Store the call logs in a database. Indicate in your dialplan which types of call are billable and which are free, or "documentation." Then at check out, the hotel billing system queries the database and adds the proper line items to the bill.
You can even match different types of calls and assign different rates. i.e. local, long distance, intra-lata, toll-free, etc.
There are several packages available from various sources to do prepaid phone cards or accounts. Check out http://voip-info.org
Incorrect. Getting VoIP calls from a POTS line has nothing to do with VoIP. What you describe is a gateway that digitizes and routes data from analog circuits onto an IP network.
VoIP, on the other hand is just that. Audio and video data packetized and transmitted with a set of protocols optimized to minimize the limitations of IP networks that make such data transmissions difficult.
Getting onto or off of the PSTN is the job of the loop signaling software and hardware. Getting your call across the Internet is the job of VoIP. Asterisk works nicely in both cases.
The reason that Robertson didn't get the answer to why not to "run as root" is twofold.
1.) He didn't want to hear the answer when it was told him.
2.) probably 99% of people who know that you shouldn't "run as root" don't know absolutly why themselves. They have a pretty good idea, but someone they respect and trust (and who is correct) told them it was stupid.
The other 1% who could have told him why, weren't consulted. Nor will they be.
It's no accident that Linspire (Lindows) is modeled after Windows, and it contains Windows' greatest fundamental security flaw.
...but MS being a business (unlike the Mozilla Foundation), put business interests first.
There's nothing wrong with putting business interests first, as long as customers have the option to go elsewhere.
It's only when you can't "vote with your feet" to punish a company for stupid decisions that really serious problems arise.
This is the essense of the problem with MS. Not that they are a business, but that they have a monopoly. And the goodness of The Mozilla Foundation is not that they are non-profit, but that they are trying to offer a viable alternative to one part of the monopoly.
I can't tell you what a relief it is to have the Supreme Court of the United States weighing in on such an important issue as whether the 4th ammendment to the US Constitution is valid. I mean, for the longest time I was woried that people had rights independant of government. It's nice to see the government clairify the issue.
You see, government gives us our rights, and therefore can take them away. It's important, also, to remember that the US Constitution is a "living document." This means that it's much more like a EULA for citizenship than a restraint on, and plan for government. I can't tell you how relieved I am to know that all responsibility for my safety, and well being is under the management of caring government bureaucrats.
I thought I might have to exercise some of my freedoms to prove I'm still free. But my government has assured me that I am, in fact, still free as long as I don't try to exercise any of my freedoms.
The status of bloggers as journalists is irrelevant for this purpose. I can find no constitutional basis for the protection of journalist's sources, or those of anyone else. (please correct me if I'm wrong.)
That said, this brings two questions to mind; First, what if I hear something that someone is not supposed to reveal and I tell a friend? That friend then tells the police. Am I required to tell the authorities where I heard it? This has probably already been settled in law, but IANAL. Second, Why are Journalists given special status in regard to their treatment under the law? Isn't this what the Bill of Rights was attempting to prevent?
There has long been a disturbing trend in the U.S. toward making the job of law enforcement easier at the expense of individual freedom. But if my neighbor knows who committed a crime against me or my family, and won't tell authorities, it mearly make him a rotten person. It shouldn't make him a criminal. One of the costs of freedom is that sometimes the criminals get away. The alternative is to have the criminals running your life.
Re:Asterisk has good WAF...
on
Build Your Own PBX
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Another tactic for call screening that I use is to require the caller to press a number in order to leave a message. For me, this stops a lot of telemarketing calls. It seems they either can't or don't want to press 1 before leaving me a message. Which makes me VERY happy.
With a hashed password, you don't have access to the password (input to message digest function).
You don't need it for most implementations. In most systems that use hashes for password security, you provide a string to the system. The system computes a hash and compairs it to the stored value.
if you know the hash, you simply provide another string with the same hash. In effect, every hash used for passwords probably has more than one plaintext.
Some systems complicate this by using some known, preshared value which is concatinated to the plaintext before hashing. This would require you to know some of the plaintext in order to calculate a subsitute string. But without that complication, this is pretty straight forward substitution without knowing the plaintext (password)
The *point* of science fiction is the science of course,...
The *point* of science fiction is the fiction. If I want to read science I'll pick up a text book. When I want a good story with a science backdrop I'll turn to science fiction.
The degree is just the secret handshake. Once in the door, you will succeed or not based on your drive and ability. Having a degree is better than not, but no one much cares where you got it.
As someone with 14 years of experience on the ops side of things and no degree; the dot-com bust got a little tough. I was losing out to people with the same experience who had the degree. Get as much experinece as possible before you graduate. That's what counts. Your degree will just give you an edge with people of the same experience. It's a checklist item.
Imagine if everyone reading this thread picked up a phone, called a friend and said five or six of the keywords.
Actually, that wouldn't do a thing. Since the system has to scan all if its traffic in order to hit on something anyway, then you haven't increased the load on the system. Having more hits only means more items are flagged for analysis. And unless the system is undersized, it will simply continue to process up to the maximum capacity of the public telecom networks on which it's listening. A hard limit, that can only be increased by installing more hardware, or more efficient utilization of that hardware by the telecom companies. Either way, the upper limit of flash mobs is the size of the infrastructure on which they play.
On the other hand, if you're talking about the analysis of hits, you have another set of problems. If I were designing such a system I would qualify possible hits with a correlation of some sort. We know, for example, that through Beysian statical analysis a correlation exists in natural language between certian types of tokens within a given communication. Detecting threats should be very similar to detecting spam, once the analysis engine is properly trained. Implement that training in hardware, and you have a very fast analysis engine.
You lose you job and don't bother to take advantage of the unemployment compensation...
All government sponsored social assistance, funded by tax money, is fundamentally immoral by virtue of the fact that it is predicated on compelled Charity. If I, as a tax payer, am compelled to pay taxes, which I am. Then any tax money used for charitable purposes for which I did not specifically intend, is compelled charity. Western societies have long held that charity is a voluntary practice, and to compel one person to aid another against his will is robbery. Therefore I will not accept any form of government assistance, except it be the result of voluntary contributions. Private charities are another matter. I have given liberally to many of them in the past, and will do so in the future when I am able. Unfortunately, those that I contacted were unable to help at that time. I see this as too many people being forced to support government programs, and therefore lacking the funds to aid people in their own local communities. The government is not responsible for my well being, only for insuring that I have the freedom to help myself, and providing a common defense so that I may exercise my right to own property.
Or did I not understand "The government didn't help me, and I didn't ask."
The government didn't help me, and I didn't ask. The government cannot help anyone. It can only force others to help me. See above.
This (from my viewpoint) is stupid (I tried to think of any other word that fit and isn't "name calling", but am at a loss)...
From the perspective of a capitalist, socialism is stupid. You are entitled to your viewpoint. Professing the opinion that my ideas are stupid is not the same as calling me stupid. So, no offense taken.
The measure of one's moral and ethical beliefs can only be effectively taken when there is a compelling reason to abandon them. It is my adherence to such principles that makes me someone who may be trusted, and relied upon in times of hardship and danger. Whether others see value in that is another matter. The important point is that I will know the difference, and my children will as well. It's not that I eschew assistance. I simply refuse to be part of the problem.
especially if you have a young one on the way!
The young one exists. that fact cannot be changed, only its disposition, and murder of the Innocent is beyond me.
What do you mean by this "I found the strength to survive and move forward, Helped by the lessening of government restraints"?
My business depends on other businesses. If I provide a valuable service at a reasonable price, which I do. And I am able to let potential customers know that, which I am. Then they can choose to buy my services if they have the funds, which they don't. Lessening of the tax burden on businesses lets them keep more of their profits. Contrary to socialist ideology, this does not all go into the pockets on the owners, never to be seen again. The bulk of it is reinvested in the company to increase next years profits. Part of that reinvestment is the purchase of my services. The only incentive that anyone has to hire me as an employee or a service provider is that it makes them more profit. Otherwise why should they bother? Because I need it? Now we're talking charity again. That's not something I would build my life around.
Are you implying that people accepting unemployment checks, food stamps/donations from food banks, or say heating assistance are being held back by "the man"?
I am stating quite clearly that many of them are being held back by their choice to be dependent on the good will of others. They expect another to do what they could do themselves. The purpose of charity it to provide relief when you are unable to do for yourself, not when you are unwilling. And long term use of public assistance is just that, being unwilling to better yourself. That's where I draw the line at aiding others.
Charity is by it's nature demeaning to anyone who desir
Actually I did loose my high paying IT job. And I choose to discontinue my insurance because it was too expensive, and I would have lost it anyway. After that, my second daughter was born, and every month I wonder if it's the one they'll forclose on my house, because I'm sixty days on both mortgages.
So in order to keep the lights on, and eat, (literally, we went several weeks when the only food in the house was baby formula.) I started a business, and sent out resumes. No takers on the resume. Now my credit is shot, so I can't work for a bank, or work under a waiver while I wait for a new DoD security clearance. My business phone line was disconnected, followed by my home phone. Things looked bleak. Some of you will know who I am from these details, so you know what happened next. I got back up, and kept working.
The government didn't help me, and I didn't ask. i got knocked on my ass, and I got up. I got knocked down again and got back up. I'm looking for work and finding it. I'm turning things around, and the only reason I that businesses are able to afford to hire my company is that the Bush cut taxes on the "rich" freed up capital, and reduced drag on the economy. Don't tell me the economy hasn't turned around. I see it every time I go in for a sales meeting and come out with more work. (which is difficult since I'm and engineer, forced to become a salesman.) Kerry wants to repeal the Bush tax cuts. I, quite literally, can't afford to see him elected.
So, you whished ill on me not knowing it had already happened. But being true to who we both are, I would never do that to you, and you will never succeed in life because you have no desire to. This also explains our political leanings which are an outgrowth of the kind of life we lead. I found the strength to survive and move forward, Helped by the lessening of government restraints. While you lack even the courage to be known by a psudeonym. And this speaks volumes of the cause you espouse.
Oh, and my dad died of cancer a few years ago. He had insurance, but strangely enough, it didn't help. Maybe if we elect enough "caring" liberals such as yourself to office, we can pass a law to make having cancer illegal. But like most failed social programs, it won't cure cancer, it'll just put a bunch of cancer patients in jail.
Speaking of informed opinions, or the lack thereof; perhaps you should be doing a little of that research you like to preach about.
We forced the inspectors to leave.
Before Bush even took office, Sadam kick them out. Then let them in. Then stalled, and played some games. At some point, you cease to allow a government which has failed to comply with the terms of its surrender, to continue to exits. Perhaps if we had been a little faster, we would have found the chem and bio weapons that the inspectors, has previously claimed were present.
Did we find any WMDs? NO! This sounds like success to me.
You're forgetting that Sadam's government claimed in it's own inventory, turned over to the UN inspectors, that it had chem and bio weapons. Most of this was never accounted for after the fact, as was required, and the inspectors never found the majority of them. This was part of the evidence presented to the UN by Colin Powell last year.
This is success the same way not finding all the bodies that a serial killer has confessed to burring is. All governments involved agree that he had the weapons. why would he destroy them and not tell anyone? to embarrass Bush? Clinton was president when most of this happened. The answer is he wouldn't. He hid them, and we can't find them. NO ONE in a position to know, has EVER claimed that Sadam did not previously have weapons of mass destruction. He failed to provide evidence of their disposition, and the inspectors acknowledge that they neither found nor destroyed even a large percent of what was admitted, and believed by the inspectors, to exist.
Again, I think it is you who needs to check your opinions with facts before making condescending and disparaging comments, in lieu of informed dialog. In light of the facts, and history of this matter, it's reasonable to conclude that Inspections did not work, and never would have.
First, I'll believe the story when I see real proof. The press has shown itself to be a bigger lier than the politicians lately.
Second, of course I'll still vote for W, even it he lied. (yes, I mean lied and not just "repeated a lie."
Why would I do this? Not because I love the Republican party, I don't. Rather because the choice, as I see it, is between a Socialist, and a Liberal. So, while Socialism is one of the most vile and evil forms of economy ever devised; Liberalism is just annoying, so long as it's continually challenged at every turn. Since these are my only real choices, I'll take the closet liberal and lower taxes, over compelled charity and a blue helmeted military, any day.
Now we can watch the moderators duke it out as this valid counterpoint to the parent post is moded up and down for the next five days or so.
wasnt it mob mentality that put Jesus on the cross?
Wow, you had the spine to use the name of Jesus in a serious and positive way on slashdot. Just wait until the anti-religious religious zealots get their digital fingers on you. That +1 won't be there for long.
That said; you're right. Our representative democracy has been chipped slowly away for over a century in the interest of attaining that most heinous of things-- The tyranny of mob rule, brought about by direct democracy.
-A recording must be executing on at least one tuner
-Signal quality must degrade to the point of causing severe digital artifacts WITHOUT a loss of signal lock
-The poor signal quality must persist for at LEAST 15 seconds
-The signal must then cut out completely on BOTH tuners
-The recording must STILL be going on when signal is restored
Which is exactly what happened in Richmond, Virginia last Friday night during Stargate SG1. It was very annoying. I'm still pissed to find that it's a software bug.
This appears to be an isolated issue that has only affected a small number of owners of much older Tivos (and in reality, ones that probably have a bunch of weird hacks).
No quite. My stock sony SAT-60 started acting up last week. I've had to power it off three times now, and I missed an episode of good eats because of it (oh, the horror) and It screwed up both Stargate SG1 and Stargate Atlantis. I thought my Tivo was going bad, and since I can't afford an upgrade I was a little dismayed. In fact I was considering going back to cable to avoid the expense of the upgrade.
Now I find out that it was a bug in the software. I'm quite pissed off. Six year old hardware flaking out is one thing, but incompetent QA is another.
This isn't new. It's not even something that security practitioners don't know about. It's just something that management doesn't want to implement in most cases, and that personal firewall vendors are afraid to.
It's egress filtering and every firewall in existence should have been configured to do it a long time ago. When done correctly, it can allow you to filter all of your outbound traffic with ease on your existing firewall.
Slashdot Mirror
Store the call logs in a database. Indicate in your dialplan which types of call are billable and which are free, or "documentation." Then at check out, the hotel billing system queries the database and adds the proper line items to the bill.
You can even match different types of calls and assign different rates. i.e. local, long distance, intra-lata, toll-free, etc.
There are several packages available from various sources to do prepaid phone cards or accounts. Check out http://voip-info.org
Incorrect. Getting VoIP calls from a POTS line has nothing to do with VoIP. What you describe is a gateway that digitizes and routes data from analog circuits onto an IP network.
VoIP, on the other hand is just that. Audio and video data packetized and transmitted with a set of protocols optimized to minimize the limitations of IP networks that make such data transmissions difficult.
Getting onto or off of the PSTN is the job of the loop signaling software and hardware. Getting your call across the Internet is the job of VoIP. Asterisk works nicely in both cases.
The reason that Robertson didn't get the answer to why not to "run as root" is twofold.
1.) He didn't want to hear the answer when it was told him.
2.) probably 99% of people who know that you shouldn't "run as root" don't know absolutly why themselves. They have a pretty good idea, but someone they respect and trust (and who is correct) told them it was stupid.
The other 1% who could have told him why, weren't consulted. Nor will they be.
It's no accident that Linspire (Lindows) is modeled after Windows, and it contains Windows' greatest fundamental security flaw.
I prefer chopsticks!
There's nothing wrong with putting business interests first, as long as customers have the option to go elsewhere.
It's only when you can't "vote with your feet" to punish a company for stupid decisions that really serious problems arise.
This is the essense of the problem with MS. Not that they are a business, but that they have a monopoly. And the goodness of The Mozilla Foundation is not that they are non-profit, but that they are trying to offer a viable alternative to one part of the monopoly.
I agree... Now. What was I saying?
Oh, now I remember.
This is all a load of crap. Linux Rocks!
I can't tell you what a relief it is to have the Supreme Court of the United States weighing in on such an important issue as whether the 4th ammendment to the US Constitution is valid. I mean, for the longest time I was woried that people had rights independant of government. It's nice to see the government clairify the issue.
You see, government gives us our rights, and therefore can take them away. It's important, also, to remember that the US Constitution is a "living document." This means that it's much more like a EULA for citizenship than a restraint on, and plan for government. I can't tell you how relieved I am to know that all responsibility for my safety, and well being is under the management of caring government bureaucrats.
I thought I might have to exercise some of my freedoms to prove I'm still free. But my government has assured me that I am, in fact, still free as long as I don't try to exercise any of my freedoms.
The status of bloggers as journalists is irrelevant for this purpose. I can find no constitutional basis for the protection of journalist's sources, or those of anyone else. (please correct me if I'm wrong.)
That said, this brings two questions to mind; First, what if I hear something that someone is not supposed to reveal and I tell a friend? That friend then tells the police. Am I required to tell the authorities where I heard it? This has probably already been settled in law, but IANAL. Second, Why are Journalists given special status in regard to their treatment under the law? Isn't this what the Bill of Rights was attempting to prevent?
There has long been a disturbing trend in the U.S. toward making the job of law enforcement easier at the expense of individual freedom. But if my neighbor knows who committed a crime against me or my family, and won't tell authorities, it mearly make him a rotten person. It shouldn't make him a criminal. One of the costs of freedom is that sometimes the criminals get away. The alternative is to have the criminals running your life.
Another tactic for call screening that I use is to require the caller to press a number in order to leave a message. For me, this stops a lot of telemarketing calls. It seems they either can't or don't want to press 1 before leaving me a message. Which makes me VERY happy.
Never worked with AOL, eh?
That's interesting. I put quotes around it (i.e. "c#") and it worked fine. I guess ya just got to tell it what you really want.
Aren't computers a bitch?
You don't need it for most implementations. In most systems that use hashes for password security, you provide a string to the system. The system computes a hash and compairs it to the stored value.
if you know the hash, you simply provide another string with the same hash. In effect, every hash used for passwords probably has more than one plaintext.
Some systems complicate this by using some known, preshared value which is concatinated to the plaintext before hashing. This would require you to know some of the plaintext in order to calculate a subsitute string. But without that complication, this is pretty straight forward substitution without knowing the plaintext (password)
The *point* of science fiction is the fiction. If I want to read science I'll pick up a text book. When I want a good story with a science backdrop I'll turn to science fiction.
Why is this comment insightful?
RTFA and see that the author claims this will not be the outcome.
As for me, Roy Batty said it best; "I want more life... Fucker!"
The degree is just the secret handshake. Once in the door, you will succeed or not based on your drive and ability. Having a degree is better than not, but no one much cares where you got it.
As someone with 14 years of experience on the ops side of things and no degree; the dot-com bust got a little tough. I was losing out to people with the same experience who had the degree. Get as much experinece as possible before you graduate. That's what counts. Your degree will just give you an edge with people of the same experience. It's a checklist item.
More like, "Jim has 2 Ph.D.'s... He'll bust a cap on my ass if I double check his work."
Actually, that wouldn't do a thing. Since the system has to scan all if its traffic in order to hit on something anyway, then you haven't increased the load on the system. Having more hits only means more items are flagged for analysis. And unless the system is undersized, it will simply continue to process up to the maximum capacity of the public telecom networks on which it's listening. A hard limit, that can only be increased by installing more hardware, or more efficient utilization of that hardware by the telecom companies. Either way, the upper limit of flash mobs is the size of the infrastructure on which they play.
On the other hand, if you're talking about the analysis of hits, you have another set of problems. If I were designing such a system I would qualify possible hits with a correlation of some sort. We know, for example, that through Beysian statical analysis a correlation exists in natural language between certian types of tokens within a given communication. Detecting threats should be very similar to detecting spam, once the analysis engine is properly trained. Implement that training in hardware, and you have a very fast analysis engine.
All government sponsored social assistance, funded by tax money, is fundamentally immoral by virtue of the fact that it is predicated on compelled Charity. If I, as a tax payer, am compelled to pay taxes, which I am. Then any tax money used for charitable purposes for which I did not specifically intend, is compelled charity. Western societies have long held that charity is a voluntary practice, and to compel one person to aid another against his will is robbery. Therefore I will not accept any form of government assistance, except it be the result of voluntary contributions. Private charities are another matter. I have given liberally to many of them in the past, and will do so in the future when I am able. Unfortunately, those that I contacted were unable to help at that time. I see this as too many people being forced to support government programs, and therefore lacking the funds to aid people in their own local communities. The government is not responsible for my well being, only for insuring that I have the freedom to help myself, and providing a common defense so that I may exercise my right to own property.
Or did I not understand "The government didn't help me, and I didn't ask."
The government didn't help me, and I didn't ask. The government cannot help anyone. It can only force others to help me. See above.
This (from my viewpoint) is stupid (I tried to think of any other word that fit and isn't "name calling", but am at a loss)...
From the perspective of a capitalist, socialism is stupid. You are entitled to your viewpoint. Professing the opinion that my ideas are stupid is not the same as calling me stupid. So, no offense taken.
The measure of one's moral and ethical beliefs can only be effectively taken when there is a compelling reason to abandon them. It is my adherence to such principles that makes me someone who may be trusted, and relied upon in times of hardship and danger. Whether others see value in that is another matter. The important point is that I will know the difference, and my children will as well. It's not that I eschew assistance. I simply refuse to be part of the problem.
especially if you have a young one on the way!
The young one exists. that fact cannot be changed, only its disposition, and murder of the Innocent is beyond me.
What do you mean by this "I found the strength to survive and move forward, Helped by the lessening of government restraints"?
My business depends on other businesses. If I provide a valuable service at a reasonable price, which I do. And I am able to let potential customers know that, which I am. Then they can choose to buy my services if they have the funds, which they don't. Lessening of the tax burden on businesses lets them keep more of their profits. Contrary to socialist ideology, this does not all go into the pockets on the owners, never to be seen again. The bulk of it is reinvested in the company to increase next years profits. Part of that reinvestment is the purchase of my services. The only incentive that anyone has to hire me as an employee or a service provider is that it makes them more profit. Otherwise why should they bother? Because I need it? Now we're talking charity again. That's not something I would build my life around.
Are you implying that people accepting unemployment checks, food stamps/donations from food banks, or say heating assistance are being held back by "the man"?
I am stating quite clearly that many of them are being held back by their choice to be dependent on the good will of others. They expect another to do what they could do themselves. The purpose of charity it to provide relief when you are unable to do for yourself, not when you are unwilling. And long term use of public assistance is just that, being unwilling to better yourself. That's where I draw the line at aiding others.
Charity is by it's nature demeaning to anyone who desir
Actually I did loose my high paying IT job. And I choose to discontinue my insurance because it was too expensive, and I would have lost it anyway. After that, my second daughter was born, and every month I wonder if it's the one they'll forclose on my house, because I'm sixty days on both mortgages.
So in order to keep the lights on, and eat, (literally, we went several weeks when the only food in the house was baby formula.) I started a business, and sent out resumes. No takers on the resume. Now my credit is shot, so I can't work for a bank, or work under a waiver while I wait for a new DoD security clearance. My business phone line was disconnected, followed by my home phone. Things looked bleak. Some of you will know who I am from these details, so you know what happened next. I got back up, and kept working.
The government didn't help me, and I didn't ask. i got knocked on my ass, and I got up. I got knocked down again and got back up. I'm looking for work and finding it. I'm turning things around, and the only reason I that businesses are able to afford to hire my company is that the Bush cut taxes on the "rich" freed up capital, and reduced drag on the economy. Don't tell me the economy hasn't turned around. I see it every time I go in for a sales meeting and come out with more work. (which is difficult since I'm and engineer, forced to become a salesman.) Kerry wants to repeal the Bush tax cuts. I, quite literally, can't afford to see him elected.
So, you whished ill on me not knowing it had already happened. But being true to who we both are, I would never do that to you, and you will never succeed in life because you have no desire to. This also explains our political leanings which are an outgrowth of the kind of life we lead. I found the strength to survive and move forward, Helped by the lessening of government restraints. While you lack even the courage to be known by a psudeonym. And this speaks volumes of the cause you espouse.
Oh, and my dad died of cancer a few years ago. He had insurance, but strangely enough, it didn't help. Maybe if we elect enough "caring" liberals such as yourself to office, we can pass a law to make having cancer illegal. But like most failed social programs, it won't cure cancer, it'll just put a bunch of cancer patients in jail.
Speaking of informed opinions, or the lack thereof; perhaps you should be doing a little of that research you like to preach about.
We forced the inspectors to leave.Before Bush even took office, Sadam kick them out. Then let them in. Then stalled, and played some games. At some point, you cease to allow a government which has failed to comply with the terms of its surrender, to continue to exits. Perhaps if we had been a little faster, we would have found the chem and bio weapons that the inspectors, has previously claimed were present.
Did we find any WMDs? NO! This sounds like success to me.You're forgetting that Sadam's government claimed in it's own inventory, turned over to the UN inspectors, that it had chem and bio weapons. Most of this was never accounted for after the fact, as was required, and the inspectors never found the majority of them. This was part of the evidence presented to the UN by Colin Powell last year.
This is success the same way not finding all the bodies that a serial killer has confessed to burring is. All governments involved agree that he had the weapons. why would he destroy them and not tell anyone? to embarrass Bush? Clinton was president when most of this happened. The answer is he wouldn't. He hid them, and we can't find them. NO ONE in a position to know, has EVER claimed that Sadam did not previously have weapons of mass destruction. He failed to provide evidence of their disposition, and the inspectors acknowledge that they neither found nor destroyed even a large percent of what was admitted, and believed by the inspectors, to exist.
Again, I think it is you who needs to check your opinions with facts before making condescending and disparaging comments, in lieu of informed dialog. In light of the facts, and history of this matter, it's reasonable to conclude that Inspections did not work, and never would have.
First, I'll believe the story when I see real proof. The press has shown itself to be a bigger lier than the politicians lately.
Second, of course I'll still vote for W, even it he lied. (yes, I mean lied and not just "repeated a lie."
Why would I do this? Not because I love the Republican party, I don't. Rather because the choice, as I see it, is between a Socialist, and a Liberal. So, while Socialism is one of the most vile and evil forms of economy ever devised; Liberalism is just annoying, so long as it's continually challenged at every turn. Since these are my only real choices, I'll take the closet liberal and lower taxes, over compelled charity and a blue helmeted military, any day.
Now we can watch the moderators duke it out as this valid counterpoint to the parent post is moded up and down for the next five days or so.
Wow, you had the spine to use the name of Jesus in a serious and positive way on slashdot. Just wait until the anti-religious religious zealots get their digital fingers on you. That +1 won't be there for long.
That said; you're right. Our representative democracy has been chipped slowly away for over a century in the interest of attaining that most heinous of things-- The tyranny of mob rule, brought about by direct democracy.
-Signal quality must degrade to the point of causing severe digital artifacts WITHOUT a loss of signal lock
-The poor signal quality must persist for at LEAST 15 seconds
-The signal must then cut out completely on BOTH tuners
-The recording must STILL be going on when signal is restored
Which is exactly what happened in Richmond, Virginia last Friday night during Stargate SG1. It was very annoying. I'm still pissed to find that it's a software bug.
No quite. My stock sony SAT-60 started acting up last week. I've had to power it off three times now, and I missed an episode of good eats because of it (oh, the horror) and It screwed up both Stargate SG1 and Stargate Atlantis. I thought my Tivo was going bad, and since I can't afford an upgrade I was a little dismayed. In fact I was considering going back to cable to avoid the expense of the upgrade.
Now I find out that it was a bug in the software. I'm quite pissed off. Six year old hardware flaking out is one thing, but incompetent QA is another.
This isn't new. It's not even something that security practitioners don't know about. It's just something that management doesn't want to implement in most cases, and that personal firewall vendors are afraid to.
It's egress filtering and every firewall in existence should have been configured to do it a long time ago. When done correctly, it can allow you to filter all of your outbound traffic with ease on your existing firewall.