So why don't they and everyone else just refuse to recognise the movement of the IP addresses.
That's probably exactly what will happen. The ISP who's been hit with the restraining order will say `ok, you can have your IP address range for now', and the company will smugly take it over to a new ISP.
The new ISP *will* refuse to use it, since that's not how things are done. Suppose the customer gets a court order forcing the new ISP to use it... fine. So the new ISP announces BGP routes for this address space, and all the other ISPs in the world will filter out this allocation because it's too small.
Note that the court order here only affects one ISP -- it can't affect every single ISP in the country.
Unless this customer can get court orders forcing every ISP in the whole world to respect their address space, it's just not going to work. They've won nothing.
I completly understand that there are technical challenges ahead.
Actually, this is a technical challenge behind. At one point, even/24s were portable. You had them allocated to you, and you took them with you.
It worked, but as the Internet grew, it broke down, and was finally abandoned in favor of the current system where all but the largest players borrow IP addresses from their ISP rather than owning their own.
If we can drive a remote controlled car on mars I think we can overcome this issue.
We did not drive a remote control car on Mars. The time lag alone would make that maddening. (And we have not overcome the speed of light limitations quite yet.) We controlled a mostly autonomous robot on Mars.
And we did overcome this issue, long ago. The solution is DNS. slashdot.org is Slashdot, no matter what the underlying IP address is.
With IPv6, an IP address will be 16 bytes long... do you really expect people to memorize something that long? Even a 4 byte IPv4 address is hard enough to memorize. Quick! What's the IP address for www.slashdot.org! No cheating and looking it up!
I am talking over my head here, my knowledge is not such that I should be permitted to say stuff like this.
Well, at least you realize that you don't understand the issue. The judge didn't understand the issue, yet he made a ruling anyways.
because he thinks his WWW address is tied into the provider
Well, if he thinks that, he thinks wrong. There's no need to break the Internet just to make his misconception relevant.
It's an excellent analogy! (And in a world of poor analogies, that's rare!)
Except that it's not your five digit ZIP you'd take with you -- it's your nine digit ZIP. Your nine digit ZIP seems to cover a single address or P.O. box (or perhaps it's a single block or street?) -- assuming it's a single house, you could in theory take it with you, but the problems for the post office will be very similar to the problems caused by making small blocks of IP addresses portable.
Everytime I buy a new computer, I sue the NIC manufacturer to give me the same MAC address as my old one.
Rather than do this, I just pull the old ethernet card out and put it in the new computer. Saves a lot on legal bills. [For the sarcasm impaired, No, I don't really do this.]
Also, you can generally change your MAC address -- it's not terribly hard for most cards.
IP's are NOT portable and should not be interchanged like phone numbers.
Actually, IPs are portable, just like phone numbers are. [But read on]
Oh the hell this would unleash.
It used to be that you took your IP addresses with you wherever you went, even a class C, and your ISP would make it work.
However, this became a big problem as the Internet grew and grew, and the BGP tables grew and grew, so finally companies stopped doing this, and now IP ranges are considered to be not portable unless they're a certain size. `CIDRize or die' was the saying... and people chose not to die.
The court needs a clue though. As does the customer who asked for the TRO -- they'll find that many (most?) ISPs will not route to their IP range at their new ISP, in spite of what the court said. I guess their old ISP could set up a VPN for them, but I'm guessing they won't.
In the R/C jet community the Alpha 4 is considered the end-all charger.
It's a popular charger, mostly because it can charge four packs seperately. The big downsides are that it's $300+ dollars, and you can't get one without getting lucky in a lottery, or paying even more on Ebay.
Most importantly the packs *never* get hot, even on its fastest charge rates.
That's because it's got one more big disadvantage -- it can only charge at one amp, *total*, added up between it's four outputs. That's why your packs don't get hot -- it can't charge them fast enough to make them hot. (But one amp could make a AA pack get warm.) There's nothing special about this charger (beyond this limitation) that keeps it from making packs hot -- any other peak charger, charging at a rate of 1 amp, will make a battery pack just as hot as this one charging at one amp.
One more disadvantage -- it can't do LiPoly cells. But I don't know how many jet people use them -- probably not too many. I don't understand why it doesn't do LiPoly cells yet -- a simple firmware upgrade should be all that's required, and since it's all custom made by them, you'd think that would be trivial for them to do. I guess they just don't want to make money -- they won't increase production to match demand, and they won't add simple to add features that would increase demand.
It will also do a peak charge at C/10 rate, to really baby your packs.
A minor nit -- at C/10, most packs don't really exhibit a peak at all. So it's probably just doing your standard charge (with no peak detection) at that rate -- which is fine, because a few hours of overcharging at C/10 is a good thing (it helps equalize the cells) rather than a bad thing. But you don't need the Litco charger for that -- any wal-wart can do this for far less money.
In any event, the Alpha 4 is a fine (but pricey and hard to get!) charger for keeping a fleet (it's overkill if you only have one or two planes) of glow or glider planes ready to fly, but it's totally inadequate for the needs of an electric flyer. It also can't even charge 2000 mAh AA cells at a 1 C rate, meaning that it probably wouldn't do the `Ask/.' guy much good.
Actually, the Triton is way more than the guy needs too. He could probably do very well with any peak charger that can charge 1-8 cells, and can probably find one for around $40. Something like this
would probably be just fine for $50. And it has two charge ports too, which is a nice feature.
The R/C community has some serious chargers that can pretty much charge anything out there.
My current favorite is the
Great Planes Triton charger -- I like it so much that I've got two of them. It'll charge anything. If you need it to run off of 110v AC current, this page will probably help set you up cheaply. You'll need to make a battery holder to hold the cells, but you could easily charge 10 at once, or possibly even charge them inside whatever you're using them in.
(And
this tells how to find the best price on it right now.)
I would like to find an inexpensive Intelligent charger that can charge 4 or more high capacity cells (in pairs or individually) in an hour or less.
Note that most NiMH cells will only tolerate being charged at up to 1 C -- so don't charge your 2 Ahr cells at more than 2 A if you want them to last (and one amp, 1/2 C, would be better.) I don't know what they do to the 15 minute cells to let them be charged at 4 C, but whatever it is, most NiMH cells do not have it. No charger, no matter how smart, is going to remove this limitation for you.
Of course, chargers like the Triton are probably overkill for what you need, especially at $130, but I certainly love mine...
Model rocket + GPS + Palmtop + warhead = guided missile. I'm not so sure it's such a bad idea to be concerned about this.
You make it sound so *easy*.
Well it's not. <barbie voice>It's hard!</barbie voice>
Places like Lockheed get billions of dollars to make guided missiles. While I guess it would be ossible for a hobbyist to make a guided missile of some sort using off the shelf components, it wouldn't be easy, and requiring background checks on hobbyists trying to buy propellant isn't going to stop it from happening.
As a general rule of thumb, terrorists (a subset of the group known as `criminals') generally are not concerned with breaking the law. They're also generally trying to get the most bang for their buck -- and that would NOT be a guided missile. It would be a truck full of explosives parked next to the big building -- which could have over 100 times the explosive power of the largest hobbiest rocket (or R/C plane, for that matter) if it were fitted with the largest explosive load it could handle.
It's attitudes like yours that are causing this country to go to Hell in a handbasket in the name of the fight on terrorism/drugs/the Constitution/environment/disobediance/whatever.
This seems very atypical. The test subject does not represent typical email behavior, except among the most hardcore geeks. Even still, typical hardcore geeks will adjust this behavior in an attempt to curve spam. The typical technical user (someone who makes his living online) will have the same email address for perhaps five or more years, and the typical non-technical user (a majority of the users on the Internet, lest we forget) will change email addresses every couple of years. In either case, most sane users use one or two variants at the most.
Who is Jonathan to decide what consitutes sanity?
Maybe I'm a hardcore geek, but I do do exactly what Gordon does -- have several accounts feeding a `master' mail account, using addresses I've owned for over a decade. I also post to Usenet and mailing lists with my unobfuscated mailing address -- I want people to be able to reach me, and I refuse to let the spammers take that away from me.
And I think I'm very sane, thank you.
49,000 emails in eight months is also absurd.
I agree. That's an absurdly *small* amount. I personally receive over 1500 spams/day -- so I'd have 49,000 in under a month. Obviously the amount of spam I receive is because I set myself up as a target, but I'm hardly the only one. Even Jonathan's email address is clearly listed on his page, unobfuscated, so he's doing it too, at least to some degree.
(As a piece of anecdotal evidence, Spamassassin catches all but about 4/day of the spams I get, and false positives are extremely rare. Of course, I have spent a good deal of time tweaking SA to work best with my email, and it now works very well.)
A good test should have included independent tests with corpora from 10-15 different test subject, of all walks of life - geek, doctor, etc.
That sounds fine in theory, but in practice it's hard to do. How many people from all non-geek walks of life save *all* their email, including spam, and are willing to give it to you so you can analyze it?
And merely capturing all their email won't do it -- they need to categorize it for you, because they're the only ones who can reliably decide what's spam *for them* and what's not.
I do agree, that the study had more than it's share of issues, but this critique goes way over the top.
I would have gone for something a little more forceful like Susan Ivanova's "death incarnate" speech.:P
My favorite B5 (and Ivanova) line of all time --
No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. What?! Look, somebody's got to have some damn perspective around here. Boom! Sooner or later...BOOM!"
Here in Cedar Rapids IA, we already have it, i can go and see the units themselves mounted on the powerlines, and pick them up with kismet and netstumbler along glass road.
Eh? BPL is typically between 2 and 80 mHz. Higher frequencies will be attenuated too much over powerlines to make their use pratical. kismet/netstumbler is for WiFi, 2400 mHz -- MUCH higher than 80 mHz.
If you can pick up these boxes with these tools, then these boxes are not BPL., unless they're some sort of bridge between BPL and WiFi, or can be managed via WiFi or something?
Aha... google to the rescue!
I just received word a few days ago that Alliant Energy is planning a trial
of BPL in an undisclosed part of Cedar Rapids, IA, sometime this year. No
specific dates available, but within the next 3 months. The plan appears
to be using the 13.8 kV lines to carry the data to various neighborhoods,
and then use 2.4 GHz WLAN servers to connect between the HV lines and
subscribers.
So they are bridges. Seems an odd way to do it though -- BPL CAN go all the way into the house (that's part of why people like it), so why are they using WiFi for that? If all they're doing is putting APs in each neighborhood, why use BPL at all? Just run standard cox or fiber optics to each AP.
And if very many hams do what you suggest the laws will be changed and those hams will lose their licenses and have to pay fines.
Perhaps, though that would require that the law change. Currently, the hams CAN legally do this.
Note that it's only a *very* small subset of the ham community that's even considering deliberately jamming BPL. Most hams are considerate to a fault, and wouldn't retaliate like that.
But for now, if you need to use 1500 watts to make a contact, it's legal for a ham to use 1500 watts to make that contact (on most bands), even if it causes problems for BPL. The law says you need to use the minimum amount of power to get the job done, and most hams do that. But if you need 1500 watts to get the job done, then you can do that.
(For the record, I'm AD5RH. And I don't have any equipment capable of putting out over 200 watts.)
Is this the next take on lining the walls with lead?
No, it's not. To block a RF signal all you need is a faraday cage -- which can even have lots of holes in it (like a wire cage) as long as the holes are a good deal smaller than the wavelength of the signal you're trying to keep out.
Wrapping the whole places in tinfoil would work nicely as well, as long as you don't leave any holes. No need to go to anything as heavy as lead, unless you're trying to block things like X-rays or gamma rays.
ST:TOS: To boldly go where no man has gone before...
ST:TNG To boldly go where no one has gone before (PC version)
ST:DS9: To boldly stay in one place
ST:VOY To boldly go and get completely lost
And that's from before Enterprise, so I don't know where Enterprise would fit in. Perhaps `To bodly go and mess up the time-space continum?':)
That's how I did it. I don't use Opera, but Mozilla works just fine. I don't really use Gnome or KDE tools, but I've found that the ones I do start seem to work fine. Really, I've had very few problems with this.
XP on the other hand is unusable on machines with 256 mb without significant tweaking.
XP is perfectly usable on a box with 128 MB of RAM. You won't be running any new 3D games very quickly, but IE and Office work just fine. It's a tad slow, but hardly `unusable'. And that's with no `treaking'.
Same goes for Linux.
Actually, Fedora Core 1 with the default desktop and stuff works fine on that same box (p2/266 128mb ram Dell laptop.)
And note that Linux is a kernel. Don't want to run some bloated window manager? Then don't! I'm using fvwm95 right now and it's only using a few MB of ram. Yes, this box does have 1 GB of ram, but fvwm95 gives me what I need. And if you don't need X, don't start it, and even brand spanking new Linux distributions will run ok in 32 MB or so of RAM. Such a machine could make an ok small DNS or Web server... try getting XP or 2000 to even install with only 32 MB of ram. Mostly because Windows doesn't let you turn off the GUI.
If you want to run an os on a machine from 2000, use an OS from 2000.. how hard is that to grasp?
It would be easier to grasp if it wasn't so mind-numbingly oversimplified.
This is a much larger accomplishment than a simple backpack repeater. In order to get gain out of an antenna, you make it directional. To make an antenna with positive gain and yet it be omnidirectional, you need... magic, since you're violating the laws of physics.
Picking the lock on the locked door is quite possibly more expensive than fighting through the turrets and trip mines. At least in Deus Ex 1, you needed to use lock picks to unlock a door, and often they were a lot harder to find than ammunition and health packs. And if you never spent the points on learning to pick locks, you needed a lot of them.
And lots of games don't let you shoot out windows and go through them. If you want to let people do this, make it clear in the tutorial, or make it the only way to get through a section earlier in the game.
If you really want to make people go through the window and not through the war zone, make the war zone so incredibly difficult that nobody can get through. Eventually, people will look for another way.
But I can see the validity in the point of "how can we trust them to post unbiased reviews when they are funded by Microsoft
Ok, let's assume that the Microsoft revenue goes away. How can you trust them to post unbiased reviews when they're funded by Redhat? Or Suse, Mandrake, Sun, IBM. LoneTar (is that thing still around?), whatever?
This is a classic problem, one that affects every magazine that accepts advertisements and does reviews. And there's no real answer, short of what Consumer Reports does -- don't accept ads. Except that magazines like to show a profit, and ads are a good way to do that. The other ways, raising your prices or accepting donations, is iffy at best. It doesn't even work for PBS -- even PBS shows commercials (sort of) for their advertisers now.
Ultimately, if you're actually reading `Linux Today', you can probably already see through the Microsoft FUD. So I have to respond to dave (Mr Linux Today founder) with a `No, I'm not going to boycott Linux Today just because they run Microsoft ads. Sorry.' (Of course, I haven't read Linux Today in a long while, so my lack of boycott hardly means anything.)
So, how did dave lose control of Linux Today? Did he sell out in the height of the dot-com craze? (Like everybody else did?) If so, crawl back to your Porche, drive back to your nice, paid off already house, and stop whining.
You'd think Microsoft would be maintaining periodic backups of Hotmail data, but what the hey.
They probably are. But accidents still happen. Nobody can guarantee 100% reliability with any sort of backup setup. You might be able to get 99.9% reliability, and adding backup backups will get you more nines, but you'll never get 100%. And I don't see Hotmail as bringing in enough money to justify enough redundant backups to get lots and lots of nines in there.
I'm up to 1500/day. That's just me, just my personal address.
On the bright side, only a very few spams get through -- perhaps 3 per day. As for false positives, very few.
Spamassassin and the RBLs, especially the Spamcop URI stuff, rock!
Alas, while I may have 21 times the source material that you have, I don't really care to make poetry out of it. Not manually anyways, but it might be interesting to make a program generate it...
My wife told me about this -- one of our friends is on here. I don't really do lj (my life is chronicled on Usenet!) so I'm not up on the politics, but apparantly people have tried to get people removed from this list, or to have their journals removed after their death, and lj (or somebody else, I don't know) has been unwilling to do so.
I've found that Linux (at least 2.4.something) will have problems using a fat32 filesystem over 128 GB in size. Windows will work with it fine, but Linux will work mostly but writing to one file will eventually cause another file to get truncated to zero bytes... nasty.
I never really tracked down exactly what was going on, but it was easily reproducible on at least two different boxes just by creating a fat32 partition over 128 GB, using both mkdosfs and Partition Magic and mounting it under Linux and performing some operations on it.
and even my Dell 400SC is sooo quiet I can barely hear it
Then you're lucky. Many modern computers make a lot of noise -- sometimes even enough noise to make having conversations difficult. And they don't have to be servers. (Probably has something to do with the 60+ watt cpus people are using nowadays.)
Or suppose your computer is in your bedroom, and you leave it on overnight. Wouldn't it be nice if it were quieter? Even the fan and hard drive in my DTV Tivo are annoying at night -- and it's much quieter than a full blown PC.
Slashdot Mirror
The new ISP *will* refuse to use it, since that's not how things are done. Suppose the customer gets a court order forcing the new ISP to use it ... fine. So the new ISP announces BGP routes for this address space, and all the other ISPs in the world will filter out this allocation because it's too small.
Note that the court order here only affects one ISP -- it can't affect every single ISP in the country.
Unless this customer can get court orders forcing every ISP in the whole world to respect their address space, it's just not going to work. They've won nothing.
It worked, but as the Internet grew, it broke down, and was finally abandoned in favor of the current system where all but the largest players borrow IP addresses from their ISP rather than owning their own.
We did not drive a remote control car on Mars. The time lag alone would make that maddening. (And we have not overcome the speed of light limitations quite yet.) We controlled a mostly autonomous robot on Mars.And we did overcome this issue, long ago. The solution is DNS. slashdot.org is Slashdot, no matter what the underlying IP address is.
With IPv6, an IP address will be 16 bytes long ... do you really expect people to memorize something that long? Even a 4 byte IPv4 address is hard enough to memorize. Quick! What's the IP address for www.slashdot.org! No cheating and looking it up!
Well, at least you realize that you don't understand the issue. The judge didn't understand the issue, yet he made a ruling anyways. Well, if he thinks that, he thinks wrong. There's no need to break the Internet just to make his misconception relevant.It's an excellent analogy! (And in a world of poor analogies, that's rare!)
Except that it's not your five digit ZIP you'd take with you -- it's your nine digit ZIP. Your nine digit ZIP seems to cover a single address or P.O. box (or perhaps it's a single block or street?) -- assuming it's a single house, you could in theory take it with you, but the problems for the post office will be very similar to the problems caused by making small blocks of IP addresses portable.
Also, you can generally change your MAC address -- it's not terribly hard for most cards.
However, this became a big problem as the Internet grew and grew, and the BGP tables grew and grew, so finally companies stopped doing this, and now IP ranges are considered to be not portable unless they're a certain size. `CIDRize or die' was the saying ... and people chose not to die.
The court needs a clue though. As does the customer who asked for the TRO -- they'll find that many (most?) ISPs will not route to their IP range at their new ISP, in spite of what the court said. I guess their old ISP could set up a VPN for them, but I'm guessing they won't.
Not.One more disadvantage -- it can't do LiPoly cells. But I don't know how many jet people use them -- probably not too many. I don't understand why it doesn't do LiPoly cells yet -- a simple firmware upgrade should be all that's required, and since it's all custom made by them, you'd think that would be trivial for them to do. I guess they just don't want to make money -- they won't increase production to match demand, and they won't add simple to add features that would increase demand.
A minor nit -- at C/10, most packs don't really exhibit a peak at all. So it's probably just doing your standard charge (with no peak detection) at that rate -- which is fine, because a few hours of overcharging at C/10 is a good thing (it helps equalize the cells) rather than a bad thing. But you don't need the Litco charger for that -- any wal-wart can do this for far less money.In any event, the Alpha 4 is a fine (but pricey and hard to get!) charger for keeping a fleet (it's overkill if you only have one or two planes) of glow or glider planes ready to fly, but it's totally inadequate for the needs of an electric flyer. It also can't even charge 2000 mAh AA cells at a 1 C rate, meaning that it probably wouldn't do the `Ask /.' guy much good.
Actually, the Triton is way more than the guy needs too. He could probably do very well with any peak charger that can charge 1-8 cells, and can probably find one for around $40. Something like this would probably be just fine for $50. And it has two charge ports too, which is a nice feature.
My current favorite is the Great Planes Triton charger -- I like it so much that I've got two of them. It'll charge anything. If you need it to run off of 110v AC current, this page will probably help set you up cheaply. You'll need to make a battery holder to hold the cells, but you could easily charge 10 at once, or possibly even charge them inside whatever you're using them in.
(And this tells how to find the best price on it right now.)
Note that most NiMH cells will only tolerate being charged at up to 1 C -- so don't charge your 2 Ahr cells at more than 2 A if you want them to last (and one amp, 1/2 C, would be better.) I don't know what they do to the 15 minute cells to let them be charged at 4 C, but whatever it is, most NiMH cells do not have it. No charger, no matter how smart, is going to remove this limitation for you.Of course, chargers like the Triton are probably overkill for what you need, especially at $130, but I certainly love mine ...
Well it's not. <barbie voice>It's hard!</barbie voice>
Places like Lockheed get billions of dollars to make guided missiles. While I guess it would be ossible for a hobbyist to make a guided missile of some sort using off the shelf components, it wouldn't be easy, and requiring background checks on hobbyists trying to buy propellant isn't going to stop it from happening.
As a general rule of thumb, terrorists (a subset of the group known as `criminals') generally are not concerned with breaking the law. They're also generally trying to get the most bang for their buck -- and that would NOT be a guided missile. It would be a truck full of explosives parked next to the big building -- which could have over 100 times the explosive power of the largest hobbiest rocket (or R/C plane, for that matter) if it were fitted with the largest explosive load it could handle.
It's attitudes like yours that are causing this country to go to Hell in a handbasket in the name of the fight on terrorism/drugs/the Constitution/environment/disobediance/whatever.
Maybe I'm a hardcore geek, but I do do exactly what Gordon does -- have several accounts feeding a `master' mail account, using addresses I've owned for over a decade. I also post to Usenet and mailing lists with my unobfuscated mailing address -- I want people to be able to reach me, and I refuse to let the spammers take that away from me.
And I think I'm very sane, thank you.
I agree. That's an absurdly *small* amount. I personally receive over 1500 spams/day -- so I'd have 49,000 in under a month. Obviously the amount of spam I receive is because I set myself up as a target, but I'm hardly the only one. Even Jonathan's email address is clearly listed on his page, unobfuscated, so he's doing it too, at least to some degree.(As a piece of anecdotal evidence, Spamassassin catches all but about 4/day of the spams I get, and false positives are extremely rare. Of course, I have spent a good deal of time tweaking SA to work best with my email, and it now works very well.)
That sounds fine in theory, but in practice it's hard to do. How many people from all non-geek walks of life save *all* their email, including spam, and are willing to give it to you so you can analyze it?And merely capturing all their email won't do it -- they need to categorize it for you, because they're the only ones who can reliably decide what's spam *for them* and what's not.
I do agree, that the study had more than it's share of issues, but this critique goes way over the top.
( boom.wav, from Babylon 5 Sounds...).
If you can pick up these boxes with these tools, then these boxes are not BPL., unless they're some sort of bridge between BPL and WiFi, or can be managed via WiFi or something?
Aha ... google to the rescue!
So they are bridges. Seems an odd way to do it though -- BPL CAN go all the way into the house (that's part of why people like it), so why are they using WiFi for that? If all they're doing is putting APs in each neighborhood, why use BPL at all? Just run standard cox or fiber optics to each AP.Note that it's only a *very* small subset of the ham community that's even considering deliberately jamming BPL. Most hams are considerate to a fault, and wouldn't retaliate like that.
But for now, if you need to use 1500 watts to make a contact, it's legal for a ham to use 1500 watts to make that contact (on most bands), even if it causes problems for BPL. The law says you need to use the minimum amount of power to get the job done, and most hams do that. But if you need 1500 watts to get the job done, then you can do that.
(For the record, I'm AD5RH. And I don't have any equipment capable of putting out over 200 watts.)
Wrapping the whole places in tinfoil would work nicely as well, as long as you don't leave any holes. No need to go to anything as heavy as lead, unless you're trying to block things like X-rays or gamma rays.
ST:TOS: To boldly go where no man has gone before ...
ST:TNG To boldly go where no one has gone before (PC version)
ST:DS9: To boldly stay in one place
ST:VOY To boldly go and get completely lost
And that's from before Enterprise, so I don't know where Enterprise would fit in. Perhaps `To bodly go and mess up the time-space continum?' :)
And note that Linux is a kernel. Don't want to run some bloated window manager? Then don't! I'm using fvwm95 right now and it's only using a few MB of ram. Yes, this box does have 1 GB of ram, but fvwm95 gives me what I need. And if you don't need X, don't start it, and even brand spanking new Linux distributions will run ok in 32 MB or so of RAM. Such a machine could make an ok small DNS or Web server ... try getting XP or 2000 to even install with only 32 MB of ram. Mostly because Windows doesn't let you turn off the GUI.
It would be easier to grasp if it wasn't so mind-numbingly oversimplified.And lots of games don't let you shoot out windows and go through them. If you want to let people do this, make it clear in the tutorial, or make it the only way to get through a section earlier in the game.
If you really want to make people go through the window and not through the war zone, make the war zone so incredibly difficult that nobody can get through. Eventually, people will look for another way.
This is a classic problem, one that affects every magazine that accepts advertisements and does reviews. And there's no real answer, short of what Consumer Reports does -- don't accept ads. Except that magazines like to show a profit, and ads are a good way to do that. The other ways, raising your prices or accepting donations, is iffy at best. It doesn't even work for PBS -- even PBS shows commercials (sort of) for their advertisers now.
Ultimately, if you're actually reading `Linux Today', you can probably already see through the Microsoft FUD. So I have to respond to dave (Mr Linux Today founder) with a `No, I'm not going to boycott Linux Today just because they run Microsoft ads. Sorry.' (Of course, I haven't read Linux Today in a long while, so my lack of boycott hardly means anything.)
So, how did dave lose control of Linux Today? Did he sell out in the height of the dot-com craze? (Like everybody else did?) If so, crawl back to your Porche, drive back to your nice, paid off already house, and stop whining.
On the bright side, only a very few spams get through -- perhaps 3 per day. As for false positives, very few.
Spamassassin and the RBLs, especially the Spamcop URI stuff, rock!
Alas, while I may have 21 times the source material that you have, I don't really care to make poetry out of it. Not manually anyways, but it might be interesting to make a program generate it ...
My wife told me about this -- one of our friends is on here. I don't really do lj (my life is chronicled on Usenet!) so I'm not up on the politics, but apparantly people have tried to get people removed from this list, or to have their journals removed after their death, and lj (or somebody else, I don't know) has been unwilling to do so.
I've found that Linux (at least 2.4.something) will have problems using a fat32 filesystem over 128 GB in size. Windows will work with it fine, but Linux will work mostly but writing to one file will eventually cause another file to get truncated to zero bytes ... nasty.
I never really tracked down exactly what was going on, but it was easily reproducible on at least two different boxes just by creating a fat32 partition over 128 GB, using both mkdosfs and Partition Magic and mounting it under Linux and performing some operations on it.
Maybe they're not aging as well as hoped. (Or maybe I'm aging better than expected!)
Or suppose your computer is in your bedroom, and you leave it on overnight. Wouldn't it be nice if it were quieter? Even the fan and hard drive in my DTV Tivo are annoying at night -- and it's much quieter than a full blown PC.