"The US has a strong interest in a democratic ally in the Middle East (see Israel)."
I don't see why. However, suppose this is true. Why endanger Jews by encouraging them to be violent? The U.S. government's actions are not helping any cause, including any cause that should be American.
What makes U.S. diplomats think they know any answers? The have a terrible track record.
Whatever it is that annoys other cultures about the Jewish culture almost certainly has nothing to do with religion. I've never heard anyone voice any complaints about Jewish religion, other than about circumcision. Probably the Jewish culture could make some adjustments to make themselves more agreeable to their neighbors, without any idea that they were wrong the way they were before.
The replies to my grandparent post wildly misunderstand. The only point I am making is that the U.S. government has had a long history of making things worse in the Middle East: Either for profit, or because of political support from Zionist groups, or political support from fundamentalist Christians. Since U.S. diplomats have established that they don't know how to handle Middle East affairs, maybe they should take a break and stop meddling. I don't agree with Osama bin Laden about violence, but I do agree that the meddling in Saudi and Palestinian and Israeli politics should stop. Many of these American diplomats do not have the social sophistication to know their own wives and daughters very well; they should not presume that they understand other cultures.
When everyone in the world sees U.S. helicopters operated by Israelis firing at Arabs on the ground, it is bad publicity, to say the least. An ad agency exec would have a hard time thinking of a more powerful 10-second message.
A large part of the world is anti-U.S. government, not anti-American. Most
Americans don't know this, but the U.S. government supports the killing of
Arabs by supporting a scheme of embezzlement: U.S. weapons makers and other
largely secret influences have arranged that Israel be given about $5 billion
each year as "foreign aid". (The figure varies somewhat each year, and may not
be accurate for this year.) But the money can be used only to buy U.S.-made
weapons, like the "AH-64 Apache helicopters" mentioned in today's story: Hamas Leader Sheik Ahmed Yassin Killed in Gaza.
This arrangement allows U.S. weapons makers to "sell" more weapons than they
would otherwise, and at pre-arranged prices. The Israelis are not careful
about the price they pay, because the money is free, and because not
discussing the price is part of the arrangement. Of course, everyone tries to
keep all of this secret, and there is considerable pretense.
In recent interviews on U.S. TV, the King of Jordan and the foreign minister
of Iran both say that the biggest factor encouraging al-Qaeda attacks on the
U.S. is the U.S. government's long-standing support for killing Arabs in
Palestine. A Jewish leader said that U.S. government money for weapons was
like gasoline on the fire of Israeli-Arab conflicts.
There are only 14 million Jews in the entire world, and less than 5 million
Jews in Israel. The $5 billion donation from the U.S. government is about
$1,000 for every Jewish Israeli man, woman, and child.
I believe that no violence is justified. So, I am not justifying violence when
I mention this: It is interesting to note that, throughout recorded history,
beginning 3,200 years ago with an Egyptian pharoah, the decendants of Abraham
(who became those we call the Jews) have had periodic conflicts with the
people around them. The Jews move into an area and, within perhaps 200 years
everyone else wants them killed. No other culture that I've been able to find
provokes such hostile reactions. Mostly Jews blame everyone else. The only
time I have ever known a Jewish person to take responsibility is a quote from
former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger: "Any group that has been
persecuted for 2,000 years must be doing something wrong." (But it is 3,200
years.)
If you would like more facts about the purposes of al-Qaeda, you can download
and read the al-Qaeda Training Manual from the U.S. government's Department of
Justice web site: al-Qaeda Training Manual. Note that some of it is missing, presumably
because the U.S. government does not want us to read it. Note that the
conflict with Israel is mentioned. It has been plausibly suggested that much
of the inspiration for the manual came from training given by the U.S. CIA to
Arabs fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan in the early 1980s.
Osama bin Laden predicted that the U.S. would invade and occupy an oil-rich
Arab state. The U.S. government under the present president Bush planned an
attack on Iraq well before 9/11/2001. (If you watched yesterday's 60
Minutes TV news show on CBS, you saw this discussed intensely.) Those
plans apparently encouraged al-Quaeda volunteers. The actual occupation of
Iraq by the U.S. military encourages more to volunteer.
So, Americans live in fear and have their treasury drained by war so that
weapons makers can make a higher profit.
There are other factors, of course, in this story of stupidity and illegality
and ignorance. There is craziness. This is difficult to believe, but true, and
has been widely reported: Christian fundamentalists in the U.S., who almost
all support George Bush, have a plan to arrange the conversion or death of all
the Jews, which they believe is predicted in their bible. There are numerous
rationalizations and quotes from the Bible, but act
An old Digital Equipment Company manual for technical writers said that only a small percentage of people really know English. And here is an example of not knowing English, in the Slashdot story:
"The knowledge gap between someone who can successfully write a System.out.println() and someone capable of designing and implementing a complex Java system brings to companies being back-logged with pending projects."
I learned a lot from the recent election in California. I learned that you can get a job even when you have no qualifications. So, I've decided to be a supermodel.
Unfortunately, Dan seems to review only parts meant to sell to people who know nothing about computers. These are all overpriced. None of the parts I saw would be used by computer companies to build computers. We pay $5.50 U.S. for a partly copper heatsink for Athlon processors, for example.
Here is an exact copy of point 7, paragraph 3, in the parent post:
"The bottom line is that *BSD is dying. It's losing out in terms of developers to Linux and losing out in market share to Windows. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dying."
Not surprisingly, that paragraph is NOT in the original.
Moderators, you were trolled, trolled, trolled!!!! And you moderated down the messengers who were trying to help you, including me.
We need a better moderation system! When was the last time you went to a party and said absolutely nothing? Yet moderators, if they want to do their duty of moderating, are not allowed to talk.
"This latest Barricade g Wireless Cable/DSL Broadband Router provides hacker prevention and logging functionalities. For example, when a hacker attempts to access your network, the Barricade g can alert you via email so you can take appropriate action."
Anyone should gladly pay a little more for a good firewall.
The stupid, socially backward violence authorized by Democrats is better than the stupid, socially backward violence authorized by Republicans. Clinton was only trying to distract voters from his involvement with women.
Republicans don't have that problem. Who would sleep with a Republican? Republicans authorize stupid, socially backward violence so their friends can make more money. Actually, a lot of people who call themselves "Republicans" are not really part of any political party, they are only interested in selling anything the government has to anyone willing to pay. (True Republicans do exist, and this comment is not intended to show disrespect for them.)
Agreed: "The Bush administration and the Republican majority in Congress have used the tragedy of 9/11 to spread fear among Americans, and are using that fear to gain control of all three branches of government - legislative, executive and judicial. If we don't stop allowing the right-wing factions in this country to consolidate their power by taking away our freedoms one by one we won't have a country worth saving."
The U.S. government is rapidly becoming more corrupt. Here are just a few examples, which were posted before to another story:
Killing people and destroying their property: N.Y.
Times editorial "... Americans paid Ahmad Chalabi to gull them into a war that is costing
them a billion a week and a precious human cost."
The present terrorism against the U.S. people is partly the result of the
U.S. government's secret violence: About a year ago, I hastily put
together a short, incomplete history that shows what has happened: History
surrounding the U.S. war with Iraq: Four short stories.
Cisco 675 modems competed directly with Netgear. Not sure what Cisco is doing now.
If you know the market, I think you would be convinced that there are many cases where Cisco sales people are selling very expensive gear when a $50 Netgear box would do as well.
A 50-person company whose employees occasionally browse the internet, that has no servers, and only sends business email doesn't need much.
This is just one more case where an excellent area of inquiry is ruined by the wording of a Slashdot article, and by people trying to show how much they know without saying anything that could actually be used by someone else.
The article at Flexbeta should not be worded, "An In-depth Look at Firewalls", it should be "An In-depth Look at Small System Firewalls". Most single computers or small LANs have no servers.
The parent post is considering an important issue for systems of 100 users. Systems that large are far out of the scope of the Flexbeta article.
We need two Slashdot articles on firewalls, one for small systems, and one for more complex LANS.
The Flexbeta article considered only Linksys (now owned by Cisco) and D-Link small system hardware firewalls. It did not consider Airlink Plus and Netgear.
I got burned with poor technical support from Cisco. Also, Cisco stopped supporting its 675 router. I don't want to be involved with Cisco again, so Linksys is out, especially because of the confused Linksys web site. Cisco has an enormous conflict of interest. If Linksys sells good firewalls, it will mean Cisco sells fewer.
So, which is the better hardware firewall, D-Link DI-604, or the Netgear RP614?
He wasn't being careful in what he said, probably. There is nothing wrong with ShieldsUp! at GRC.com. (Scroll down to ShieldsUp, which cannot be linked directly.)
However, ShieldsUp doesn't go far enough in testing for vulnerabilities. ShieldsUp is perfect for testing systems or LANs that have no servers, because you are only trying to verify that there is no response at a particular port. However, if there is a server, other attacks than those of ShieldsUp should be tried.
I've had problems getting technical support for WinBatch. That was a long time ago, maybe things have changed now. There were so many small and big problems that I stopped using WinBatch.
I haven't checked out AutoIt, a free alternative, apparently. From the home page:
"AutoIt is a simple tool that can simulate key presses, mouse movements and window commands (maximize, minimize, wait for, etc.) in order to automate any windows based task (or even windowed DOS tasks)."
I certainly agree that it is unfortunate that installing NetBEUI or IPX sometimes solves Windows network problems. However, it is a solution that sometimes works, for whatever reason, and it is a solution that is sometimes suggested by Microsoft staff. There are some failures that are not easy to troubleshoot, so we just have to go with a kluge solution.
In my experience, quirky behavior is generally caused by sloppy code; I'm only guessing when I say that is true in this case. I have not seen any Microsoft source code.
Windows XP network problems: Underlying sloppiness
on
Implementing CIFS
·
· Score: 2, Informative
MOD PARENT UP!
I notice that, too. Also, Windows XP machines newly added to a Windows 98 peer-to-peer network have trouble seeing the Win 98 machines. Posting to official Microsoft newsgroups provides no answers to this quirky behavior. Of course, that may be because Chang, Li, Wu, Zhang and others have been told not to discuss it.
I put some of the fixes for quirkiness together so that I could ask Microsoft if there was anything I am missing: Possible Solutions to Slow Network Browsing or Inability to Connect. Some of the problems mentioned are obviously not the fault of Windows XP directly, but the fact that they often occur seems sometimes to be the fault of underlying sloppiness in Windows OS code.
Acronis TrueImage is a Linux-based Windows XP backup utility that never has any problem seeing all machines on a Windows peer-to-peer network.
The marketing department at Microsoft has found another was to convince people not to use any Windows OS: Customers will be forced to accept "upgrades" if they want bug fixes.
This is abuse of customer trust, and a management failure at Microsoft.
Slashdot Mirror
"The US has a strong interest in a democratic ally in the Middle East (see Israel)."
I don't see why. However, suppose this is true. Why endanger Jews by encouraging them to be violent? The U.S. government's actions are not helping any cause, including any cause that should be American.
What makes U.S. diplomats think they know any answers? The have a terrible track record.
Whatever it is that annoys other cultures about the Jewish culture almost certainly has nothing to do with religion. I've never heard anyone voice any complaints about Jewish religion, other than about circumcision. Probably the Jewish culture could make some adjustments to make themselves more agreeable to their neighbors, without any idea that they were wrong the way they were before.
The replies to my grandparent post wildly misunderstand. The only point I am making is that the U.S. government has had a long history of making things worse in the Middle East: Either for profit, or because of political support from Zionist groups, or political support from fundamentalist Christians. Since U.S. diplomats have established that they don't know how to handle Middle East affairs, maybe they should take a break and stop meddling. I don't agree with Osama bin Laden about violence, but I do agree that the meddling in Saudi and Palestinian and Israeli politics should stop. Many of these American diplomats do not have the social sophistication to know their own wives and daughters very well; they should not presume that they understand other cultures.
When everyone in the world sees U.S. helicopters operated by Israelis firing at Arabs on the ground, it is bad publicity, to say the least. An ad agency exec would have a hard time thinking of a more powerful 10-second message.
A large part of the world is anti-U.S. government, not anti-American. Most Americans don't know this, but the U.S. government supports the killing of Arabs by supporting a scheme of embezzlement: U.S. weapons makers and other largely secret influences have arranged that Israel be given about $5 billion each year as "foreign aid". (The figure varies somewhat each year, and may not be accurate for this year.) But the money can be used only to buy U.S.-made weapons, like the "AH-64 Apache helicopters" mentioned in today's story: Hamas Leader Sheik Ahmed Yassin Killed in Gaza.
This arrangement allows U.S. weapons makers to "sell" more weapons than they would otherwise, and at pre-arranged prices. The Israelis are not careful about the price they pay, because the money is free, and because not discussing the price is part of the arrangement. Of course, everyone tries to keep all of this secret, and there is considerable pretense.
In recent interviews on U.S. TV, the King of Jordan and the foreign minister of Iran both say that the biggest factor encouraging al-Qaeda attacks on the U.S. is the U.S. government's long-standing support for killing Arabs in Palestine. A Jewish leader said that U.S. government money for weapons was like gasoline on the fire of Israeli-Arab conflicts.
There are only 14 million Jews in the entire world, and less than 5 million Jews in Israel. The $5 billion donation from the U.S. government is about $1,000 for every Jewish Israeli man, woman, and child.
I believe that no violence is justified. So, I am not justifying violence when I mention this: It is interesting to note that, throughout recorded history, beginning 3,200 years ago with an Egyptian pharoah, the decendants of Abraham (who became those we call the Jews) have had periodic conflicts with the people around them. The Jews move into an area and, within perhaps 200 years everyone else wants them killed. No other culture that I've been able to find provokes such hostile reactions. Mostly Jews blame everyone else. The only time I have ever known a Jewish person to take responsibility is a quote from former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger: "Any group that has been persecuted for 2,000 years must be doing something wrong." (But it is 3,200 years.)
If you would like more facts about the purposes of al-Qaeda, you can download and read the al-Qaeda Training Manual from the U.S. government's Department of Justice web site: al-Qaeda Training Manual. Note that some of it is missing, presumably because the U.S. government does not want us to read it. Note that the conflict with Israel is mentioned. It has been plausibly suggested that much of the inspiration for the manual came from training given by the U.S. CIA to Arabs fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan in the early 1980s.
Osama bin Laden predicted that the U.S. would invade and occupy an oil-rich Arab state. The U.S. government under the present president Bush planned an attack on Iraq well before 9/11/2001. (If you watched yesterday's 60 Minutes TV news show on CBS, you saw this discussed intensely.) Those plans apparently encouraged al-Quaeda volunteers. The actual occupation of Iraq by the U.S. military encourages more to volunteer.
So, Americans live in fear and have their treasury drained by war so that weapons makers can make a higher profit.
There are other factors, of course, in this story of stupidity and illegality and ignorance. There is craziness. This is difficult to believe, but true, and has been widely reported: Christian fundamentalists in the U.S., who almost all support George Bush, have a plan to arrange the conversion or death of all the Jews, which they believe is predicted in their bible. There are numerous rationalizations and quotes from the Bible, but act
"Only 32% of Java developers really know Java."
An old Digital Equipment Company manual for technical writers said that only a small percentage of people really know English. And here is an example of not knowing English, in the Slashdot story:
"The knowledge gap between someone who can successfully write a System.out.println() and someone capable of designing and implementing a complex Java system brings to companies being back-logged with pending projects."
I learned a lot from the recent election in California. I learned that you can get a job even when you have no qualifications. So, I've decided to be a supermodel.
Unfortunately, Dan seems to review only parts meant to sell to people who know nothing about computers. These are all overpriced. None of the parts I saw would be used by computer companies to build computers. We pay $5.50 U.S. for a partly copper heatsink for Athlon processors, for example.
However, you should check News.Google.com frequently in case the world ended and no one told you.
Duh. Duhhhhhhh. Bored Moderators!
Here is an exact copy of point 7, paragraph 3, in the parent post:
"The bottom line is that *BSD is dying. It's losing out in terms of developers to Linux and losing out in market share to Windows. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dying."
Not surprisingly, that paragraph is NOT in the original.
Moderators, you were trolled, trolled, trolled!!!! And you moderated down the messengers who were trying to help you, including me.
We need a better moderation system! When was the last time you went to a party and said absolutely nothing? Yet moderators, if they want to do their duty of moderating, are not allowed to talk.
One model of SMC Barricade
Froogle results: SMC SMC2804WBR Cable/DSL RTR 802.11GW/Switch
"This latest Barricade g Wireless Cable/DSL Broadband Router provides hacker prevention and logging functionalities. For example, when a hacker attempts to access your network, the Barricade g can alert you via email so you can take appropriate action."
Anyone should gladly pay a little more for a good firewall.
The advice is very much appreciated.
NOT A TRUE COPY. He didn't say BSD is dying!
And really good things are called "Evil Dragon", at least that's what you would think looking at the retail packaging for video cards.
The stupid, socially backward violence authorized by Democrats is better than the stupid, socially backward violence authorized by Republicans. Clinton was only trying to distract voters from his involvement with women.
Republicans don't have that problem. Who would sleep with a Republican? Republicans authorize stupid, socially backward violence so their friends can make more money. Actually, a lot of people who call themselves "Republicans" are not really part of any political party, they are only interested in selling anything the government has to anyone willing to pay. (True Republicans do exist, and this comment is not intended to show disrespect for them.)
"If Skype becomes illegal, only criminals will have Skype." (Encrypted VOIP, with better sound quality than telephones, and free, at present.)
Agreed: "The Bush administration and the Republican majority in Congress have used the tragedy of 9/11 to spread fear among Americans, and are using that fear to gain control of all three branches of government - legislative, executive and judicial. If we don't stop allowing the right-wing factions in this country to consolidate their power by taking away our freedoms one by one we won't have a country worth saving."
The U.S. government is rapidly becoming more corrupt. Here are just a few examples, which were posted before to another story:
Killing people and destroying their property:
N.Y. Times editorial
"... Americans paid Ahmad Chalabi to gull them into a war that is costing them a billion a week and a precious human cost."
Lying about scientific facts:
"The Bush administration has deliberately and systematically distorted scientific fact in the service of policy goals..."
N.Y. Times
The Guardian
Wired News
Union of Concerned Scientists
The present terrorism against the U.S. people is partly the result of the U.S. government's secret violence:
About a year ago, I hastily put together a short, incomplete history that shows what has happened: History surrounding the U.S. war with Iraq: Four short stories.
If you don't like it, vote accordingly.
LOL
Any more info about Netgear would be helpful.
Cisco 675 modems competed directly with Netgear. Not sure what Cisco is doing now.
If you know the market, I think you would be convinced that there are many cases where Cisco sales people are selling very expensive gear when a $50 Netgear box would do as well.
A 50-person company whose employees occasionally browse the internet, that has no servers, and only sends business email doesn't need much.
While Steve Gibson is known for overblown language, his ShieldsUp does in fact test for open ports.
This is just one more case where an excellent area of inquiry is ruined by the wording of a Slashdot article, and by people trying to show how much they know without saying anything that could actually be used by someone else.
The article at Flexbeta should not be worded, "An In-depth Look at Firewalls", it should be "An In-depth Look at Small System Firewalls". Most single computers or small LANs have no servers.
The parent post is considering an important issue for systems of 100 users. Systems that large are far out of the scope of the Flexbeta article.
We need two Slashdot articles on firewalls, one for small systems, and one for more complex LANS.
The Flexbeta article considered only Linksys (now owned by Cisco) and D-Link small system hardware firewalls. It did not consider Airlink Plus and Netgear.
I got burned with poor technical support from Cisco. Also, Cisco stopped supporting its 675 router. I don't want to be involved with Cisco again, so Linksys is out, especially because of the confused Linksys web site. Cisco has an enormous conflict of interest. If Linksys sells good firewalls, it will mean Cisco sells fewer.
So, which is the better hardware firewall, D-Link DI-604, or the Netgear RP614?
He wasn't being careful in what he said, probably. There is nothing wrong with ShieldsUp! at GRC.com. (Scroll down to ShieldsUp, which cannot be linked directly.)
However, ShieldsUp doesn't go far enough in testing for vulnerabilities. ShieldsUp is perfect for testing systems or LANs that have no servers, because you are only trying to verify that there is no response at a particular port. However, if there is a server, other attacks than those of ShieldsUp should be tried.
I've had problems getting technical support for WinBatch. That was a long time ago, maybe things have changed now. There were so many small and big problems that I stopped using WinBatch.
I haven't checked out AutoIt, a free alternative, apparently. From the home page:
"AutoIt is a simple tool that can simulate key presses, mouse movements and window commands (maximize, minimize, wait for, etc.) in order to automate any windows based task (or even windowed DOS tasks)."
This is VERY difficult, but it works: To be more intelligent, work on resolving your inner conflict.
Read this book: The Primal Scream: Primal Therapy: The Cure for Neurosis.
Other books I've found useful for personal growth: Read the Recent Great Books.
I certainly agree that it is unfortunate that installing NetBEUI or IPX sometimes solves Windows network problems. However, it is a solution that sometimes works, for whatever reason, and it is a solution that is sometimes suggested by Microsoft staff. There are some failures that are not easy to troubleshoot, so we just have to go with a kluge solution.
In my experience, quirky behavior is generally caused by sloppy code; I'm only guessing when I say that is true in this case. I have not seen any Microsoft source code.
MOD PARENT UP!
I notice that, too. Also, Windows XP machines newly added to a Windows 98 peer-to-peer network have trouble seeing the Win 98 machines. Posting to official Microsoft newsgroups provides no answers to this quirky behavior. Of course, that may be because Chang, Li, Wu, Zhang and others have been told not to discuss it.
I put some of the fixes for quirkiness together so that I could ask Microsoft if there was anything I am missing: Possible Solutions to Slow Network Browsing or Inability to Connect. Some of the problems mentioned are obviously not the fault of Windows XP directly, but the fact that they often occur seems sometimes to be the fault of underlying sloppiness in Windows OS code.
Acronis TrueImage is a Linux-based Windows XP backup utility that never has any problem seeing all machines on a Windows peer-to-peer network.
I've also never had problems with Linux itself.
The marketing department at Microsoft has found another was to convince people not to use any Windows OS: Customers will be forced to accept "upgrades" if they want bug fixes.
This is abuse of customer trust, and a management failure at Microsoft.