Imagine that. People buying things because they want or need them, rather than being psyched into buying it with every brainwashing trick in the playbook.
Ad campaigns tend to coincide with a new product. Those genuinely interested in it, tend to find it on their own, regardless. That marketing firms never point out that ad campaigns are carefully launched when interest would go higher anyway, is the most devious scam of all.
My newspaper trick should be at least possible, however unlikely. If Pi is truly random, and infinite, then all information exists within it somewhere. Finding it could be damn tricky though.
I'll agree, it would be hard for someone to convince you that they are the future version of yourself. Unless they are Brad Pitt or something, and then I'd probably want to believe it because I'm so butt ugly in real life.
What if the loop, isn't a loop though? What if what looks like time travel to you, is actually someone running GDB on the universe, and resetting it to a past condition, with one exception? This is the way it has always seemed to be, and eliminates virtually all the paradoxes... well, except conservation. Seems like you'd have to reset it with an equivalent amount of energy/mass, even if it's not in the same configuration. Maybe the new version is missing a few kilos out of some distant neutron star, though... wouldn't be missed.
You don't know that the "time traveler" is giving you valid info either. He could be an escaped nutcase who dresses weird. Hell, his predictions might even come true, and it would be coincidence.
On the other hand, my "coincidence newspaper" might be something I believe in so extremely that I would say I "know" that it's gonna happen. And since it does, it would be in effect be provable.
I hate going all subjective, but where is the flaw in this logic?
Information doesn't violate conversation, I wouldn't think. It has to be some real energy, heat, electricity, inertia... something.
What if I randomly select a sequence from Pi, put it in binary, and discover that it is a complete online newspaper from 2012, complete with grainy black and white photos of Dubya in a black party dress?
And suppose 10 years from now, it happens like that. Big if, I know. But was the information provided from nowhere, just like you're complaining about?
Whether or not their is truth in your opinion, I'm sorry I can't agree with anything you believe.
If the politicians and those in power have to destroy everything that is good, beautiful, or clever, to make themselves feel more powerful is that my fault?
If I try to escape from all that, is that my fault?
Blame those who've fucked everything up from time immemorial. Not those doing their best to fix it.
Country exchange I haven't figured out. But routing discovery shouldn't be a problem
Imagine we get the following network setup, 5 nodes in a simple chain.
A - B - C - D - E
All have non-conflicting subnets, and all are routing to each other, though none know anything about any of the others unless they connect directly. F comes along, wants to connect to E. He picks an unused subnet. D knows nothing of F, all it is aware of, is that a new subnet appeared, and that E claims to know how to get packets to it.
My somewhat amateurish understanding of how various routing protocols work, says it can already work like this. D doesn't have to know the country, or anything else, just that E claims to know how to get packets to a new subnet. Then D tells C the same thing, who tells B. That's the easy part.
But assuming the script kiddies will consider this too much work for what little mayhem they can cause, why can't we have 10.0.0.1 be a simple little website, that lists what subnets aren't taken. When E and F are negotiating to let F become a new node (this is negot. between people, not computers), E can do his homework, find a suitably random, unused subnet, and tell F to use it. E may not even know where 10.0.0.1 is located. Only that node itself, and it's immediate neighbors would be able to rat it out, as a CA. Thus, once the network grows, we can stop worrying they'll have an easy time tracking down the CA.
But even more so. Once the network grows, why couldn't non-neighbor nodes voluntarily start mirroring this website/database? Even though the authorities could stumble upon the original CA and take it out, by that time its too late. To make it easy for users to find a CA without actually knowing anything else, we could play a few DNS tricks to roundrobin www.ca.ntwrk through all the IP addresses. If you try it, and they've been knocked out, requery and you get a new IP. The CA mirrors can only grow to a point, but even 4 or 5 CA mirrors randomly distribute through the network, who know nothing other than the 10.x IPs of the others... that would be hard to de-nut. Especially with an emergency broadcast service, that let people know a mirror has just went down. Within an hour, another random node might have replaced it.
Of course, this is still vulnerable to assholes trying to mess it up intentionally. But those are gonna be hard to beat no matter what.
As for country discovery, that's not a problem. Say I'm on the regular internet in a channel, and I make friends with someone in Peru. After a few months, it becomes obvious he should be invited, and I let him on as a user. Connected directly to my routing node. Well, a few more months pass, and he has shown himself to be capable, so I offer to let him set up a node himself. Instead of a single IP, he gets a block of them. I know who he is, maybe even enough to discover his real name with a little research. But that's why he's across the border! Even if I rat him out, there is no way to serve a warrant on him, or vice versa. The only thing he has to do, is add a routing node onto his end, but that's his business. He should know enough to never even give me clues whom he might let connect, nor to let someone else from Peru to connect to him (this is true for routing nodes, I'm not sure if it has to be so careful for plain users).
The only thing left, is to decide what these "rules" are, so I can teach them to him well enough for him to teach to someone else.
I hate to suggest it... but might a network like this actually spontaneously generate some kind of "reimbursement" system. There are goods, after all, that might be traded in such a medium.
And once it started, might not some enterprising soul set up a real $$$ < -- > virtual $$$ exchange?
The only reason I've thought of it, was because it's a potentiial security weakness to let someone do that. Something that we probably can't afford, forgive the pun.
These are the sorts of things that need to be discussed before implementation, so we don't screw it all up.
Routing itself can update automatically to a certain extent though. Open up a new routing node somewhere, and soon the routing tables propagate, right?
When you say there are problems, you mean with the actual allocation though (new node gets 10.45.67.x). Can't we make it more or less "whichever subnet is unused, you get" ? We'd have to somehow avoid a goldrush, but since everyone obviously couldn't be trusted off the bat to run a routing node, maybe that's the avenue you'd take.
Another point, while I think of it. We'll have to allocate subnets randomly from the IP range, or else risk giving people an idea how big it has grown. For instance, if the feds happen to snoop on 10.0.3.x by chance, I don't want them to be able to know they're really close to the first subnet (to the central authority, too) just by how low it is.
As for social policy, what I meant somewhat overlaps your thinking... but I'd hesitate to recreate the entire concept of "nation" in a virtual space. It's yet another thing, that maybe we should leave behind, if we can. Or, a slightly different perspective would say that the entire network is a single nation, as it should be in meatspace.
I enjoy hearing your thoughts though. Makes me feel good to think that even if I weren't successful with this on my own, someone else may recreate the idea on their own. I'm a bit scared we may all need such a network before too long...
However, even after being noticed, I think this network could survive. It's all a matter of designing it in such a way that they'd have to put incredibly massive effort to shut it down. As in rescinding constitutional ammendments fulltime.
Why do we have to give up the global IP network part, to get our freedom back?
Let me summarize my idea. We do a large VPN over our existing internet connections, hub and spoke model, full routing. Probably using the 10.x.x.x address space at first, with a simple planned upgrade to ipv6, when it's ready for primetime.
Those with multi-homed nodes only connect to other routing nodes in other countries, across international borders. This should prevent, or at least slow law enforcement from node hopping. Being a fully routed network, you can only snitch on the nodes that connect directly to you, the system is designed so you don't have to know anything else. And what good is it to them, if you can snitch on others, if they can't serve warrants because its out of their jurisdiction. There will still be damage, but in this way it can be contained.
I'm also thinking about a new "emergency broadcast system" service. Multicast so that all users/nodes see a message within minutes, some sort of authentication so that transmit is offlimits except to admins. You HAVE to run the client, or you get disconnected. If we can coordinate, without knowing much about each other, we can still move faster than those that would shut it down.
The thing that gets me, is what sort of social policy should there be? There are risks associated with inviting just anyone, and if we have a good idea how to go about doing that, we might be able to avoid some of it.
But in the end, I expect there to at least be complete web services, unmonitored/able IRC, spam-free email (rebuilding the system from scratch will let us be able to fix that), and anything else that you can do with IP.
And please, if you want to criticize do so, this is a bare outline of an idea, not a carefully crafted thing. Point out the flaws, and offer solutions, if they occur to you.
Freenet is the p2p version of what I'm talking about, yeh.
But I don't want to trade mp3s... I just want to be able to run a tiny, modest website on my little broadband link. Maybe some other services. Only full IP connectivity will do.
Too bad I can't get a domain name, it's dhcp only. Too bad that all the good names are taken because they were allocated in a pisspoor way. Too bad that if they aren't taken, a corp would swoop down and claim trademark infringement or cybersquatting.
Too bad that port 80 is blocked, with bogus reasons.(why would you need it anyway, unless you are a evil hacker?) Too bad that port 25 is blocked too. Not that I could do much with it, without a domain name. Too bad that the type of site I might want to build offends corporate interests, even though it should be protected by the 1st amendment.
The list goes on... it's so long, I dunno that I want to finish it. Flame me if you want.
When is the last time you saw an old lady using unix? A better question is, how will little old ladies ever use unix, if trolls in management and positions of power lock it out of bids, options, and decisions? Or lesser trolls like yourself, make fun of it in public, without ever being able to back anything up?
I wouldn't ask a little old lady to build a Wright brothers flyer either, but they have no problem setting foot inside a 747 and waiting 2 hours for the plane ride to end. On the same note, I wouldn't ask a little old lady to use command line sys7 unix on my PDP-11/04, but they'd have no problem sitting down to a linux box running wmaker, gnome, or KDE.
When is the last time you saw an old lady using Windows? Of course they're always using windows, it's called a "M - O - N - O - P - O - L - Y". Say it with me, "monopoly". And not just a monopoly of deviousness on M$'s part, but a monopoly of ignorance and idiocy, and watered down compromise on the part of those working in IT, who shouldn be working drive thru at Burger King.
When is the last time you saw Windows XP crash I've layed off Windows at home, and they're using win2k at work, the most tolerable windows yet. Thank god it's not XP, because yes, it does crash. Even more than 98, in my limited experience. They must have accidentally fixed win2k too much, and decided to unfix everything with XP. Not to mention the lame Aqua wannabe theme.
What does DOS 1.1 have to do with Windows 2k or XP? What does unix necessarily have to do with a really crappy command line analogy? You were implying that there was no way to use a mouse, to click on a big fat button with monster point type designating it the "Vote for Dubya" widget. The worst kind of lie, in my book.
How many window managers and replacement desktop utilities can you choose from with Windows Do you have a clue what's going on underneath the windows gui, in the windows API? If you did, you wouldn't be able to sit there with a straight face, and type your crap in. Replacement desktops simply munge around all the shit and excrement windows plopped out, they don't, they can't, clean it up and build anew. They can't burn it all down, and start from scratch.
If I'm not on your foe list already, it's your own damn problem. It's not like I'm not working hard enough at it.
Sorry, but self-moderating all my posts down to "0 spice, 0 opinion, and -2 cleverness" might make the trolls and moderators (are they two seperate species, or one in the same? We'll have to do a DNA test, if we can get samples... anyone have some crack cocaine for bait?) go away, but what would be left of slashdot?
The reason the internet was great back then, wasn't because it took 48 hours of hair pulling to get your DOS ip stack configured correctly.
It was because dumbass politicians and greedy politicians hadn't touched it. They've spent the better part of a decade proving to us, that it wasn't because they couldn't.
But what if we could build a network that was extremely difficult for them to mess with?
What if it offered the same services as the regular net, fully routed static IP, DNS, and no restrictions. No one coming after you for posting files, building a website, or registering a domain name that some corps find offensive.
And as a side bonus, it might be just as complicated to get connected to it, as the internet originally was...
Christ on a sharpened pogo stick, won't you dumb fucking trolls lay off?
This is only slightly more accurate, than making fun of windows because of some obtuse memory config bug that hasn't been an issue since DOS 1.1 on the original IBM PC.
With unix, you have a choice of what, 2 dozen GUIs, to windows' 1? And even if those are too bloated for something this lean, with unix, any unix, writing a GUI from scratch is as simple as it could be. On windows, can you even write your own, or are you constantly tripping over the GUI that you can't get rid of? (Gates: "It's impossible to remove the browser, it's an integral part of the OS!")
Hey Eurotrash, you put me in a really confusing situation.
If I'm not careful, I could accidentally and unintentionally defend my nation's goverment (USA) which more than just sucks, it is as corrupt and perverse as any goverment can be. Even "Mad Max: Road Warriors" type anarchy couldn't possibly be worse.
And on the other hand, I might not be as vicious enough in insulting the twisted parody of goverment much of europe seems to embrace. Those of you that no longer have actual monarchies, have had the same royals and aristocrats crawl back into their dens of political power over the centuries. That they have the nerve to spew contrived philosophy and rhetoric from time to time, is the most disgusting thing I've been forced to think about for at least a few months.
As if being a slave for elite power cartels is so much more preferable to being own by greedy mindless corporations.
Given the chance, wouldn't you prefer to be free of both?
With windows, I wouldn't trust it to not puke on the vote tally, 5 minutes after the voter walks away. And it could do this without even showing visible symptons.
Should have used some kind of unix, the damn thing has a drop dead simple interface. It's not like you will want to move M$ Votenow! out of the way, so you can browse porn on the internet. What were they thinking?
Slashdot Mirror
Only if I'm lying.
Imagine that. People buying things because they want or need them, rather than being psyched into buying it with every brainwashing trick in the playbook.
Heh.
Um, you're jumping to conclusions.
Ad campaigns tend to coincide with a new product. Those genuinely interested in it, tend to find it on their own, regardless. That marketing firms never point out that ad campaigns are carefully launched when interest would go higher anyway, is the most devious scam of all.
I think most people would be shocked to discover how little spending habits would differ if no one watched commercials...
Mostly, because they don't either. Human brains tend to veg out when the damn things come on.
Vaporware. Pure Vaporware.
My newspaper trick should be at least possible, however unlikely. If Pi is truly random, and infinite, then all information exists within it somewhere. Finding it could be damn tricky though.
I'll agree, it would be hard for someone to convince you that they are the future version of yourself. Unless they are Brad Pitt or something, and then I'd probably want to believe it because I'm so butt ugly in real life.
What if the loop, isn't a loop though? What if what looks like time travel to you, is actually someone running GDB on the universe, and resetting it to a past condition, with one exception? This is the way it has always seemed to be, and eliminates virtually all the paradoxes... well, except conservation. Seems like you'd have to reset it with an equivalent amount of energy/mass, even if it's not in the same configuration. Maybe the new version is missing a few kilos out of some distant neutron star, though... wouldn't be missed.
You don't know that the "time traveler" is giving you valid info either. He could be an escaped nutcase who dresses weird. Hell, his predictions might even come true, and it would be coincidence.
On the other hand, my "coincidence newspaper" might be something I believe in so extremely that I would say I "know" that it's gonna happen. And since it does, it would be in effect be provable.
I hate going all subjective, but where is the flaw in this logic?
Information doesn't violate conversation, I wouldn't think. It has to be some real energy, heat, electricity, inertia... something.
And if I were writing this script with you as the actor, you're going back to kill him would set off a chain of events that starts WWI.
Damn, can't they write some decent science fiction for once?
That sounds so dumb. Information from nowhere?
What if I randomly select a sequence from Pi, put it in binary, and discover that it is a complete online newspaper from 2012, complete with grainy black and white photos of Dubya in a black party dress?
And suppose 10 years from now, it happens like that. Big if, I know. But was the information provided from nowhere, just like you're complaining about?
Whether or not their is truth in your opinion, I'm sorry I can't agree with anything you believe.
If the politicians and those in power have to destroy everything that is good, beautiful, or clever, to make themselves feel more powerful is that my fault?
If I try to escape from all that, is that my fault?
Blame those who've fucked everything up from time immemorial. Not those doing their best to fix it.
Country exchange I haven't figured out. But routing discovery shouldn't be a problem
Imagine we get the following network setup, 5 nodes in a simple chain.
A - B - C - D - E
All have non-conflicting subnets, and all are routing to each other, though none know anything about any of the others unless they connect directly. F comes along, wants to connect to E. He picks an unused subnet. D knows nothing of F, all it is aware of, is that a new subnet appeared, and that E claims to know how to get packets to it.
My somewhat amateurish understanding of how various routing protocols work, says it can already work like this. D doesn't have to know the country, or anything else, just that E claims to know how to get packets to a new subnet. Then D tells C the same thing, who tells B. That's the easy part.
But assuming the script kiddies will consider this too much work for what little mayhem they can cause, why can't we have 10.0.0.1 be a simple little website, that lists what subnets aren't taken. When E and F are negotiating to let F become a new node (this is negot. between people, not computers), E can do his homework, find a suitably random, unused subnet, and tell F to use it. E may not even know where 10.0.0.1 is located. Only that node itself, and it's immediate neighbors would be able to rat it out, as a CA. Thus, once the network grows, we can stop worrying they'll have an easy time tracking down the CA.
But even more so. Once the network grows, why couldn't non-neighbor nodes voluntarily start mirroring this website/database? Even though the authorities could stumble upon the original CA and take it out, by that time its too late. To make it easy for users to find a CA without actually knowing anything else, we could play a few DNS tricks to roundrobin www.ca.ntwrk through all the IP addresses. If you try it, and they've been knocked out, requery and you get a new IP. The CA mirrors can only grow to a point, but even 4 or 5 CA mirrors randomly distribute through the network, who know nothing other than the 10.x IPs of the others... that would be hard to de-nut. Especially with an emergency broadcast service, that let people know a mirror has just went down. Within an hour, another random node might have replaced it.
Of course, this is still vulnerable to assholes trying to mess it up intentionally. But those are gonna be hard to beat no matter what.
As for country discovery, that's not a problem. Say I'm on the regular internet in a channel, and I make friends with someone in Peru. After a few months, it becomes obvious he should be invited, and I let him on as a user. Connected directly to my routing node. Well, a few more months pass, and he has shown himself to be capable, so I offer to let him set up a node himself. Instead of a single IP, he gets a block of them. I know who he is, maybe even enough to discover his real name with a little research. But that's why he's across the border! Even if I rat him out, there is no way to serve a warrant on him, or vice versa. The only thing he has to do, is add a routing node onto his end, but that's his business. He should know enough to never even give me clues whom he might let connect, nor to let someone else from Peru to connect to him (this is true for routing nodes, I'm not sure if it has to be so careful for plain users).
The only thing left, is to decide what these "rules" are, so I can teach them to him well enough for him to teach to someone else.
Strange, that the golden days for a person who raped the internet, would be at the height of the gangbang.
I'll spare everyone the AIDS/internet commercialism analogy.
I hate to suggest it... but might a network like this actually spontaneously generate some kind of "reimbursement" system. There are goods, after all, that might be traded in such a medium.
And once it started, might not some enterprising soul set up a real $$$ < -- > virtual $$$ exchange?
The only reason I've thought of it, was because it's a potentiial security weakness to let someone do that. Something that we probably can't afford, forgive the pun.
These are the sorts of things that need to be discussed before implementation, so we don't screw it all up.
Routing itself can update automatically to a certain extent though. Open up a new routing node somewhere, and soon the routing tables propagate, right?
When you say there are problems, you mean with the actual allocation though (new node gets 10.45.67.x). Can't we make it more or less "whichever subnet is unused, you get" ? We'd have to somehow avoid a goldrush, but since everyone obviously couldn't be trusted off the bat to run a routing node, maybe that's the avenue you'd take.
Another point, while I think of it. We'll have to allocate subnets randomly from the IP range, or else risk giving people an idea how big it has grown. For instance, if the feds happen to snoop on 10.0.3.x by chance, I don't want them to be able to know they're really close to the first subnet (to the central authority, too) just by how low it is.
As for social policy, what I meant somewhat overlaps your thinking... but I'd hesitate to recreate the entire concept of "nation" in a virtual space. It's yet another thing, that maybe we should leave behind, if we can. Or, a slightly different perspective would say that the entire network is a single nation, as it should be in meatspace.
I enjoy hearing your thoughts though. Makes me feel good to think that even if I weren't successful with this on my own, someone else may recreate the idea on their own. I'm a bit scared we may all need such a network before too long...
Hehe, maybe.
But I've got ideas on how to make this hypothetical network very infertile soil for the weed that is spam.
Yeh. And I don't plan on relying on constitutional rights, of this nation, or any other, to protect this network.
The only thing people like myself excel at, if anything, is technology. Surely it has a few tricks up its sleaves, that might make this possible.
Agreed on that.
However, even after being noticed, I think this network could survive. It's all a matter of designing it in such a way that they'd have to put incredibly massive effort to shut it down. As in rescinding constitutional ammendments fulltime.
Well, not really.
Why do we have to give up the global IP network part, to get our freedom back?
Let me summarize my idea. We do a large VPN over our existing internet connections, hub and spoke model, full routing. Probably using the 10.x.x.x address space at first, with a simple planned upgrade to ipv6, when it's ready for primetime.
Those with multi-homed nodes only connect to other routing nodes in other countries, across international borders. This should prevent, or at least slow law enforcement from node hopping. Being a fully routed network, you can only snitch on the nodes that connect directly to you, the system is designed so you don't have to know anything else. And what good is it to them, if you can snitch on others, if they can't serve warrants because its out of their jurisdiction. There will still be damage, but in this way it can be contained.
I'm also thinking about a new "emergency broadcast system" service. Multicast so that all users/nodes see a message within minutes, some sort of authentication so that transmit is offlimits except to admins. You HAVE to run the client, or you get disconnected. If we can coordinate, without knowing much about each other, we can still move faster than those that would shut it down.
The thing that gets me, is what sort of social policy should there be? There are risks associated with inviting just anyone, and if we have a good idea how to go about doing that, we might be able to avoid some of it.
But in the end, I expect there to at least be complete web services, unmonitored/able IRC, spam-free email (rebuilding the system from scratch will let us be able to fix that), and anything else that you can do with IP.
And please, if you want to criticize do so, this is a bare outline of an idea, not a carefully crafted thing. Point out the flaws, and offer solutions, if they occur to you.
Freenet is the p2p version of what I'm talking about, yeh.
But I don't want to trade mp3s... I just want to be able to run a tiny, modest website on my little broadband link. Maybe some other services. Only full IP connectivity will do.
Too bad I can't get a domain name, it's dhcp only.
Too bad that all the good names are taken because they were allocated in a pisspoor way.
Too bad that if they aren't taken, a corp would swoop down and claim trademark infringement or cybersquatting.
Too bad that port 80 is blocked, with bogus reasons.(why would you need it anyway, unless you are a evil hacker?)
Too bad that port 25 is blocked too. Not that I could do much with it, without a domain name.
Too bad that the type of site I might want to build offends corporate interests, even though it should be protected by the 1st amendment.
The list goes on... it's so long, I dunno that I want to finish it. Flame me if you want.
Irrelevant.
When is the last time you saw an old lady using unix?
A better question is, how will little old ladies ever use unix, if trolls in management and positions of power lock it out of bids, options, and decisions? Or lesser trolls like yourself, make fun of it in public, without ever being able to back anything up?
I wouldn't ask a little old lady to build a Wright brothers flyer either, but they have no problem setting foot inside a 747 and waiting 2 hours for the plane ride to end. On the same note, I wouldn't ask a little old lady to use command line sys7 unix on my PDP-11/04, but they'd have no problem sitting down to a linux box running wmaker, gnome, or KDE.
When is the last time you saw an old lady using Windows?
Of course they're always using windows, it's called a "M - O - N - O - P - O - L - Y". Say it with me, "monopoly". And not just a monopoly of deviousness on M$'s part, but a monopoly of ignorance and idiocy, and watered down compromise on the part of those working in IT, who shouldn be working drive thru at Burger King.
When is the last time you saw Windows XP crash
I've layed off Windows at home, and they're using win2k at work, the most tolerable windows yet. Thank god it's not XP, because yes, it does crash. Even more than 98, in my limited experience. They must have accidentally fixed win2k too much, and decided to unfix everything with XP. Not to mention the lame Aqua wannabe theme.
What does DOS 1.1 have to do with Windows 2k or XP?
What does unix necessarily have to do with a really crappy command line analogy? You were implying that there was no way to use a mouse, to click on a big fat button with monster point type designating it the "Vote for Dubya" widget. The worst kind of lie, in my book.
How many window managers and replacement desktop utilities can you choose from with Windows
Do you have a clue what's going on underneath the windows gui, in the windows API? If you did, you wouldn't be able to sit there with a straight face, and type your crap in. Replacement desktops simply munge around all the shit and excrement windows plopped out, they don't, they can't, clean it up and build anew. They can't burn it all down, and start from scratch.
If I'm not on your foe list already, it's your own damn problem. It's not like I'm not working hard enough at it.
Sorry, but self-moderating all my posts down to "0 spice, 0 opinion, and -2 cleverness" might make the trolls and moderators (are they two seperate species, or one in the same? We'll have to do a DNA test, if we can get samples... anyone have some crack cocaine for bait?) go away, but what would be left of slashdot?
The reason the internet was great back then, wasn't because it took 48 hours of hair pulling to get your DOS ip stack configured correctly.
It was because dumbass politicians and greedy politicians hadn't touched it. They've spent the better part of a decade proving to us, that it wasn't because they couldn't.
But what if we could build a network that was extremely difficult for them to mess with?
What if it offered the same services as the regular net, fully routed static IP, DNS, and no restrictions. No one coming after you for posting files, building a website, or registering a domain name that some corps find offensive.
And as a side bonus, it might be just as complicated to get connected to it, as the internet originally was...
Read my unfinished webpage about it.
Christ on a sharpened pogo stick, won't you dumb fucking trolls lay off?
This is only slightly more accurate, than making fun of windows because of some obtuse memory config bug that hasn't been an issue since DOS 1.1 on the original IBM PC.
With unix, you have a choice of what, 2 dozen GUIs, to windows' 1? And even if those are too bloated for something this lean, with unix, any unix, writing a GUI from scratch is as simple as it could be. On windows, can you even write your own, or are you constantly tripping over the GUI that you can't get rid of? (Gates: "It's impossible to remove the browser, it's an integral part of the OS!")
Hey Eurotrash, you put me in a really confusing situation.
If I'm not careful, I could accidentally and unintentionally defend my nation's goverment (USA) which more than just sucks, it is as corrupt and perverse as any goverment can be. Even "Mad Max: Road Warriors" type anarchy couldn't possibly be worse.
And on the other hand, I might not be as vicious enough in insulting the twisted parody of goverment much of europe seems to embrace. Those of you that no longer have actual monarchies, have had the same royals and aristocrats crawl back into their dens of political power over the centuries. That they have the nerve to spew contrived philosophy and rhetoric from time to time, is the most disgusting thing I've been forced to think about for at least a few months.
As if being a slave for elite power cartels is so much more preferable to being own by greedy mindless corporations.
Given the chance, wouldn't you prefer to be free of both?
With windows, I wouldn't trust it to not puke on the vote tally, 5 minutes after the voter walks away. And it could do this without even showing visible symptons.
Should have used some kind of unix, the damn thing has a drop dead simple interface. It's not like you will want to move M$ Votenow! out of the way, so you can browse porn on the internet. What were they thinking?