How is it different w/ NAT, where the 'marketeers' would know the public IPv4 address and the private IPv4 address? Everytime a connection is initiated, the site being visited knows your address, or how else could it serve up its page on your node?
Not sure if you are serious, but no, the whole point of NAT is that the outside server has no clue whatsoever what the private IP of the ultimate client is. All he sees is a bunch of ports on the public IP of the NAT translator. The latter maintains a dynamic translation table so it is able to redirect port A on the public IP to port B on the private IP C, for all single-public-IP/port-A to private-IP-C/port-B pairs in the translation table.
To the outside server, no client on that NAT is distinguishable from any other client on the same NAT except by using cookies in the case of HTTP. Every one of those clients could be on the same machine as far as he knows.
As a matter of fact YES he is innocent in the eyes of the law. It is now the job of the government to demonstrate why he is not inocent (which the judge overseeing the case says is unlikely, because they did not have authority to seize the items).
Almost, or essentially right. I'd phrase it a bit differently though.
Actually, innocent is not the same as not guilty. He is not proven guilty of these particular charges (yet) in a court of law yet. It is the job of the prosecutor to prove him guilty of these particular charges. It is the job of the jury to decide (1) if the prosecutor has achieved his aim, and (2) whether the the laws underlying the charges are full of shit or not. The last is called jury nullification, which is a bit misleading. A jury does not have to explain or justify its reasons or the basis for its decision to ANYONE.
The aim of the defense is purely negative - to either cast doubt on the prosecutions case, or outright disprove it. It is not necessary for the defense to PROVE anything.
You really think he had anything to do with it? You think that things would have been different no matter who else but him was in office?
He's the chief executive. It's his Jutice Department. Where do you think the buck stops? As to whether I think things would be different if someone else was President - that depends on the someone else. The last half dozen or so Presidents - probably not. Certain other people I can imagine as President? You bet your life thing would be different.
I'm afraid I think your idea of an all-encompassing patent war yielding an eventual improvement is naive.
The only way to restore sanity is to TOSS OUT the patent system, not tinker with it. No patent system could ever be fair because the very concept of a patent is completely counter to fundamental human rights. Get rid of the system and invalidate all existing patents tomorrow. THAT would work. Perfectly.
Of course I know that will never happen, any more than "perpetrators" of victimless crimes like using drugs being released from the unprecedentedly bloated prison system, and the associated evil laws abolished.
All right, how do you "fix" a system that by its very concept is bound to be a hopeless bureaucratic mess?
"I thought of it first, nyah, nyah" "No, *I* did" "No you didn't, I did" "You copied it" "No, *you* copied it" "But mine's different from yours" "No it isn't"
Like the guy said, that's probably more then, or at the very least close to, the median price of a plain consumer laptop. Pretty sure it's even more true for the median price of a plain consumer desktop. Counting the drive that's already in the laptop or desktop.
Not quite. The distinction between traditional gasoline engines and diesel engines involves method of ignition (as well as method and timing of introduction of fuel), but it has nothing to do with the two fuels except as they have been traditionally used.
I.e., there is no reason you have to inject diesel fuel in a timed pulse into a cylinder containing compressed and heated air, while you have to premix gasoline and air, induct and compress them as a mixture, and ignite the result with a timed spark.
Essentially all they are doing is using gasoline instead of diesel fuel in a timed direct injection engine.
You keep using that word "justice." I do not think it means what you think it means.
No, actually, I think parent to your post has a perfect grasp of what both the word "justice", and the concept of justice, mean - and you have a poor one.
Justice: "noun 1. the quality of being just; righteousness, equitableness, or moral rightness... 3. the moral principle determining just conduct.... 5. the administering of deserved punishment or reward.". Your definition of justice as a legal concept is a side issue and not the primary definition of the word.
As long as you get the things you want and need, you may not care whether others less privileged do, and for the sake of argument that may even be a rational and supportable view - but it is not just, by the very definition of the word.
Apologies, but the premise is silly. "Legal" downloads use the same bandwidth as "illegal" ones. For the record, none of it is "illegal" and none of it violates Comcast TOS (which hosting on a residential line would do). It's essentially all down traffic.
Here's a hint. ftp'ing a single 4GB linux ISO from a decent server sustains 2 MBps for over half an hour.
I'm not going to spell out what I am doing because it's immaterial, but lots of things use lots of bandwidth: I *MIGHT* be doing any of these:
Have a look at the various sections in archive.org and similar sites
Downloading lots of linux DVD ISO images and other freeware to try out
Backing up and restoring multiple hosts to/from the cloud
Supporting remote servers
Upgrading packages on multiple linux hosts
Receiving email with gigantic attachments ("here is my kid's birthday video")
Streaming half decent HD video
Running remote desktops
and so on and so on
And - gasp - you don't have to limit yourself to doing just one of these things at a time.
Boggle on. You're not very imaginative. There probably should be a cheapo option for customers like you whose demands are so minuscule. For my part, I can easily get up dangerously close to 250 GB within HALF a month without half trying, and I then have to curtail my usage for the rest of the month.
I'm not even going to say what kind of stuff I do to pile up the GB. It's not particularly daring or esoteric. There are so many ways. Look, I've got a pipe that flows a sustained 2 MB/s - that's 120 MB/min, 7.2 GB/h, 172.8 GB/d, 5184 GB/mo. And you seriously think using an average of 4.8% of that capacity "boggles the mind"?
The WW II era fortified line known in the west as the Siegfried Line and known to the Reich as the West Wall was a separate line to the Maginot Line. It was built by the Germans in the 1930s. They were two separate things.
What are you, trapped in World War II? Manpower cost is anything but "nil". It is probably about half, or even more, of all military spending.
2011 US military spending, $ billion:
Military personnel 162 Veterans benefits and services 127 Military construction[1] 20 Family housing 3 Operation and maintenance[1] 291
All other military spending[2] 230
TOTAL 833
[1] Some large part of this is obviously connected with manpower. [2] Everything else includes procurement, r&d/test/eval, "atomic energy defense activities", and "defense-related activities" - the portion
So, gee, what if Sprague and Cornell-Dubilier or whoever do not have a trademark on the Vitamin Q capacitor, the orange drop capacitor, the yellow mylar cap? So fucking what? They would have to convince the buyer they have the best characteristics and value. Gee - just like they do anyway when they DO use the trademarks. What's that you say? You couldn't be sure they weren't copied counterfeits? You'd go by the brand name, just like you do now. The bad guys could still be prosecuted for false advertising if they pretended the design was theirs - just like now.
"Society" as a whole would "suffer" because Bayer doesn't get sole use of the word aspirin in a drug context? Are you kidding? Where the heck did that come from?
Of the three, trademarks are the most obvious sop to big corporations. There's no way they are really expected to support and reward innovation, and they don't help the little guy as copyrights help the individual author.
I just wanted to thank you for your misinformed post because the other two replies were gold mines of actual factual information from which I learned a lot.
Slashdot Mirror
Not sure if you are serious, but no, the whole point of NAT is that the outside server has no clue whatsoever what the private IP of the ultimate client is. All he sees is a bunch of ports on the public IP of the NAT translator. The latter maintains a dynamic translation table so it is able to redirect port A on the public IP to port B on the private IP C, for all single-public-IP/port-A to private-IP-C/port-B pairs in the translation table.
To the outside server, no client on that NAT is distinguishable from any other client on the same NAT except by using cookies in the case of HTTP. Every one of those clients could be on the same machine as far as he knows.
I believe we now know the answer to your question, assuming you will allow me to treat it as non rhetorical.
Almost, or essentially right. I'd phrase it a bit differently though.
Actually, innocent is not the same as not guilty. He is not proven guilty of these particular charges (yet) in a court of law yet. It is the job of the prosecutor to prove him guilty of these particular charges. It is the job of the jury to decide (1) if the prosecutor has achieved his aim, and (2) whether the the laws underlying the charges are full of shit or not. The last is called jury nullification, which is a bit misleading. A jury does not have to explain or justify its reasons or the basis for its decision to ANYONE.
The aim of the defense is purely negative - to either cast doubt on the prosecutions case, or outright disprove it. It is not necessary for the defense to PROVE anything.
He's the chief executive. It's his Jutice Department. Where do you think the buck stops? As to whether I think things would be different if someone else was President - that depends on the someone else. The last half dozen or so Presidents - probably not. Certain other people I can imagine as President? You bet your life thing would be different.
In what magical fairy tale land would that occur?
I'm afraid I think your idea of an all-encompassing patent war yielding an eventual improvement is naive.
The only way to restore sanity is to TOSS OUT the patent system, not tinker with it. No patent system could ever be fair because the very concept of a patent is completely counter to fundamental human rights. Get rid of the system and invalidate all existing patents tomorrow. THAT would work. Perfectly.
Of course I know that will never happen, any more than "perpetrators" of victimless crimes like using drugs being released from the unprecedentedly bloated prison system, and the associated evil laws abolished.
All right, how do you "fix" a system that by its very concept is bound to be a hopeless bureaucratic mess?
"I thought of it first, nyah, nyah"
"No, *I* did"
"No you didn't, I did"
"You copied it"
"No, *you* copied it"
"But mine's different from yours"
"No it isn't"
"It wasn't me, inspector. It was my evil twin brother. The one whose birth was never recorded."
Like the guy said, that's probably more then, or at the very least close to, the median price of a plain consumer laptop. Pretty sure it's even more true for the median price of a plain consumer desktop. Counting the drive that's already in the laptop or desktop.
I like RAID 666 - a RAID 6 array of RAID 6 arrays of RAID 6 arrays.
Tesla has a unit named after him (one tesla = one weber per square meter). Edison does not.
Not quite. The distinction between traditional gasoline engines and diesel engines involves method of ignition (as well as method and timing of introduction of fuel), but it has nothing to do with the two fuels except as they have been traditionally used.
I.e., there is no reason you have to inject diesel fuel in a timed pulse into a cylinder containing compressed and heated air, while you have to premix gasoline and air, induct and compress them as a mixture, and ignite the result with a timed spark.
Essentially all they are doing is using gasoline instead of diesel fuel in a timed direct injection engine.
You do realize "what the market will bear" is pretty much the DEFINITION of supply and demand? The two terms are EQUIVALENT.
No, actually, I think parent to your post has a perfect grasp of what both the word "justice", and the concept of justice, mean - and you have a poor one.
Justice: "noun 1. the quality of being just; righteousness, equitableness, or moral rightness ... 3. the moral principle determining just conduct. ... 5. the administering of deserved punishment or reward.". Your definition of justice as a legal concept is a side issue and not the primary definition of the word.
As long as you get the things you want and need, you may not care whether others less privileged do, and for the sake of argument that may even be a rational and supportable view - but it is not just, by the very definition of the word.
Apologies, but the premise is silly. "Legal" downloads use the same bandwidth as "illegal" ones. For the record, none of it is "illegal" and none of it violates Comcast TOS (which hosting on a residential line would do). It's essentially all down traffic.
Here's a hint. ftp'ing a single 4GB linux ISO from a decent server sustains 2 MBps for over half an hour.
I'm not going to spell out what I am doing because it's immaterial, but lots of things use lots of bandwidth: I *MIGHT* be doing any of these:
Have a look at the various sections in archive.org and similar sites
Downloading lots of linux DVD ISO images and other freeware to try out
Backing up and restoring multiple hosts to/from the cloud
Supporting remote servers
Upgrading packages on multiple linux hosts
Receiving email with gigantic attachments ("here is my kid's birthday video")
Streaming half decent HD video
Running remote desktops
and so on and so on
And - gasp - you don't have to limit yourself to doing just one of these things at a time.
Boggle on. You're not very imaginative. There probably should be a cheapo option for customers like you whose demands are so minuscule. For my part, I can easily get up dangerously close to 250 GB within HALF a month without half trying, and I then have to curtail my usage for the rest of the month.
I'm not even going to say what kind of stuff I do to pile up the GB. It's not particularly daring or esoteric. There are so many ways. Look, I've got a pipe that flows a sustained 2 MB/s - that's 120 MB/min, 7.2 GB/h, 172.8 GB/d, 5184 GB/mo. And you seriously think using an average of 4.8% of that capacity "boggles the mind"?
Bad math. It's 10X, not 100X.
The WW II era fortified line known in the west as the Siegfried Line and known to the Reich as the West Wall was a separate line to the Maginot Line. It was built by the Germans in the 1930s. They were two separate things.
What are you, trapped in World War II? Manpower cost is anything but "nil". It is probably about half, or even more, of all military spending.
2011 US military spending, $ billion:
Military personnel 162
Veterans benefits and services 127
Military construction[1] 20
Family housing 3
Operation and maintenance[1] 291
All other military spending[2] 230
TOTAL 833
[1] Some large part of this is obviously connected with manpower.
[2] Everything else includes procurement, r&d/test/eval, "atomic energy defense activities", and "defense-related activities" - the portion
The fat, carbohydrate, and cholesterol theories of atherosclerosis are all BULLSHIT. Atherosclerosis is caused by chronic INFLAMMATION of the arteries.
No. Just no.
So, gee, what if Sprague and Cornell-Dubilier or whoever do not have a trademark on the Vitamin Q capacitor, the orange drop capacitor, the yellow mylar cap? So fucking what? They would have to convince the buyer they have the best characteristics and value. Gee - just like they do anyway when they DO use the trademarks. What's that you say? You couldn't be sure they weren't copied counterfeits? You'd go by the brand name, just like you do now. The bad guys could still be prosecuted for false advertising if they pretended the design was theirs - just like now.
"Society" as a whole would "suffer" because Bayer doesn't get sole use of the word aspirin in a drug context? Are you kidding? Where the heck did that come from?
Of the three, trademarks are the most obvious sop to big corporations. There's no way they are really expected to support and reward innovation, and they don't help the little guy as copyrights help the individual author.
I just wanted to thank you for your misinformed post because the other two replies were gold mines of actual factual information from which I learned a lot.
Excuses for inferiority. How lame is that?