Just want to say I totally agree with you on this thread, these other people either believe anything they read, or refuse to listen to anything but the perfect digital copy.
As long as I have an ADC in my hot little hands (and I have quite a few sitting around) I can rip whatever I hear, and I can rip whatever goes through standard RCA/headphone audio cables.
So you are saying my copy of Flight Simulator 1 through 5 are now out of date??:)
Seriously, the one time I visited Chicago, I fought a losing battle to see Meigs Field, after having performed hundreds of virtual take-offs and landings there. Sucks that I never will.
Re:yet another worthless article about IPv6
on
An Introduction to IPv6
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
Are you listening? I just agreed with you that ignorant people should be behind NAT.
I'm just saying that that doesn't mean that *I* have to be behind NAT.
Maybe you should try reading my comments a couple times before replying.
That's fine, but they shouldn't be forced into that position because of a actual limit of IP addresses, they should be forced into that position because that's how Comcast sets them up, and they don't know how to change it.
Again, if Comcast customers are required to run NAT in order to have multiple machines online, and if I am a Comcast customer, then I am requried to run NAT due to other peoples' ignorance, and I don't like that.
NAT may provide us with a nearly infinite number of IP addresses, but none of the addresses behind NAT are not properly addressable; each one can only get ports forwarded to it from the external IP address.
Therefore, there are only as many port 80's out there as IP addresses, and NAT cannot change that. IPv6 can.
To me, NAT is just a hack. Having a handful of real IPs is to me much preferable than one IP, NAT, internal IPs, and a massively complex forwarding ruleset.
I think the problem is your naming scheme, not IPv6!
Re:yet another worthless article about IPv6
on
An Introduction to IPv6
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I think you are being just a liiitle overly pessemistic here.
Who cares if its card to remember an IPv6 address? Do you really memorize multiple IPs from multiple subnets that often? I can personally only think of 2 subnets I have memorized right now, and I work as a system admin full time.
As for the shortages, you think that it's a good idea to have scarcity in the IP market just so people will be encouraged to run NAT? I think its presumptious of you to force conditions on me, personally I'd love to have IPs for each machine in my house, but I can't because IP addresses are hard to come by.
And your last point, yes, ISPs are scumbags, but it seems that the fact that they price gouge for IPs would make you for IPv6, not against it.
I didn't know you could get altitude data from GPS, are you sure you are not mistaken? My GPS uses a barometric altimeter, why would they bother putting that in if you could just get that data off GPS? Which model of GPS do you have?
There hasn't been a change to *any* amendment in the bill of rights. I think that any politician considering trying to change the bill of rights knows that the public has a great sentiment towards it, and it would be a bad thing politically to be 'the guy who said the founding fathers were wrong'.
Besides all that, the 2nd amendment is so vague that laws easily could be (and are) made to limit what defines 'the right to bear arms'. Anyway, arguments on domestic issues aside, guns purchased legitimately in America are not the terrorists biggest source of arms.
This is one of the reasons I haven't thought of buying a cellphone yet. It is still an industry with very little consumer empowerment. It's just a microcosm of the PC revolution. All the tech companies figured they could start over with the proprietary bullshit again on a different architecture with the excuse that "It's smaller" satiating the average Joe-dont-know-shit consumer.
Eventually, that will change, just like it always does with things like this. The first product to break out of the proprietary lock-in mindset wins. Just like VHS, just like PC clones. One company can't fulfill all the potential uses of what is basically a portable computer which happens to have access to a wireless data service otherwise known as cellular phone service, just like Microsoft knew they couldn't, just like Apple knew they couldn't.
I never said that my vote is meaningless, I just said that it is unreasonable to expect my vote to lead to a change in the outcome of the election.
Your vote is a show of support, a "vote of confidence". All this 'throw away your vote' stuff is so unbelievably ignorant. The thought that people would not vote for a third party simply because voting for a larger party raises the chances that your vote will change the outcome of the election from 1 in 100 million to 1 in 4 million is completely rediculous.
It's like they are gambling to make sure that their vote has the maximum chance of changing the election, rather than just voting for who they want to win. It's a rediculous argument started by the large parties that for some reason even educated people seem to think holds water.
On what do you base your assertion that "the Internet has had a clearly detrimental effect on our spelling abilities". I don't see how having to use text as a communications medium could do anything but help spelling abilities.
I think we just notice that more people can't spell worth a damn now that they are forced to attempt to spell in order to function in their job, social life, whatever they use the internet for.
Why do you say voting for a minority party candidate is throwing away your vote? Do you really vote just because you think that your single solitary vote has a chance of changing the outcome of the election? Unless you vote on this belief, there is no such thing as 'throwing away your vote'.
Once you accept that your vote will have no effect on the outcome of the election, you can vote for whoever you think is the best candidate.
Oh come now, you know its just not practical to simply stop the use of nuclear power for energy production completely. It's just not going to happen. All the alternatives are unfeasible, economically, environmentally, etc. It's like saying "Want to stop nuclear proliferation? Stop using electricity!"
In a perfect world, I'd agree with you, any country should have access to nuclear power. The problem is that it tends to fall into the hands of "bad people", who proceed to kill thousands of people -- maybe you are one of those people who refuses to believe that there are "bad people", so maybe I should change "bad people" to "members of unstable societies".
If something like this can come along, and prevent "unstable" countries from developing nuclear power, then that's awesome in my book. We aren't exactly trying to keep nuclear power out of Canada here, this is more like Syria, all the fun terrorist-sponsoring governments.
It's not a perfect solution, and you can chant "Nuclear Power to Syria! All hail the independence of North Korea!" all you want, but personally I feel safer if we can give the countries nuclear power in order to give their society the same tools we have to develop a more stable society.
You are just having a knee-jerk reaction to the fact that the world does not operate on a egalitarian basis on some issues. Don't worry, it needs to be that way, your reaction will pass.
Comma abuse is something that afflicts lots of high-school to college grads. I went to rehab for 2 years, and it was the best thing that ever happened to me.
BETA is still not a success, though. I don't know how much the television industry uses BETA in day-to-day operations. Sony certainly hoped for a bit more market penetration.
Agreed, seperate camera. I've never owned a cellphone though, I have a hang-up (ha ha) about them.
Where's the data? I want to see the signal data. I'm sure it would be confusing to see without the proper perspective and backgrounds into the physics behind their radio telescope and ambient radio noise and whatnot, but I want to look at it anyway.
Interesting. I lived out there in 1998, having moved there from North LA county, it was quite bad. I seem to remember smog alerts, though I wasn't particularly attentive of such things. I just went out to Fontana not too long ago and it really wasn't that bad, but I had assumed it was just a fluke. Why is it getting better? Was all the pollution before the result of industrial pollution? Because surely there are more cars on the road.
Slashdot Mirror
As long as I have an ADC in my hot little hands (and I have quite a few sitting around) I can rip whatever I hear, and I can rip whatever goes through standard RCA/headphone audio cables.
It's just like the way people would obviously cover their license plates in their cars if it were legal.
But once we get the RFID implants I guess it won't matter if we wear cloaks and masks or not.
See you at the nearest mountain stronghold! :)
Seriously, the one time I visited Chicago, I fought a losing battle to see Meigs Field, after having performed hundreds of virtual take-offs and landings there. Sucks that I never will.
I'm just saying that that doesn't mean that *I* have to be behind NAT.
Maybe you should try reading my comments a couple times before replying.
Again, if Comcast customers are required to run NAT in order to have multiple machines online, and if I am a Comcast customer, then I am requried to run NAT due to other peoples' ignorance, and I don't like that.
Therefore, there are only as many port 80's out there as IP addresses, and NAT cannot change that. IPv6 can.
To me, NAT is just a hack. Having a handful of real IPs is to me much preferable than one IP, NAT, internal IPs, and a massively complex forwarding ruleset.
Therefore, yay IPv6.
I think the problem is your naming scheme, not IPv6!
Who cares if its card to remember an IPv6 address? Do you really memorize multiple IPs from multiple subnets that often? I can personally only think of 2 subnets I have memorized right now, and I work as a system admin full time.
As for the shortages, you think that it's a good idea to have scarcity in the IP market just so people will be encouraged to run NAT? I think its presumptious of you to force conditions on me, personally I'd love to have IPs for each machine in my house, but I can't because IP addresses are hard to come by.
And your last point, yes, ISPs are scumbags, but it seems that the fact that they price gouge for IPs would make you for IPv6, not against it.
Very informative, thank you.
I didn't know you could get altitude data from GPS, are you sure you are not mistaken? My GPS uses a barometric altimeter, why would they bother putting that in if you could just get that data off GPS? Which model of GPS do you have?
Besides all that, the 2nd amendment is so vague that laws easily could be (and are) made to limit what defines 'the right to bear arms'. Anyway, arguments on domestic issues aside, guns purchased legitimately in America are not the terrorists biggest source of arms.
Eventually, that will change, just like it always does with things like this. The first product to break out of the proprietary lock-in mindset wins. Just like VHS, just like PC clones. One company can't fulfill all the potential uses of what is basically a portable computer which happens to have access to a wireless data service otherwise known as cellular phone service, just like Microsoft knew they couldn't, just like Apple knew they couldn't.
Just history repeating itself.
Your vote is a show of support, a "vote of confidence". All this 'throw away your vote' stuff is so unbelievably ignorant. The thought that people would not vote for a third party simply because voting for a larger party raises the chances that your vote will change the outcome of the election from 1 in 100 million to 1 in 4 million is completely rediculous.
It's like they are gambling to make sure that their vote has the maximum chance of changing the election, rather than just voting for who they want to win. It's a rediculous argument started by the large parties that for some reason even educated people seem to think holds water.
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!!
I think we just notice that more people can't spell worth a damn now that they are forced to attempt to spell in order to function in their job, social life, whatever they use the internet for.
Once you accept that your vote will have no effect on the outcome of the election, you can vote for whoever you think is the best candidate.
Well I'm sure you understand that the US isn't in a position to use nuclear weapons to achieve its goals, whatever you say they might be.
Sorry, couldn't resist. This is Slashdot, after all.
Even if you look at US foreign policy in the worst possible light, we've done pretty good with not nuking people.
In a perfect world, I'd agree with you, any country should have access to nuclear power. The problem is that it tends to fall into the hands of "bad people", who proceed to kill thousands of people -- maybe you are one of those people who refuses to believe that there are "bad people", so maybe I should change "bad people" to "members of unstable societies".
If something like this can come along, and prevent "unstable" countries from developing nuclear power, then that's awesome in my book. We aren't exactly trying to keep nuclear power out of Canada here, this is more like Syria, all the fun terrorist-sponsoring governments.
It's not a perfect solution, and you can chant "Nuclear Power to Syria! All hail the independence of North Korea!" all you want, but personally I feel safer if we can give the countries nuclear power in order to give their society the same tools we have to develop a more stable society.
You are just having a knee-jerk reaction to the fact that the world does not operate on a egalitarian basis on some issues. Don't worry, it needs to be that way, your reaction will pass.
*crunch crunch crunch*
*chop chop chop*
*sniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiff*
I can stop anytime I want.
Agreed, seperate camera. I've never owned a cellphone though, I have a hang-up (ha ha) about them.
AudioScrobbler
Someone else posted this: Signal Candidate SHGb02+14a
Where's the data? I want to see the signal data. I'm sure it would be confusing to see without the proper perspective and backgrounds into the physics behind their radio telescope and ambient radio noise and whatnot, but I want to look at it anyway.
Interesting. I lived out there in 1998, having moved there from North LA county, it was quite bad. I seem to remember smog alerts, though I wasn't particularly attentive of such things. I just went out to Fontana not too long ago and it really wasn't that bad, but I had assumed it was just a fluke. Why is it getting better? Was all the pollution before the result of industrial pollution? Because surely there are more cars on the road.