, as quickly, and as efficiently, and as PERMANENTLY, as possible.
And before you tell me I'm being overly emotionally, you're right. Anyone who doesn't react emotionally to this is less than human.
To the survivors, and the families of the victims of this hideous tragedy, you have my deepest sympathies and condolensces.
To anyone who knows what it means, it's clear as day.
But I'll explain for the ignorant.
My real name is Christopher Blake. I live in New Jersey. The nick I use online is generally Wraith. I am an IRCop on the asylumnet IRC network, hence the nickname "AsylumWraith" here (since for some reason, I couldn't use Wraith, but I forget why.)
Now, anyone who knows me, would understand the logic there completely. Just like anyone who knows you in real life would be able to identify you almost instantly.
But, since you don't know me, you couldn't have known who I was just based on my nickname. Just like I wouldn't know you by just seeing your face for the first time.
I call it selective anonymity. People who know what my nick means, will know it's me. And people who know your face will know you. But having cameras all over the place changes that. Anyone with access to the cameras will know who you are, and what you're doing.
Oh, btw, I just gave a bunch of my personal info away here. Do you have the guts to do the same thing, no-privacy-for-anyone-advocate?
"b) Restrictions on my privacy but being reasonably assured that paedophiles will be eliminated from the society before they rape children."
Yes, that's nice, you're willing to have your freedom curbed a bit so you don't have to live up to the responsibility of protecting your children. I'M NOT!
It's your job to protect your children, not the gov't's.
"And don't give me that shitty line about "not deserving safety or liberty". It's hundreds of years old and doesn't apply to this day when monsters like Dahmer and an untold number of paedophiles are running around."
Sorry to burst your bubble, but yes, it DOES apply. It will always apply in a Democracy, or in the case of the US, a Republic.
Slashdot Mirror
That's nice, but Gates didn't write it. QDOS was bought from another developer (forget his name) for 50 grand, and renamed MS-DOS.
Least that's the way I always heard it.
Wrong again, it's *my* IP address.
Multiple redundant (and automatic) routes to IRC servers can be set up using D:Lines (available in ircU based ircds) for auto-routing.
It works like this (I think):
A hub server has a set of D:Lines specifying the hub servers (with corresponding C/N/H:Lines) it should attempt to connect to. It goes down this list in order, i.e. it tries the first server, it there is no response, it jumps to the next entry, etc.
Used in conjunction with a latency detecting mechanism, I would think that this could be a good solution for a p2p gaming network. If a hub dropped out, or became really laggy, the leaves could reroute themselves onto different hubs.
Warning, this option is probably not legal...
:p
I had to work the night of the premiere (sp?). So, two days later, I went on Morpheus, and managed to download it, san commercials.
Should still be available. Just hope you have broadband.
No, what it means is that I don't work for a dot-bomb. My (current) job expects me to work 12 hour days. Being a contractor, I don't qualify for company-sponsored training, until I've accumulated 1000 hours overtime (which is how they'll pay for the training, I guess.) And even then, I won't be able to take the test on the client's time. I'll have to take it on one of my days off, when I'm usually sleeping.
I'm not afraid, I know full well that I could go out and pass an MCSE, a CNE, and an A+ right now. I just don't have the time, money, or a big dick complex, like you seem to have.
It's pretty easy to speak on it when I've seen dozens of uncertified freaks out perform certified freaks. Really says something about the test, don't you think?
And yes, I have the right to complain when I've had MCSEs waste my valuable time, because they don't know the first damned thing about a C:\> prompt.
I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with getting certified... but it's not the be all, end all, of computer knowledge. The cert can only give you the basics (if that.) After that, you need to go out and improve those skills.
Read my reply earlier in this thread. These tests are nothing more than the same thing you did in high school and college: cram for the test then forget anything. This doesn't mean that people who have them don't know anything, but it doesn't mean they necessarily mean they know anything either.
In the end, all it really means is that you had the time and money to go out and get certified, while I was doing my job, learning the real thing hands on, and paying my bills.
Get a life. Stop being so defensive.
Watch it, I've met too many of you MS certified freaks that don't know what the hell you're doing to buy the "You're just too scared to take the test" bit.
:p)
Perfect example. When I got out of high school, I got a job working for the department of defense the good old fasioned way (I knew someone on the inside.) No certification, just 6 years of home experience under my belt. A month later, they hired an MCSE. Guess who ended up training who, who's beeper was going off all the time to help the other, and who screwed up less.
I'll give you a hint: It wasn't the MCSE. And this was in a strictly MS shop (we had finished migrating from Netware 3/4 shortly before this guy came on.)
Now, I don't see anything wrong with getting certified. In fact, one day when I have the motivation, time, and money, I will go out and get an MCSE, a CNE/CNA, an A+, a CCNP/CCNA, and now this Linux+ cert. But not having those pieces of paper doesn't mean I don't know what I'm doing (with the exception of the CCNE/CCNA... I don't know the first thing about setting up a router.
Well, I have Comcast@Home cable service, and I have had absolutely zero problems using Linux on it. You just have to configure the system to use DHCP (and that's not hard. :))
In fact, the one time I had to have a technician to the house to fix a hardware problem (the equipment on the pole was *ancient*) he took one look at my machine and asked "Which distro?"
I'd say that they're pretty friendly to Linux.
The one thing that I'm curious about...
Here in (South) Jersey, we have Comcast cable, and they offer @Home. How would that fit into the mix?
While I tend to agree that Apache is more secure than IIS, those statistics don't mean anything to me.
It could be the guys writing virii/worms are too busy writing stuff for MS to write stuff for *nix.
After all, there's a lot more "glory" in exploiting the (unfortunate) industry leader than it is exploiting the underdog.
More than likely, you have 4 chips, each with 2 banks of 128 MB each, so you're shit out of luck. You'll only be able to use three of those chips.
From http://www.usps.gov/history/his3.htm#REORG (a government site):
"In May 1969, four months after he became a member of President
Richard Nixon's Cabinet, Postmaster General Winton M. Blount proposed a
basic reorganization of the Post Office Department. The President asked
Congress to pass the Postal Service Act of 1969, calling for removal of
the Postmaster General from the Cabinet and creation of a
self-supporting postal corporation wholly owned by the federal
government."
So while you are correct in saying that the USPS isn't a gov't institution (anymore,) it IS owned by the U.S. gov't, hence, completely under the gov't's control (to my thinking.)
And reflecting on that, maybe that would be the best way to go with a gov't funded ISP. Set it up as a corporation that is wholly owned by the gov't, as opposed to making it a part of the gov't.
Hey, it worked for the USPS...
I know that I'm feeding the trolls, but...
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
And I'd say that freedom of any and all religions is an essential liberty, seeing as it's part of the First Amendment, and all.
So you're saying that because we have the U.S. mail, we live in a socialist system?
I like what the poster above you said. Have the gov't provide a baseline service (U.S. Mail/U.S. Broadband.) Then if you want your packages/packets to get around a little faster, or you want slightly higher quality, you go with a private provider (UPS/@Home.)
The gov't already DOES compete in some areas, and you don't see the other competitors dying off. Last time I checked, UPS and FedEx are doing fine.
The one thing that would worry me is that since the gov't owns the infrastructure, they would more than likely have the right to filter it as they see fit. I'd want to see legislation passed saying that filtering was the responsibility of the end-user only, before a public network went up.
You have a Blessed day also, and God Bless America.
You know, I recently had a bad experience with a girl. Being very musically oriented, I associated quite a bit of music with this girl (even went so far as to compile two CDs worth of music that made me think about her for her birthday.)
I don't talk to her very much now, and hearing some of that same music is, to me, now unbearable. In particular, the local station here plays "Drops of Jupiter" by Train, which I associate with her, a lot. You know what I do? I don't demand that the station stop playing the song, I just turn the volume on my radio down until the song is over.
Now, I have no problem with being sensitive to the people who've been vicitmized by this tragedy, but I don't think any of them are really worrying about what's being played on the radio right now. And they surely haven't lost their ability to turn their volume down.
Also, who told these guys at ClearChannel what songs would offend the victims of 9/11/01? "Imagine"? "What A Wonderful World"? "New York, New York"? "Sunday Bloody Sunday"? "Tuesday's Gone"? Hell, I've listened to some of those songs in the past week, along with others on the list that I've failed to mention. None of them have made me overtly think about the tragedy (it's been at the back of my head the entire time.) And some of them were genuinely uplifting.
How about letting the victims decide what they want to hear, instead of telling them "No, we think this song will be bad for you, so we're not going to let you listen to it."? ClearChannel could actually be making it worse for some people who listen to music for a sort of emotional release.
"Rooster" is an account by Jerry Cantrell about his father's experiences during the Korean (?) war... I guess I can understand how someone might find it offensive right now.
This is not to say I agree with it being on a "banned list," and I'm glad that the local rock station here in Philly, WMMR, isn't affiliated with ClearChannel.
That was my original thought, but, I have to agree with the people posting here. Build a New World Trade Center... what could better show that we will *NOT* accept this kind of behavior, that we are strong in every sense of the word, and we will live on, no matter what.
But a memorial in the lobby would definitely be a good thing.
Now now, there's no place for racism here. If you look through my post history, you'll see that I'm baying for blood (and not making any bones about it!) just like everyone else.
But not because the people who did this are Muslim, or Arab, or whatever. It is because they REFUSE to act in a civilized manner. And when you are dealing with barbarians who insist on killing you, to the point of not caring if they die in the attempt or not, the only civilized thing to do is kill them first.
This shouldn't be about racism. It should be about removing a scourge from the world.
Really effective. I'm sure Bin Laden being expelled from two countries is really comforting to the families of the victims of today's tragedy.
Bin Laden is a rabid dog who needs to be put down.
I don't care if they think they're going to Allah. They're gone from this world, hence not a problem anymore.
Also, don't use the word "Islamic" to describe these people, even if you tack "Fundamentalist" to it. It's a slander to one of the greatest, most tolerant, and most peaceful religions on the planet.
Pigs like the ones who committed this atrocity do nothing but pervert and slander Islam.
No, the assholes who did this started it. We'd just making sure it doesn't happen again.
Be rational people. It's an ugly world out there, to be sure. Utopian solutions have been proven time and time again not to work. So the only way to stop this is to resort to violence. As distasteful as that is, sometimes it is necessary.
The only way to be *absolutely* sure that this doesn't happen again is to make sure that those who would attempt terrorist actions are too scared (of losing their lives, of their families losing their lives, of failing, whatever) that they won't even try. We *MUST* as a civilized people, eradicate this kind of barbarism, as quickly, and as efficiently, and as PERMANENTLY, as possible.
And before you tell me I'm being overly emotionally, you're right. Anyone who doesn't react emotionally to this is less than human.
To the survivors, and the families of the victims of this hideous tragedy, you have my deepest sympathies and condolensces.
To the vicitms, you will be missed.
To anyone who knows what it means, it's clear as day.
But I'll explain for the ignorant.
My real name is Christopher Blake. I live in New Jersey. The nick I use online is generally Wraith. I am an IRCop on the asylumnet IRC network, hence the nickname "AsylumWraith" here (since for some reason, I couldn't use Wraith, but I forget why.)
Now, anyone who knows me, would understand the logic there completely. Just like anyone who knows you in real life would be able to identify you almost instantly.
But, since you don't know me, you couldn't have known who I was just based on my nickname. Just like I wouldn't know you by just seeing your face for the first time.
I call it selective anonymity. People who know what my nick means, will know it's me. And people who know your face will know you. But having cameras all over the place changes that. Anyone with access to the cameras will know who you are, and what you're doing.
Oh, btw, I just gave a bunch of my personal info away here. Do you have the guts to do the same thing, no-privacy-for-anyone-advocate?
"b) Restrictions on my privacy but being reasonably assured that paedophiles will be eliminated from the society before they rape children."
Yes, that's nice, you're willing to have your freedom curbed a bit so you don't have to live up to the responsibility of protecting your children. I'M NOT!
It's your job to protect your children, not the gov't's.
"And don't give me that shitty line about "not deserving safety or liberty". It's hundreds of years old and doesn't apply to this day when monsters like Dahmer and an untold number of paedophiles are running around."
Sorry to burst your bubble, but yes, it DOES apply. It will always apply in a Democracy, or in the case of the US, a Republic.
Then why are you posting AC? After all, anonymity can only be a bad thing, so why not come out and show us something that identifies you?
Hypocrite.
But even if I'm not going to take that sort of hypocracy into account, you may be willing to accept those concession, the rest of us are not.
And yes, I have my own kids, and take it as MY responsibility to take care of them, not the gov't's.