I beg to differ. When I was a wee lad (and allowed to stay up late), I remember watching a special (read: pilot) that Rob Reiner put together called "The TV Show" in the late 1970s (on ABC-TV I think). It was basically skits that parodied TV (much like "Robot Chicken", though horribly dated of course).
The skits included a telethon ("Stop Death During Our Lifetime!"), a commercial for the chemical company Proto-Chem (with CEO Tom Proto-Chem no less), a send-up of Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom (the prey of the intrepid crew that week was "the white collar worker"), and.. Spinal Tap.
Weird, that sounds a lot like Mr. Show. Obviously a much later show on a different network (HBO), but the names and focus are eerily similar.
Mr. Show had Globo-Chem, and Dr. X, "an evil genius who launches a laser-equipped satellite powerful enough to destroy the earth. Each year, Dr. X hosts a TV telethon to raise the $30 million dollar ransom he demands in exchange for the non-activation of his doomsday device.
Why, oh why couldn't that have been the newly-heated Asian spice race? Imagine curry going up against wasabi; new versions of kung pao chicken; the hotter the better.
So, in other words, they EVACUATED the bridges and subway stops, unless "shutting them down" means something different in Boston than in the rest of the world.
They EVACUATED parts of Boston. It's a fact. Live up to it and stop rewriting history.
Shutting something down is vastly different than an evacuation. Unless parts of Boston were EVACUATED when I left my cubicle a few minutes ago to go to a meeting... then another part of Boston was EVACUATED when we left the meeting room. Saying that parts of a city were evacuated means that at least entire neighborhoods were cleared of people. If the North End or Back Bay or Charlestown was cleared of people; that would warrant the phrase "parts of Boston were evacuated". No one was removed from their houses or places of business (I guess some of the T workers might have left the Sullivan Square station), there were people within 50 yards of the "bomb" taking pictures and laughing.
New Orleans was evacuated; Pripyat, Ukraine was evacuated; rational thought has been evacuated from your brain; but Boston was not evacuated.
The stupid thing was that they had to evacuate parts of Boston over some blinking lights attached to batteries.
No parts of Boston were evacuated, they shut down part of the subway and a bridge or two. None the less, it was pretty stupid and I had a good laugh over it. Luckily I had to get into work really early that day so I completely missed the orange line closing.
Budget Server running Linux / FreeBSD 1.8 GHz Celeron Processor 256 MB RAM 40 GB Ultra ATA Hard Drive(s) 8 IP Addresses 200 GB Data Transfer per Month
I don't think they offer this configuration anymore, it looks like the cheapest now is $64/month. They do offer colocation for $55/month. You can get any flavor of Linux or BSD and they have very competent techs. You can even have them host a mac mini or xserve for you. Checkout their network setup and facility details. I've had a good experience with them.
There is quite a bit of popular science fiction cinema that's not space western. It's simply not marketed as such. Off the top of my head...
The Truman Show
Being John Malcovich
Manchurian Candidate
I was coming into this discussion with my own opinion about the subject, and I didn't even think about the movies the parent mentioned. I think the issue is that some really really good sci-fi movies don't immediately jump to mind when you think about sci-fi because you're looking for things like Star Wars or Star Trek. Meanwhile, really great movies are not being considered. Another poster mentioned the following movies as well: Twelve Monkeys, E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, Gattaca, and Pi. These are amongst my favorite movies (except for ET, I thought it was over-rated), yet I didn't even think of them. There's also the issue that I hear people bring up all the time that Star Wars is more fantasy than sci-fi, it's Lord of the Rings in space. So the given proto-typical example isn't even a good one.
The other problem is that general audiences don't like math and science heavy movies. The first good sci-fi movie that came to my mind when I read the summary was Primer (which I would highly recommend to any slashdotter), but a friend of mine who isn't into science was not a big fan, she also hatedPi. Even though these movies were way more about curiosity, human behavior, the human condition, and issues like trust, paranoia, and power; all she could see them for was math and science. For a sci-fi movie to not be cheesy it has to have good science, and to have good science, it's going to bore a lot of people.
It costs less than $3 USD to fill a tank on which it can run for 200 to 300km
So, if I've got this right $3/300km = 1.609344 U.S. cents per mile. And filling up my tank with gasoline right now at $2.50 per gallon and getting a generous 30 miles per gallon = 8.33333333 U.S. cents per miles. Is my math correct? Is this thing 5 times more (economically) efficient than current cars? Why the hell doesn't everyone have this. I know it's fiberglass and small, and if you made ICE powered cars the same way they'd be more efficient... but not 5 times as efficient. I don't think I've ever seen anything with this level of economy for only $7,300
Yes, yes, yes, yes. I would buy this device in a second. I can't understand why no one has done something like this yet. Even if it's just Google Maps with just the map view (no satellite) for bandwidth considerations, this would be a killer app. Every new phone for years has had a GPS chip in them for 911, the phone companies just don't want to give users access to them. On one of my old phones I was able to get my coordinates using an undocumented administrative menu. When I saw the iPhone with Google Maps I was sure that it would use the GPS chip to locate the user automatically, it would have been so easy, and so incredibly useful.
Anything under a BSD or GPL license, yes, they can distribute (as long as they provide source for the GPL stuff). They didn't violate the GPL, so they don't lose the license. If GPL3 is ugly, they will probably simply keep using the regular GPL version.
That may or may not be exactly true. I believe the Microsoft/Novell deal covers the cross licensing of various patented technologies. If Novell implements one of Microsoft's patents in a piece of software, and then tries to distribute it as GPL'd software covered by version 2, they would still be in violation.
... Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software patents. We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free program will individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the program proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.
Terms and Conditions
7.... If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
The only way for Novell to actually benefit from this deal would be for them to implement Microsoft's patents in new pieces of software that they (Novell) owns outright and distributes under a license other than the GPL. This software would also have to be sufficiently untangled from other GPL software. They could not take a current project covered by the GPL and implement one of Microsoft's patents in it. Or the deal between Microsoft and Novell would have to be such that every patent implemented by Novell, and distributed as part of a software package covered by the GPL, would have to be transferable to (or at least free to use for) every person who receives a copy of said software package.
What's more likely is that Novell is just using this as a marketing technique where they can say, "Other Linux distributions are probably infringing on lots of Microsoft's patents, we have the only distribution safe from a lawsuit from Microsoft." Either way, I don't like the way Novell is heading, but Stallman was smart enough to foresee this possibility when he wrote the GPL and I think he should get more credit than he does.
The audio mixer in Vista is no longer based on different audio types (MIDI, CD Audio, WAV, etc). Instead, there is a volume slider and mute button for each application that makes sounds. So you can mute IE, AIM (those annoying video ads), and Windows itself, while still playing your music in WinAmp or WMP.
If that's true, then that's awesome. I remember a couple years ago reading a story on slashdot about various experimental usability projects going on at Microsoft and this was one of them. I think they even put together a mock desktop in flash where they implemented this volume system that you could play with. From a usability standpoint it was way better. I had assumed that this was something that just got lost along the way, but I'm glad to see they went through with it.
It's been this way for a while. General Electric's (former) headquarters in Schenectady, NY has been blurred out for a very long time. In the past it looked like they just used a lower zoom level even when you were zoomed all the way in, but now it looks cartoon-ish and obviously done on purpose. Just scroll a little bit the right to see how clear the surroundings are (also kinda cool is that the surrounding area to the north has some images that were taken during the winter and some in the summer, a partially frozen Ballston Lake looks weird). I believe they used to make turbines for submarines at this plant, but they've torn down several buildings on this plot and laid a lot of people off, I don't know what goes on there any more.
Order a free copy of your credit report from the Big Three (you can do it easily from http://www.annualcreditreport.com/). When you receive the three reports, dispute the debt on each of them following the procedures outlined in the credit report.
The company reporting the negative information is then required to submit supporting documentation, which often doesn't happen.
Sounds like you may have already tried this, but if not, it's not too time-consuming.
This happened to me. I tried to open a checking account at my hometown bank, where I had previously had a savings and checking account. When they tried to open it they found through Chex Systems, which is some sort of credit-like reporting agency that someone else had been using my social security number. I even had my SSN card on me, but they couldn't open an account for me. I tried to contact Chex Systems, but it was almost impossible to get through to them, to this day I don't know if it was ever cleared up with them.
I also got my credit reports from the three agencies, and they all had a past due account for $100 something from American Express, and an address in the Bronx (I've never lived close to NYC). The account was opened before I was 18 and before I had ever signed up for a credit card. I also had a credit card account in good standing from American Express for a while before I found this info on my credit report and they had never contacted me about owing them money.
I submitted requests to remove this info from my account, added a flag to my report, and added a statement to the account. One of the credit reporting agencies said they wouldn't take the info off because AMEX told them not to. According to the law, the agencies have to give you names and numbers of people contacted during the investigation, so naturally I asked for this info so that I could talk to whoever they talked to at AMEX, but I just got the run-around. Going through the normal channels at AMEX was no help either. Some of the agencies removed the info but then it just reappeared a few months later when AMEX reported the past due account again.
It's one of the most frustrating experiences I've gone through/still going through. Whenever I apply for a loan, open a bank account, or apply for a job, I'm always wondering if they're going to see this information and I'll be denied. Just writing about it now and thinking about it gets me so angry because it's not even like someone stole my wallet, or I was careless with my info, but I still have to deal with all this crap because the credit reporting agencies are setup in the most anti-consumer way possible. Someone probably just picked a random SSN to use to open an account and it just happened to be mine... how they were able to open an account so easily with my info, while it's been so difficult for me is insane.
The universal vaccines focus on a different protein called M2, which has barely changed during the last 100 years.
Wild guess here, but I'm betting that there is a small percentage of the flu viruses out there will have some sort of resistance to this vaccine. Maybe their M2 protein will be slightly different and they'll all survive. Then all of a sudden, the only flu viruses left will be the resistant strain. With our luck these will also be particularly virulent. Then where will we be?
There is no central server where iChat is concerned
Yes there is, it uses apple's servers to exchange the preliminary info. It's been a while since I've dealt with this, and I don't have a powerbook anymore... but open up iChat and then open up the debugging output for voice/video connections. I forget exactly where this is located, but I believe it's in the menus somewhere. Then try to start a voice or video chat with someone. You'll see it talking to apple's servers setting up the connection.
Alice's computer should not be sending to 2828. It should be sending to the source port seen in the packets sent to the centralized server used for the rendezvous operation. Bob doesn't tell Alice anything. Bob sends a message to the central computer, which in turn, tells Alice something. The central computer DOES know what port Bob's router used because it can look at the source port on the UDP packet.
First of all, I didn't even see that there was a second page to the article, and they went over some of NAT problems we're discussing. But furthermore, there are different kind of NATs: Full Cone, Restricted Cone, Port Restricted Cone, and Symmetric. Some routers fall somewhere in between these definitions, but netfilter/iptables is fully symmetric and these hole punching tricks won't work.
Let's go through it again using your procedure, Bob talks to the Skype server though his NAT. Let's say the Skype server is running at 198.173.5.35:7777 this is what it looks like:
Bob's router now has a mapping that says "Packets sent from 198.173.5.35:7777 to 2.2.2.2:3939 will be sent to 192.168.1.2:2828". Bob gets Alice's IP address and port from the Skype server and tries to send packets to her. Bob's router will have to use a different port than 3939 on the public side for sending packets to Alice because it's already in use sending to the Skype server. This is what that will look like:
Bob's router now has a mapping that says "Packets sent from 1.1.1.1:2525 to 2.2.2.2:3940 will be sent to 192.168.1.2:2828". Meanwhile, Alice is hearing from the Skype server that she should be sending to 2.2.2.2:3939, Bob's router will certainly drop these packets, it's expecting to hear from Alice on 2.2.2.2:3940. Now the second page of the article talks about trying ports sequentially if it fails at first. It wouldn't take long to find that sending to 3940 will work, but you can't count on the NAT opening up ports sequentially like this, it can be completely arbitrary.
Oh man, this shit is a pain in the ass. I had to look into the over the summer. This is the same technique that Apple's iChat uses for audio and video calls. Many many p2p applications use this technique to get through firewalls and NAT routers. The problem is that it doesn't always work when both computers are behind their own NAT router.
Let's say Bob (as in the example in the article) is behind a NAT, his local ip he got from his router via DHCP is 192.168.1.2, and the public IP of his router is 2.2.2.2. He wants to use UDP port 2828 on his computer to transmit his voice data to Alice. So he sends out the first packed to 1.1.1.1:1414, as in the example. Now because of his NAT it looks like the data is coming from 2.2.2.2 and some arbitrary port (the router can't always use the same source port as the NATed computer because some other computer on the local network might already be using that port to connect to the outside world) lets say his router uses 3939.
Now Bobs router says, "Okay, I'll let through any UDP packets sent from 1.1.1.1:1414 to 2.2.2.2:3939 and I'll pass them on to 192.168.1.2:2828". As in the example, Alice's router will just drop this packet because there is no pre-existing connection from Alice's computer using this info. Then when Alice tries to send a packet to 2.2.2.2:2828 Bob's router drops it because his router isn't expecting traffic to this port. His router is expecting packets to go to port 3939. And Bob has no way of telling Alice which port she should actually be sending packets to since he doesn't even know which port his router decided to use on the public side to send out his packets.
You can get around this if only one computer is behind a NAT, or if you open up a persistent connection through your router to your computer. Anyway, I believe UPnP is supposed to help with this somehow, but I got so sick of it that I switched jobs.
Unfortunately the GSM version of the Chocolate (LG KG800) doesn't have any expansion slot at all. The raw hardware features of the Verizon CDMA version (LG VX8500) seem to be vastly superior (I actually have one). But unfortunately Verizon feels the need to cripple all their phones as much as possible with their software.
Citizendium, whose name is a portmanteau of citizen and compendium
Maybe it's just me, but wikipedians seem to be obsessed with portmanteaus. I swear to god, every article tangentially related to a portmanteau just has to mention it. Like it's some secret that only nerds on the internet know about and just need to educate everyone else about.
Can someone help me out here... How exactly does one go about blocking these riders? And why doesn't it happen more often? Also, who gets to add rider's to bills? Can anyone just submit anything they want to be included with a bill?
I know they tried to pass the line item veto in 1996 to help deal with this, but isn't there anything better we can do to stop so many tacked on clauses? I don't know if I agree with a line item veto because it could be easily abused to get rid of things central to the bill. How about anything added to a bill after a certain period is automatically a candidate for the line item veto.
Maybe let the supreme court knock down a law as unconstitutional if said law was passed as a rider along with a completely unrelated bill. You could make the argument that congress never really voted on the law because what they were really voting on was the content of the central bill.
Having grown up in New York, I can verify that you see kill all over the place, I'm sure most people have heard of the Catskill Mountains and such. But even just driving around you'll often go over various kills, Mourningkill, Valatie Kill, and so on. In fact, I never thought twice about the name Fresh Kills and the WTC debris.
Slashdot Mirror
Weird, that sounds a lot like Mr. Show. Obviously a much later show on a different network (HBO), but the names and focus are eerily similar.
Mr. Show had Globo-Chem, and Dr. X, "an evil genius who launches a laser-equipped satellite powerful enough to destroy the earth. Each year, Dr. X hosts a TV telethon to raise the $30 million dollar ransom he demands in exchange for the non-activation of his doomsday device.
Why, oh why couldn't that have been the newly-heated Asian spice race? Imagine curry going up against wasabi; new versions of kung pao chicken; the hotter the better.
Shutting something down is vastly different than an evacuation. Unless parts of Boston were EVACUATED when I left my cubicle a few minutes ago to go to a meeting... then another part of Boston was EVACUATED when we left the meeting room. Saying that parts of a city were evacuated means that at least entire neighborhoods were cleared of people. If the North End or Back Bay or Charlestown was cleared of people; that would warrant the phrase "parts of Boston were evacuated". No one was removed from their houses or places of business (I guess some of the T workers might have left the Sullivan Square station), there were people within 50 yards of the "bomb" taking pictures and laughing.
New Orleans was evacuated; Pripyat, Ukraine was evacuated; rational thought has been evacuated from your brain; but Boston was not evacuated.
No parts of Boston were evacuated, they shut down part of the subway and a bridge or two. None the less, it was pretty stupid and I had a good laugh over it. Luckily I had to get into work really early that day so I completely missed the orange line closing.
Try rackmounted.com. For $50/month, this is what I get:
I don't think they offer this configuration anymore, it looks like the cheapest now is $64/month. They do offer colocation for $55/month. You can get any flavor of Linux or BSD and they have very competent techs. You can even have them host a mac mini or xserve for you. Checkout their network setup and facility details. I've had a good experience with them.
I was coming into this discussion with my own opinion about the subject, and I didn't even think about the movies the parent mentioned. I think the issue is that some really really good sci-fi movies don't immediately jump to mind when you think about sci-fi because you're looking for things like Star Wars or Star Trek. Meanwhile, really great movies are not being considered. Another poster mentioned the following movies as well: Twelve Monkeys, E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, Gattaca, and Pi. These are amongst my favorite movies (except for ET, I thought it was over-rated), yet I didn't even think of them. There's also the issue that I hear people bring up all the time that Star Wars is more fantasy than sci-fi, it's Lord of the Rings in space. So the given proto-typical example isn't even a good one.
The other problem is that general audiences don't like math and science heavy movies. The first good sci-fi movie that came to my mind when I read the summary was Primer (which I would highly recommend to any slashdotter), but a friend of mine who isn't into science was not a big fan, she also hated Pi. Even though these movies were way more about curiosity, human behavior, the human condition, and issues like trust, paranoia, and power; all she could see them for was math and science. For a sci-fi movie to not be cheesy it has to have good science, and to have good science, it's going to bore a lot of people.
So, if I've got this right $3/300km = 1.609344 U.S. cents per mile. And filling up my tank with gasoline right now at $2.50 per gallon and getting a generous 30 miles per gallon = 8.33333333 U.S. cents per miles. Is my math correct? Is this thing 5 times more (economically) efficient than current cars? Why the hell doesn't everyone have this. I know it's fiberglass and small, and if you made ICE powered cars the same way they'd be more efficient... but not 5 times as efficient. I don't think I've ever seen anything with this level of economy for only $7,300
What am I missing here?
The company is Compete Inc., and the estimate was 40 cents per user per month.
Yes, yes, yes, yes. I would buy this device in a second. I can't understand why no one has done something like this yet. Even if it's just Google Maps with just the map view (no satellite) for bandwidth considerations, this would be a killer app. Every new phone for years has had a GPS chip in them for 911, the phone companies just don't want to give users access to them. On one of my old phones I was able to get my coordinates using an undocumented administrative menu. When I saw the iPhone with Google Maps I was sure that it would use the GPS chip to locate the user automatically, it would have been so easy, and so incredibly useful.
I respectably disagree. I present exhibit A: Felis silvestris.
First this: Evidence of Chimp Developing "Spoken" Language, then this: Chimps Use Tool Kit, and now Chimps Found Making Own Weapons to Hunt for Food. I'm telling you, we gotta get off this rock soon.
That may or may not be exactly true. I believe the Microsoft/Novell deal covers the cross licensing of various patented technologies. If Novell implements one of Microsoft's patents in a piece of software, and then tries to distribute it as GPL'd software covered by version 2, they would still be in violation.
From the GPL:
The only way for Novell to actually benefit from this deal would be for them to implement Microsoft's patents in new pieces of software that they (Novell) owns outright and distributes under a license other than the GPL. This software would also have to be sufficiently untangled from other GPL software. They could not take a current project covered by the GPL and implement one of Microsoft's patents in it. Or the deal between Microsoft and Novell would have to be such that every patent implemented by Novell, and distributed as part of a software package covered by the GPL, would have to be transferable to (or at least free to use for) every person who receives a copy of said software package.
What's more likely is that Novell is just using this as a marketing technique where they can say, "Other Linux distributions are probably infringing on lots of Microsoft's patents, we have the only distribution safe from a lawsuit from Microsoft." Either way, I don't like the way Novell is heading, but Stallman was smart enough to foresee this possibility when he wrote the GPL and I think he should get more credit than he does.
If that's true, then that's awesome. I remember a couple years ago reading a story on slashdot about various experimental usability projects going on at Microsoft and this was one of them. I think they even put together a mock desktop in flash where they implemented this volume system that you could play with. From a usability standpoint it was way better. I had assumed that this was something that just got lost along the way, but I'm glad to see they went through with it.
I found a few more. Of course if you only want words without spaces, try this query.
Words ending in 'su' (without spaces).
It's been this way for a while. General Electric's (former) headquarters in Schenectady, NY has been blurred out for a very long time. In the past it looked like they just used a lower zoom level even when you were zoomed all the way in, but now it looks cartoon-ish and obviously done on purpose. Just scroll a little bit the right to see how clear the surroundings are (also kinda cool is that the surrounding area to the north has some images that were taken during the winter and some in the summer, a partially frozen Ballston Lake looks weird). I believe they used to make turbines for submarines at this plant, but they've torn down several buildings on this plot and laid a lot of people off, I don't know what goes on there any more.
Nearby is KAPL (Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory) here, and the GE Global Research Center Headquarters just up the road. They're both islands of blur.
This happened to me. I tried to open a checking account at my hometown bank, where I had previously had a savings and checking account. When they tried to open it they found through Chex Systems, which is some sort of credit-like reporting agency that someone else had been using my social security number. I even had my SSN card on me, but they couldn't open an account for me. I tried to contact Chex Systems, but it was almost impossible to get through to them, to this day I don't know if it was ever cleared up with them.
I also got my credit reports from the three agencies, and they all had a past due account for $100 something from American Express, and an address in the Bronx (I've never lived close to NYC). The account was opened before I was 18 and before I had ever signed up for a credit card. I also had a credit card account in good standing from American Express for a while before I found this info on my credit report and they had never contacted me about owing them money.
I submitted requests to remove this info from my account, added a flag to my report, and added a statement to the account. One of the credit reporting agencies said they wouldn't take the info off because AMEX told them not to. According to the law, the agencies have to give you names and numbers of people contacted during the investigation, so naturally I asked for this info so that I could talk to whoever they talked to at AMEX, but I just got the run-around. Going through the normal channels at AMEX was no help either. Some of the agencies removed the info but then it just reappeared a few months later when AMEX reported the past due account again.
It's one of the most frustrating experiences I've gone through/still going through. Whenever I apply for a loan, open a bank account, or apply for a job, I'm always wondering if they're going to see this information and I'll be denied. Just writing about it now and thinking about it gets me so angry because it's not even like someone stole my wallet, or I was careless with my info, but I still have to deal with all this crap because the credit reporting agencies are setup in the most anti-consumer way possible. Someone probably just picked a random SSN to use to open an account and it just happened to be mine... how they were able to open an account so easily with my info, while it's been so difficult for me is insane.
Wild guess here, but I'm betting that there is a small percentage of the flu viruses out there will have some sort of resistance to this vaccine. Maybe their M2 protein will be slightly different and they'll all survive. Then all of a sudden, the only flu viruses left will be the resistant strain. With our luck these will also be particularly virulent. Then where will we be?
Yes there is, it uses apple's servers to exchange the preliminary info. It's been a while since I've dealt with this, and I don't have a powerbook anymore... but open up iChat and then open up the debugging output for voice/video connections. I forget exactly where this is located, but I believe it's in the menus somewhere. Then try to start a voice or video chat with someone. You'll see it talking to apple's servers setting up the connection.
First of all, I didn't even see that there was a second page to the article, and they went over some of NAT problems we're discussing. But furthermore, there are different kind of NATs: Full Cone, Restricted Cone, Port Restricted Cone, and Symmetric. Some routers fall somewhere in between these definitions, but netfilter/iptables is fully symmetric and these hole punching tricks won't work.
Let's go through it again using your procedure, Bob talks to the Skype server though his NAT. Let's say the Skype server is running at 198.173.5.35:7777 this is what it looks like:
Bob's router now has a mapping that says "Packets sent from 198.173.5.35:7777 to 2.2.2.2:3939 will be sent to 192.168.1.2:2828". Bob gets Alice's IP address and port from the Skype server and tries to send packets to her. Bob's router will have to use a different port than 3939 on the public side for sending packets to Alice because it's already in use sending to the Skype server. This is what that will look like:
Bob's router now has a mapping that says "Packets sent from 1.1.1.1:2525 to 2.2.2.2:3940 will be sent to 192.168.1.2:2828". Meanwhile, Alice is hearing from the Skype server that she should be sending to 2.2.2.2:3939, Bob's router will certainly drop these packets, it's expecting to hear from Alice on 2.2.2.2:3940. Now the second page of the article talks about trying ports sequentially if it fails at first. It wouldn't take long to find that sending to 3940 will work, but you can't count on the NAT opening up ports sequentially like this, it can be completely arbitrary.
Like I said, it's a pain in the ass.
Oh man, this shit is a pain in the ass. I had to look into the over the summer. This is the same technique that Apple's iChat uses for audio and video calls. Many many p2p applications use this technique to get through firewalls and NAT routers. The problem is that it doesn't always work when both computers are behind their own NAT router.
Let's say Bob (as in the example in the article) is behind a NAT, his local ip he got from his router via DHCP is 192.168.1.2, and the public IP of his router is 2.2.2.2. He wants to use UDP port 2828 on his computer to transmit his voice data to Alice. So he sends out the first packed to 1.1.1.1:1414, as in the example. Now because of his NAT it looks like the data is coming from 2.2.2.2 and some arbitrary port (the router can't always use the same source port as the NATed computer because some other computer on the local network might already be using that port to connect to the outside world) lets say his router uses 3939.
Now Bobs router says, "Okay, I'll let through any UDP packets sent from 1.1.1.1:1414 to 2.2.2.2:3939 and I'll pass them on to 192.168.1.2:2828". As in the example, Alice's router will just drop this packet because there is no pre-existing connection from Alice's computer using this info. Then when Alice tries to send a packet to 2.2.2.2:2828 Bob's router drops it because his router isn't expecting traffic to this port. His router is expecting packets to go to port 3939. And Bob has no way of telling Alice which port she should actually be sending packets to since he doesn't even know which port his router decided to use on the public side to send out his packets.
You can get around this if only one computer is behind a NAT, or if you open up a persistent connection through your router to your computer. Anyway, I believe UPnP is supposed to help with this somehow, but I got so sick of it that I switched jobs.
Unfortunately the GSM version of the Chocolate (LG KG800) doesn't have any expansion slot at all. The raw hardware features of the Verizon CDMA version (LG VX8500) seem to be vastly superior (I actually have one). But unfortunately Verizon feels the need to cripple all their phones as much as possible with their software.
If you have Verizon, then check out the Chocolate by LG it can take a microSD card upto 2GB.
Maybe it's just me, but wikipedians seem to be obsessed with portmanteaus. I swear to god, every article tangentially related to a portmanteau just has to mention it. Like it's some secret that only nerds on the internet know about and just need to educate everyone else about.
Can someone help me out here... How exactly does one go about blocking these riders? And why doesn't it happen more often? Also, who gets to add rider's to bills? Can anyone just submit anything they want to be included with a bill?
I know they tried to pass the line item veto in 1996 to help deal with this, but isn't there anything better we can do to stop so many tacked on clauses? I don't know if I agree with a line item veto because it could be easily abused to get rid of things central to the bill. How about anything added to a bill after a certain period is automatically a candidate for the line item veto.
Maybe let the supreme court knock down a law as unconstitutional if said law was passed as a rider along with a completely unrelated bill. You could make the argument that congress never really voted on the law because what they were really voting on was the content of the central bill.
Having grown up in New York, I can verify that you see kill all over the place, I'm sure most people have heard of the Catskill Mountains and such. But even just driving around you'll often go over various kills, Mourningkill, Valatie Kill, and so on. In fact, I never thought twice about the name Fresh Kills and the WTC debris.