Muting has been around in NFL2k for years. Nothing new there. Must just be new to FPS games?
What I want is something similar to slashcode's degrees of separation. I want to have a foes list, plus friends of friends and foes of friends. Football suffers massively from idiocy online. From what I've heard, seems like all of the games do.:( If I could maintain a foes list, and see whom my friends have tagged as foes, it would make filtering jerks out much easier.
Gah, taking me too literally. Let me rephrase: it is a ROUTED protocol. ie, it's not bridging the client onto the local subnet. Broadcasts do not cross the network segment.
Of course it isn't IGRP, EIGRP, OSPF, etc etc etc.:P Sheesh. Semantics.
and despite pulling the wool over your eyes, you do NOT have an IP on the system physical subnet.
Got a link on this one? There is no reason you can't give out an IP address from a PPTP server which is on the same subnet as the ethernet card of the PPTP server.
What I mean is that the traffic is *routed* to your actual host IP address. Sure, you can make the second to last hop to you be an IP on the remote subnet. Makes for confusing network troubleshooting, and in fact on Windows PPTP servers this is often the default, giving you the false impression that you are now a host on the local subnet, when in reality it is merely another routing path. Most firewalls up until recently, if they offered you a pptp interface option, would insist that you create the pptp hosts on a completely seperate subnet, making perfectly clear the fact that routing was occurring, and keeping a logical seperation of the two. I do not have a link, sorry. Just personal experience on the matter. To date, the only vpn solution I am aware of that gives you both a layer 3 and layer 2 address on the remote network is OpenVPN using a tap interface, and then bridging that tap interface onto a local network interface, presumably ethernet. I'm realizing that I'm really tired, and crossing layer 2 and layer 3 wires in my brain here, but follow me. There tends to be a presumption that if two hosts have layer 3 addresses on the same subnet, they will also have layer 2 addresses on the same network segment (or darn close to it anyway, there are exceptions). PPTP gives you a screwy illusion that you have a layer 3 address on the remote network, and there would be some mild amount of truth to that, but what screws with this is that you DO NOT have a layer 2 address on that same remote network. That tends to lay out a huge "well duh", but it does mess with typical network logic. I've rambled on too much, it's 3:30 in the morning. I shouldn't even be awake. Bleh. There's a reason I don't use PPTP anymore, and have moved wholesale to OpenVPN. It works far better and follows network convention better.
---
Broadcasts such as NetBIOS and mdns do not cross subnet barriers.
Broadcast? No, ARP? Yes.
I can't argue, to be honest I haven't looked that closely at ARP and PPTP. At first glance, I'd say no, as you aren't getting a PHYSICAL interface on the remote network, and given that ARP is a layer 2 attribute, and not a layer 3, what's the point in keeping a mac address on hand for a physical interface that will never be accessed at layer 2. That's the problem. PPTP does NOT give you a layer 2 interface. It will try to fool you into thinking so, but it doesn't. The mac address you have does NOT get added to the arp tables of the other clients on that network segment. Broadcasts at either layer 3 or layer 2 will not reach from host to remote network or vice-versa.
ARP does work across a PPP link, so you might find that a customer is using ARP for name resolution. That really wouldn't be the brightest move as far as I was concerned, but it's a possibility.
Whaaa...huh? ARP - Address Resolution Protocol, is used as a mechanism to match IP address to Physical address, not as name resolution. One cannot use ARP to resolve names. Sure, the arp command line will be nice and do name resolution with whatever resolution mechanisms are available to it and give you an name/ip matchup, but you can't use arp alone to match a name to an IP. If you don't believe me, rm/etc/resolv.conf, then arp something (presuming you don't have mdns or something else enabled). On Windows, remove any DNS servers from your TCP/IP settings, same impact. Also, PPP != PPTP. They're not on
Gah, taking me too literally. Let me rephrase: it is a ROUTED protocol. ie, it's not bridging the client onto the local subnet. Broadcasts do not cross the network segment.
Of course it isn't IGRP, EIGRP, OSPF, etc etc etc.:P Sheesh. Semantics.
It doesn't work out of the box in Wine, but almost everything works in Crossover Office. Wine comes pretty generic, presuming that you would prefer not to use any Windows cruft at all. Crossover comes default presuming you want things to just work. And work it does.
Worth the money if you must have Windows software IMHO.
Um, not at home. Corporate network. Macs do integrate with AD, however this is a laptop, doing PPTP. AD integration on a mac across PPTP is a bit sketchy. But I think I'm right in the general sense that across PPTP broadcasts do not go. I'm (for once in my life!) not bashing windows here. Just following a protocol. Point is, SMB does not a Network neighborhood fill. WINS wouldn't do it either, as that's just another way to resolve names. You have to know that you want to resolve the name to matter, thus NetBIOS or zeroconf. AD cheating a sneaking a list of available network SMB shares accomplishes the same thing, but makes me wonder how AD knows is joe random machine on the subnet starts sharing out it's mp3 folder? Or only "AD approved" shares get populated?
That might work, except that it was a mac. There's no (easily recognizable) way to set a WINS server on the mac. Plus it was a remote user. Such options need to get pushed when they connect to PPTP.
Hey, drop me an e-mail. I was looking at your website, and want to talk to you about doing business in general. I'm in St. Louis, and have built a data center from the ground up and as a result I'm not getting bandwidth quite as cheaply as you, but I'm building out fiber and as soon as I do that, we'll be in about the same boat. Just wondered if we could chat.
Since I'm creating a "talk-to-myself" thread here. I have a question for the Windows guys out there.
I've been about 2 years now without using Windows regularly, having started my own company that uses Linux, FreeBSD, and OSX instead. Back when I was still working for a Microsoft Solutions Provider, they made a big stink about how the latest versions of Windows didn't require WINS or NetBIOS for name resolution and SMB. Last night my wife had to work late (tax season, accounting firm) and she had a single user with a Mac laptop that needed to do PPTP VPN, everyone else was using some proprietary "VPN through Internet Explorer" solution. Was easy enough to set up, but she was concerned about the user not being able to "browse" to the nas, which of course was SMB. Mac's "Network Neighborhood" as it were, doesn't populate with all of the networks shares.
This has been a sore point with me for years, and most Windows admins just don't "get it". Name resolution doesn't get you network neighborhood population. Machines have to broadcast (ie, netbios) that they are available and sharing. On Macs, but default they use zeroconf and multicast dns to accomplish this, ie everyone gets a hostname.local name with IP resolution as their LAN IP address. This doesn't happen in windows. Windows uses NetBIOS to accomplish this.
In either case, PPTP is a routing protocol, and despite pulling the wool over your eyes, you do NOT have an IP on the system physical subnet. Broadcasts such as NetBIOS and mdns do not cross subnet barriers. I've had people tell me for years that they can make network neighborhood populate over (pptp) vpn. I make it work for my clients using bridged OpenVPN, whereas you *are* on the same subnet, and broadcasts do get there, but at a performance loss.
Is there some sort of Windows voodoo you admins are using, do you cheat somehow, or what? I told her to just send her an e-mail with a link:
smb://nas.windowsdomain.loc/share%20name
She can click that and it will work, presuming you're pushing one of the directory servers as her dns server. If you push windowsdomain.loc as a search parameter, then you could do just:
smb://nas/share%20name
She was using a Firebox firewall to do the pptp vpn, and apparently you can't push the search parameter. yay. Anyway, Windows people, what's the voodoo here, or am I right and it just can't be done using PPTP?
"Like NetBIOS, the Server Message Block protocol originated a long time ago at IBM. Microsoft embraced it, extended it, and in 1996 gave it a marketing upgrade by renaming it "CIFS"."
Short answer: I have it backwards. SMB is the "open" one. CIFS is what you get after MS does their embrace and extend act on it. Ooops. Sorry for the misinformation!
Heh. You seem to overlook the obvious crap that's inserted:
Windows Media Player Internet Explorer Windows
That's reason enough to avoid it, IMHO.:)
I am not particularly thrilled with how it glosses over OSS. I've learned over the years there are benefits to not being 100% compatible with everyone else, and not having a computing environment that's not identical to everyone else too.
I'll give you a tiny example: my wife and I combined have 6 computers in this house - we each have a desktop, I currently have two laptops (will change shortly) and a server. We're both IT people, I'm a network engineer and unix admin, she's a part-time unix geek and a Windows Network admin by day. It's not uncommon for her to sit down at my machine for one reason or another, usually because she manages her music library logged into her account on my box. Occassionally, she'll be lazy and ssh into the server from my machine on my account, and want to look something up on the web. She *hates* using Firefox on my account. I have JavaScript pared all the way down, I have NoScript, Flashblock, and Adblock all enabled. She'll go onto Amazon and want to check on something, and nothing works. Now, she could of course figure out how to "temporarily allow" amazon.com in noscript, and to check the adblock sidebar if a key graphic is missing, but instead she logs into her account, launches a second instance of Firefox view amazon in it's ad-encrusted glory.
What's my point? The point is I don't have anyone else, my wife included, screwing with my Firefox profile because it's unique to my tastes and preferences. My home directory doesn't get filled with crap, and this is a mac we're talking about, so virus and malware are nearly non-existent. This could be Linux just as easily, or FreeBSD for that matter.
Once upon a time I would have suggested they use Knoppix, and although that may work, I think everyone here can agree that Kubuntu or Ubuntu (I still prefer the former to the latter) would fit the need nicely. None of this BS of "it's not what everyone else uses" fits. Win32 binaries can and do run. You just don't want to do it more often than necessary.:)
The FUD has to stop, seriously. I hate the term, I really do "Linux is/isn't ready for the desktop." I don't care when it's ready. It works, it works at very least "well enough". If I had to give it a par rating on usability in the form of Kubuntu, it quite easily is up there with Windows 98 or Windows 2000. I take Windows XP as a step backwards in many cases, so that's not really fair. OSX still beats Linux in Desktop usability, but we're not talking the widest of gaps here though. There are huge benefits to be had when you determine precisely what hardware your OS runs on, and it shows.
So now that I've wasted my breath preaching to a choir that left already....ugh. Let me toss up my company's website-that-isn't-quite-ready-yet:
If SMB protocol is patented (wouldn't suprise me) apple would be in trouble too.
Then again, BeOS back in the day (hey, the free version in 99 quickly became my primary OS!) used CIFS (common internetwork file share) and apparently was inter-operable with SMB somehow? I've always been a bit vague on that point.
Anyhoo. If CIFS is "available" and "interoperable", why does everyone insist on SMB vs CIFS?
I really do. I just had an odd sub-thought to toss out there. The NFL (which is far less important than the presidency.........right???)
has a policy that states when a team is hiring a new head coach, they *MUST* interview at least one minority candidate. The reason for this policy is that they want the percentage of coaches of "color" to fit more in line with the percentage of players. I guess that makes sense. I get frustrated by coaches being interviewed just to "fill the requirement" even though they've made up their minds, and several current head coaches have spoken up in the past about the policy, but I digress...
It would seem natural that the percentage of people "in power" line up with similar percentage of the population when it comes to racial lines. The problem is that most people don't vote. Period. I'm as guilty as everyone else too - last election was the first time I got out and voted. That holds true - then it's the white straight christian men that all go out and vote, and your inner city black gay muslim women aren't getting out and voting enough.;)
(Not racist....honest!)
I've actually pondered how it is that highly urban areas don't wind up with "Gangsta Jones" for mayor. The math would certainly be there...
Look at our ads or else. Adblock, Flashblock, and NoScript? No problem! We'll just keep track and take the computer away.
Sheesh. I guess that's what happens when you don't own the hardware. Although I swear I keep expecting that one of these days I'm going to open the box for a mainboard, have to cut some tape to get the box open, and find a note inside that reads:
End User License Agreement By opening this box you agree to the terms of this agreement......if you don't look at our ads, we can reposess this board...
I have to agree with your parent. He's right: bandwidth *is* dirt cheap.
The expensive part is being fault tolerant, and able to utilize that bandwidth in an efficient manner. A post elsewhere states that hardware was the greatest expense, and that lends credibility to this as well.
I can walk out monday morning, and get a 100Mbit trunk for about $2000/mo. Sure, you have to know the right people and be in the right place, but it can be done, and probably for less than what I just gave you, otherwise it couldn't be sold to me at that price.
From a serving standpoint, do you realize how difficult it is to saturate a 100Mbit trunk with HTTP traffic? Especially if you gz compress it on the fly. The level of redundancy, the quality of the NICs? I suspect they are saturating at least a Gig. Hardware is the problem, not the bandwidth.
Now that's puzzling. A court order would allow a search by law enforcement, no doubt. But I don't see how they could get permission for they themselves to show up and do a search of my premises. Doesn't mean it wouldn't happen, but the logic doesn't follow.
You don't understand how much this annoys me. I wouldn't let the BSA in my front door, let alone comply with any "audit". They aren't a government agency, nor a legal authority. They aren't allowed on my property, under any situation, and I've made all of my staff aware of that fact. The answer to BSA, or "Business Software Alliance" is "Please leave our property or we will call the police. This facility runs Linux and Open Source Software." If they don't leave, call the police and have them removed.
I think it all depends on how deep their pockets are, and how badly they want to win. If they were to do a serious price cut (as in 50%, bring it down to the $300 range), they would be hurting, and hurting BAD, however the units *would* start to sell. Market penetration is nearly as important as profit per unit sold. The main thing killing them right now is that Nintendo actually turns a profit on every Wii sold, Microsoft, I don't recall whether it's a loss-leader or not, but Microsoft's XBox360 simply can't hurt them badly enough for it to matter.
If Sony were to gamble big and drop the price low enough that mere mortals might consider buying, they could at very least make things interesting. Question is, how much of a loss can they afford to take per-unit to get there?
If what you say is true, these suits may be retaliatory in nature rather than typical fair. This all happened 5 years ago? That's an awful long time for something like this to come to the fore, isn't it?
Slashdot Mirror
This article has been posted for hours and no one has commented? Glitch?
:P
Didn't have much to say about it, was interested to see what everyone else had to say. Apparently nothing.
Clippy is dead.
No, really. He's dead. Honest.
Muting has been around in NFL2k for years. Nothing new there. Must just be new to FPS games?
:( If I could maintain a foes list, and see whom my friends have tagged as foes, it would make filtering jerks out much easier.
What I want is something similar to slashcode's degrees of separation. I want to have a foes list, plus friends of friends and foes of friends. Football suffers massively from idiocy online. From what I've heard, seems like all of the games do.
Gah, taking me too literally. Let me rephrase: it is a ROUTED protocol. ie, it's not bridging the client onto the local subnet. Broadcasts do not cross the network segment.
:P Sheesh. Semantics.
/etc/resolv.conf, then arp something (presuming you don't have mdns or something else enabled). On Windows, remove any DNS servers from your TCP/IP settings, same impact. Also, PPP != PPTP. They're not on
Of course it isn't IGRP, EIGRP, OSPF, etc etc etc.
and despite pulling the wool over your eyes, you do NOT have an IP on the system physical subnet.
Got a link on this one? There is no reason you can't give out an IP address from a PPTP server which is on the same subnet as the ethernet card of the PPTP server.
What I mean is that the traffic is *routed* to your actual host IP address. Sure, you can make the second to last hop to you be an IP on the remote subnet. Makes for confusing network troubleshooting, and in fact on Windows PPTP servers this is often the default, giving you the false impression that you are now a host on the local subnet, when in reality it is merely another routing path. Most firewalls up until recently, if they offered you a pptp interface option, would insist that you create the pptp hosts on a completely seperate subnet, making perfectly clear the fact that routing was occurring, and keeping a logical seperation of the two. I do not have a link, sorry. Just personal experience on the matter. To date, the only vpn solution I am aware of that gives you both a layer 3 and layer 2 address on the remote network is OpenVPN using a tap interface, and then bridging that tap interface onto a local network interface, presumably ethernet. I'm realizing that I'm really tired, and crossing layer 2 and layer 3 wires in my brain here, but follow me. There tends to be a presumption that if two hosts have layer 3 addresses on the same subnet, they will also have layer 2 addresses on the same network segment (or darn close to it anyway, there are exceptions). PPTP gives you a screwy illusion that you have a layer 3 address on the remote network, and there would be some mild amount of truth to that, but what screws with this is that you DO NOT have a layer 2 address on that same remote network. That tends to lay out a huge "well duh", but it does mess with typical network logic. I've rambled on too much, it's 3:30 in the morning. I shouldn't even be awake. Bleh. There's a reason I don't use PPTP anymore, and have moved wholesale to OpenVPN. It works far better and follows network convention better.
---
Broadcasts such as NetBIOS and mdns do not cross subnet barriers.
Broadcast? No, ARP? Yes.
I can't argue, to be honest I haven't looked that closely at ARP and PPTP. At first glance, I'd say no, as you aren't getting a PHYSICAL interface on the remote network, and given that ARP is a layer 2 attribute, and not a layer 3, what's the point in keeping a mac address on hand for a physical interface that will never be accessed at layer 2. That's the problem. PPTP does NOT give you a layer 2 interface. It will try to fool you into thinking so, but it doesn't. The mac address you have does NOT get added to the arp tables of the other clients on that network segment. Broadcasts at either layer 3 or layer 2 will not reach from host to remote network or vice-versa.
ARP does work across a PPP link, so you might find that a customer is using ARP for name resolution. That really wouldn't be the brightest move as far as I was concerned, but it's a possibility.
Whaaa...huh? ARP - Address Resolution Protocol, is used as a mechanism to match IP address to Physical address, not as name resolution. One cannot use ARP to resolve names. Sure, the arp command line will be nice and do name resolution with whatever resolution mechanisms are available to it and give you an name/ip matchup, but you can't use arp alone to match a name to an IP. If you don't believe me, rm
Gah, taking me too literally. Let me rephrase: it is a ROUTED protocol. ie, it's not bridging the client onto the local subnet. Broadcasts do not cross the network segment.
:P Sheesh. Semantics.
Of course it isn't IGRP, EIGRP, OSPF, etc etc etc.
It doesn't work out of the box in Wine, but almost everything works in Crossover Office. Wine comes pretty generic, presuming that you would prefer not to use any Windows cruft at all. Crossover comes default presuming you want things to just work. And work it does.
Worth the money if you must have Windows software IMHO.
Um, not at home. Corporate network. Macs do integrate with AD, however this is a laptop, doing PPTP. AD integration on a mac across PPTP is a bit sketchy. But I think I'm right in the general sense that across PPTP broadcasts do not go. I'm (for once in my life!) not bashing windows here. Just following a protocol. Point is, SMB does not a Network neighborhood fill. WINS wouldn't do it either, as that's just another way to resolve names. You have to know that you want to resolve the name to matter, thus NetBIOS or zeroconf. AD cheating a sneaking a list of available network SMB shares accomplishes the same thing, but makes me wonder how AD knows is joe random machine on the subnet starts sharing out it's mp3 folder? Or only "AD approved" shares get populated?
That might work, except that it was a mac. There's no (easily recognizable) way to set a WINS server on the mac. Plus it was a remote user. Such options need to get pushed when they connect to PPTP.
Mods, buy a clue. I'm the GP, and wanted to reach the guy, but he didn't post his e-mail address. Gawd.
Hey, drop me an e-mail. I was looking at your website, and want to talk to you about doing business in general. I'm in St. Louis, and have built a data center from the ground up and as a result I'm not getting bandwidth quite as cheaply as you, but I'm building out fiber and as soon as I do that, we'll be in about the same boat. Just wondered if we could chat.
Since I'm creating a "talk-to-myself" thread here. I have a question for the Windows guys out there.
I've been about 2 years now without using Windows regularly, having started my own company that uses Linux, FreeBSD, and OSX instead. Back when I was still working for a Microsoft Solutions Provider, they made a big stink about how the latest versions of Windows didn't require WINS or NetBIOS for name resolution and SMB. Last night my wife had to work late (tax season, accounting firm) and she had a single user with a Mac laptop that needed to do PPTP VPN, everyone else was using some proprietary "VPN through Internet Explorer" solution. Was easy enough to set up, but she was concerned about the user not being able to "browse" to the nas, which of course was SMB. Mac's "Network Neighborhood" as it were, doesn't populate with all of the networks shares.
This has been a sore point with me for years, and most Windows admins just don't "get it". Name resolution doesn't get you network neighborhood population. Machines have to broadcast (ie, netbios) that they are available and sharing. On Macs, but default they use zeroconf and multicast dns to accomplish this, ie everyone gets a hostname.local name with IP resolution as their LAN IP address. This doesn't happen in windows. Windows uses NetBIOS to accomplish this.
In either case, PPTP is a routing protocol, and despite pulling the wool over your eyes, you do NOT have an IP on the system physical subnet. Broadcasts such as NetBIOS and mdns do not cross subnet barriers. I've had people tell me for years that they can make network neighborhood populate over (pptp) vpn. I make it work for my clients using bridged OpenVPN, whereas you *are* on the same subnet, and broadcasts do get there, but at a performance loss.
Is there some sort of Windows voodoo you admins are using, do you cheat somehow, or what? I told her to just send her an e-mail with a link:
smb://nas.windowsdomain.loc/share%20name
She can click that and it will work, presuming you're pushing one of the directory servers as her dns server. If you push windowsdomain.loc as a search parameter, then you could do just:
smb://nas/share%20name
She was using a Firebox firewall to do the pptp vpn, and apparently you can't push the search parameter. yay. Anyway, Windows people, what's the voodoo here, or am I right and it just can't be done using PPTP?
D'oh. Found my answer:
http://ubiqx.org/cifs/SMB.html
"Like NetBIOS, the Server Message Block protocol originated a long time ago at IBM. Microsoft embraced it, extended it, and in 1996 gave it a marketing upgrade by renaming it "CIFS"."
Short answer: I have it backwards. SMB is the "open" one. CIFS is what you get after MS does their embrace and extend act on it. Ooops. Sorry for the misinformation!
Heh. You seem to overlook the obvious crap that's inserted:
:)
:)
:)
Windows Media Player
Internet Explorer
Windows
That's reason enough to avoid it, IMHO.
I am not particularly thrilled with how it glosses over OSS. I've learned over the years there are benefits to not being 100% compatible with everyone else, and not having a computing environment that's not identical to everyone else too.
I'll give you a tiny example: my wife and I combined have 6 computers in this house - we each have a desktop, I currently have two laptops (will change shortly) and a server. We're both IT people, I'm a network engineer and unix admin, she's a part-time unix geek and a Windows Network admin by day. It's not uncommon for her to sit down at my machine for one reason or another, usually because she manages her music library logged into her account on my box. Occassionally, she'll be lazy and ssh into the server from my machine on my account, and want to look something up on the web. She *hates* using Firefox on my account. I have JavaScript pared all the way down, I have NoScript, Flashblock, and Adblock all enabled. She'll go onto Amazon and want to check on something, and nothing works. Now, she could of course figure out how to "temporarily allow" amazon.com in noscript, and to check the adblock sidebar if a key graphic is missing, but instead she logs into her account, launches a second instance of Firefox view amazon in it's ad-encrusted glory.
What's my point? The point is I don't have anyone else, my wife included, screwing with my Firefox profile because it's unique to my tastes and preferences. My home directory doesn't get filled with crap, and this is a mac we're talking about, so virus and malware are nearly non-existent. This could be Linux just as easily, or FreeBSD for that matter.
Once upon a time I would have suggested they use Knoppix, and although that may work, I think everyone here can agree that Kubuntu or Ubuntu (I still prefer the former to the latter) would fit the need nicely. None of this BS of "it's not what everyone else uses" fits. Win32 binaries can and do run. You just don't want to do it more often than necessary.
The FUD has to stop, seriously. I hate the term, I really do "Linux is/isn't ready for the desktop." I don't care when it's ready. It works, it works at very least "well enough". If I had to give it a par rating on usability in the form of Kubuntu, it quite easily is up there with Windows 98 or Windows 2000. I take Windows XP as a step backwards in many cases, so that's not really fair. OSX still beats Linux in Desktop usability, but we're not talking the widest of gaps here though. There are huge benefits to be had when you determine precisely what hardware your OS runs on, and it shows.
So now that I've wasted my breath preaching to a choir that left already....ugh. Let me toss up my company's website-that-isn't-quite-ready-yet:
http://www.oss-solutions.com.nyud.net:8080/
Yes, it's coralized. I really am that afraid of Slashdot.
I've not used Google. Sorry.
If SMB protocol is patented (wouldn't suprise me) apple would be in trouble too.
Then again, BeOS back in the day (hey, the free version in 99 quickly became my primary OS!) used CIFS (common internetwork file share) and apparently was inter-operable with SMB somehow? I've always been a bit vague on that point.
Anyhoo. If CIFS is "available" and "interoperable", why does everyone insist on SMB vs CIFS?
I really do. I just had an odd sub-thought to toss out there. The NFL (which is far less important than the presidency... ... ...right???)
;)
has a policy that states when a team is hiring a new head coach, they *MUST* interview at least one minority candidate. The reason for this policy is that they want the percentage of coaches of "color" to fit more in line with the percentage of players. I guess that makes sense. I get frustrated by coaches being interviewed just to "fill the requirement" even though they've made up their minds, and several current head coaches have spoken up in the past about the policy, but I digress...
It would seem natural that the percentage of people "in power" line up with similar percentage of the population when it comes to racial lines. The problem is that most people don't vote. Period. I'm as guilty as everyone else too - last election was the first time I got out and voted. That holds true - then it's the white straight christian men that all go out and vote, and your inner city black gay muslim women aren't getting out and voting enough.
(Not racist....honest!)
I've actually pondered how it is that highly urban areas don't wind up with "Gangsta Jones" for mayor. The math would certainly be there...
Just responding to your sig.
Would usb->parallel adapters not work for hobbyists? (Serious question here...)
And for that matter, why not any old RS232 port, including usb->RS232 that you can get from Keyspan (which I use religiously)?
Look at our ads or else. Adblock, Flashblock, and NoScript? No problem! We'll just keep track and take the computer away.
...if you don't look at our ads, we can reposess this board...
:(
Sheesh. I guess that's what happens when you don't own the hardware. Although I swear I keep expecting that one of these days I'm going to open the box for a mainboard, have to cut some tape to get the box open, and find a note inside that reads:
End User License Agreement
By opening this box you agree to the terms of this agreement...
I'm in a bad mood today.
I have to agree with your parent. He's right: bandwidth *is* dirt cheap.
The expensive part is being fault tolerant, and able to utilize that bandwidth in an efficient manner. A post elsewhere states that hardware was the greatest expense, and that lends credibility to this as well.
I can walk out monday morning, and get a 100Mbit trunk for about $2000/mo. Sure, you have to know the right people and be in the right place, but it can be done, and probably for less than what I just gave you, otherwise it couldn't be sold to me at that price.
From a serving standpoint, do you realize how difficult it is to saturate a 100Mbit trunk with HTTP traffic? Especially if you gz compress it on the fly. The level of redundancy, the quality of the NICs? I suspect they are saturating at least a Gig. Hardware is the problem, not the bandwidth.
..and neither is qualified to touch any of my gear. :\
Now that's puzzling. A court order would allow a search by law enforcement, no doubt. But I don't see how they could get permission for they themselves to show up and do a search of my premises. Doesn't mean it wouldn't happen, but the logic doesn't follow.
You don't understand how much this annoys me. I wouldn't let the BSA in my front door, let alone comply with any "audit". They aren't a government agency, nor a legal authority. They aren't allowed on my property, under any situation, and I've made all of my staff aware of that fact. The answer to BSA, or "Business Software Alliance" is "Please leave our property or we will call the police. This facility runs Linux and Open Source Software." If they don't leave, call the police and have them removed.
End of discussion.
I honstely am not sure why anyone cares.
1. They aren't targeting individuals.
2. We already know what the report says:
"Sweet Christ! They're skipping them all!!!1111"
Cracker what?!?
Not neccessarily.
I think it all depends on how deep their pockets are, and how badly they want to win. If they were to do a serious price cut (as in 50%, bring it down to the $300 range), they would be hurting, and hurting BAD, however the units *would* start to sell. Market penetration is nearly as important as profit per unit sold. The main thing killing them right now is that Nintendo actually turns a profit on every Wii sold, Microsoft, I don't recall whether it's a loss-leader or not, but Microsoft's XBox360 simply can't hurt them badly enough for it to matter.
If Sony were to gamble big and drop the price low enough that mere mortals might consider buying, they could at very least make things interesting. Question is, how much of a loss can they afford to take per-unit to get there?
If what you say is true, these suits may be retaliatory in nature rather than typical fair. This all happened 5 years ago? That's an awful long time for something like this to come to the fore, isn't it?