They say you could post a cure to cancer to the net and nobody would notice. Similarly, one Jim Fleming in Chicago has hacked the IP header to get workable 34 bit addressing. He just found 3 more intrnets worth of addresses. Folow @techno_cat on twitter for details.
"The ink cartrides that come with the printeres are never 100% full, they are only about 25% full. It's just starter ink, to get you to buy more in."
For a number of years this hasn't been universally true. I boiught an Epson pingment ink photo printer for $99 that had an honest $160 worth of ink. When it ran out of ink I bought another one...
Keep in mind ink is $9 a quart from the right place. You're paying for more than ink.
Keep in mind they may be lying. We're supposed to believe with 10 years to work on this they're surprised that tha files are big? Uh, hello, no.
I suspect what's really going on is they just found the intellectual property gotcha inherant in DNSSEC that IMO is gonna prevent it from ever being widespread. It's as damning to the IP/TM guys as the Kaminsky was to technical correctness of the DNS and I suspect the project's been put on hold... and may not come back in its present form.
And then there's the.se debacle, and.de dropping off the net briefly last week.
Right now the International Governance Forumn is going on in Egypt. This is the UN bunch of wonks that would like to have control of the Internet DNS cause they think US control ism well, it's not them.
They've been meeting for 4 years talking about this. Nobody in the US seems to take them seriously, and it really seems like a way for people in every contry to self select some "internet governance" guy then they all go drink bad wine and listen to bead speeches ad Keiren McCarthy opined.
John Zittrain from Harvard/Berkman was there, and Milton Mueller and the usual US policy wonks. One of Zittrains posters was torn down by a UN security official because the Chinese protested - the poster mentioned the great firewall of China.
The first rule of the great firewall of China at the UN is you don't talk about the great firewall of China at the UN.
RT @Techno_Cat http://is.gd/4JAAj "There are 40 applicants who paid #ICANN $50,000 each" Mike Roberts said there were applicants the U.S. Government denied.
"Every time something new is created, the squatters make millions, and everyone else has headaches. Does that not sum up ICANN's contributions in the last decade?"
That makes little or no sense. ICANN hasn't *done* *anything*. They've say on their hands for a decade when they were formed to, and told by the US government that formed them to make new tlds.
Apart from some truly lame tlds burped up in 2000 (the enormously popular.museum and.coop and others, which haven't even broken even yet) there have been no new tlds since 1986. So, respectfully, WTF are you on about?
"Any existing 2nd-level domain registrant automatically gets assigned a new TLD equivalent to the current 2nd-level name minus the TLD suffix. Collision priority scheme is.edu, then.com, then.org and.net, then.gov, and finally.mil. Ignores ccTLDs."
The "move the dot to the left one" argument came up in 1997. I liked it. Course, I suggested it.
Having to pick a "winner" from com/net/org/edu etc means win-lose. Much better I think would be for them to run it in a cooperative manner. Recall that originally the Internic was run as an NSF cooperative agreement between three companies: GA, NSI and AT&T. I think consumers would feel better knowing there are multiple companies than any one outfit. Plus it's one-one.
Then you only have the problem if having 150 million tlds. ICANN will probably say there are "issues" and somebody with a DJBDNS box supporting this will no doubt shortly after echo "what issues?".
Thank you for bringing this up Karl; right now there's a certain Euphoria about IDN's and tons of people who didn't do any work on them are patting themselves on the back: it's newsworthy; people come up to me on the street and tell me the news.
And per AVC's suggestion they think maybe they can get started on new "g"tld apps, another source of institutional euphoria. I suggested long ago to him to organize a tld-apps "union".
I'm not sure anything short of a lawsuit would awaken the memory of the ICANN 2000 TLD apps, to say nothing of Postels list of tlds that IANA had noticed in 1997.
But who'd want to fund that kind of action? Seems they'd rather just pay again. Class action?
The.xxx reconsideration should be out any day. Fleming says the judges will say "hey the bylaws let them act like assholes and they acted like assholes".
"For that matter, Slashdot isn't really an organization, so why is it under.org?".org isn't really for organizations. it's a catch-all. The way the rfc is worded, com is for commercial organisations, net is for network infrastructure org is for things that don't fit any of these. It's just shorter than ".other".
This is somewhat misleading. While it was indeed the US government sponsored arpa-net and IP-network protocols that use use today, keep in mind that the ad-hoc uucp network was bigger than the tcp/ip network until 1996.
Now imagine being locked in Bell Labs and you get out and are told unix is everywhere now, your first reaction might be to say "holy crap we need to keep rack of some of the important bits" only to be told "oh, iana and icann take care of all of that".
I don't recall when switching from uucp to tcp/ip where it said "this is all undefined and we'll change details of commerce and administration on the fly, and in the worst way possible"
Holy Jesus the squirrels are really all out tonight. Transparency in passing packets, which is how we've always operated so far is now being challenged by Fox saying Obama is taking over the Internet and bloggers saying this will be the end of the USA.
If McCain is really concerned the government is taking over the internet he should dismantle the ICANN his client AT&T spent so long and so many millions on, mostly in secret in their clandestine "steaks for staffers" programme.
If you look carefully, the "the government is taking over the internet!" came from AT&T. Now McCain is saying it in public too.
AT&T seems to have called in a favor. Few poeple understand the net less than John McCain and only a fool would take advice for net.policy from somebody this undereducated and unfamiliar with the way our network interoperates.
And what is this crap about legislation affecting Telcos ability to innovate? Excuse me? Telcos didn't build the net or innovate, they were usually standing in the way with their hands out, eventually doing things so bad congress felt obliged to do something about the overwhelming public outcry of problems with Telcos.
Jamie Love was told by Oracle that they want to control the copyright to MySQL. My impression was if they don't get it it's a deal-breaker. It might even be the only reason they want it.
"Let's pray that science wins out over irrationality."
That's what the article's point is! It's not saying "vaccines don't work" it's saying "they say vaccines reduce the death rate by 50% and the numbers don't bear that out. What's the real number?"
Neither though is anybody saying the vaccine is zero percent effective or universally toxic, what happened above is a rare edge case (but as an aside it would be nice to be able to predict when this was going to happen, this is a fairly *catastrophic* edge case).
But the examples brought up in the article do suggest there is sustantive argument that the claimes reductin of 50% reduction in martaliry rate is indeed in question, that's all.
Nobody's actually measuring people who have anti-bodies of a specific type, the data gathered is fairly meaningless by lumping a lot of things (rhinovirus, coronovirus etc) as "flu", also the cohort factor and related effects do have a demonsterable non-zero effect on the mortality rate.
So, it's not a question of is the vaccine useful or nor, more like a plea for more accurate analysis and gathering of the data in question.
"Just you wait, many purchases will scrub both Android & Windows 7 and install their favourite distro be it Debian, Fedora, SUSE, or the dreaded *buntu (only joking, xbuntu is pretty good)"
"Wouldn't be better to offer fast booting Linux (Moblin?) and dual boot with Win? Then users can access nice and quick Linux environment or wait for Win if they "really" need Office."
A client sent me an xls and doc file to my android phone.
They just worked.
I don't use spreadsheets and always refuse doc files replying with "I don't use proprietary formats, send me txt or html".
Apparently my Android phone is a part time xls/doc consumer appliance.
I've used Opera exclusively for 7 years and was used to having to fire up IE every now and again. Long ago it was for certain parts of ebay and even longer ago, paypal.
But, in the past year to 18 mos I haven't had to use IE at all, ever. Maybe I don't get out much.
I did have to try IE about 4 mos ago on some site that didn't work with Opera but it didn't work with FF or IE either. Go figure.
DHT. Thanks for asking. Efforts are already underway, quietly, so ICANN doesn't notice and cannot co-opt it. Oh, and name and address shortages? Thing of the past.
It's not "a" dot, it's "every" dot. A bad script adn DNSSEC are to blame. Note that this is version 4 (5?) of dnssec. The earlier ones just didn't work.
And there's a real bad gotcha in the current one they haven't found yet that has still to raise it's ugly head. In time.
One of the things we learned in the DNS wars is the lobbing technique of AT&T. The spend millions of dollars on this, and anywhere you turn you find AT&Y wonks buying dinner and drinks for anybody of import, aside from the lobbying efforts inside DC. Congress critters are so receptive to this it just isn't funny.
So this thing that's happening now? AT&T bought it and it has nothing to do with the merits of the situation.
Lauren is heavily involved with net.neutrality and has been around for ages. I met him when he was a Lucent (Bell Labs) guy, he had the office next to Brian Reid.
Slashdot Mirror
They say you could post a cure to cancer to the net and nobody would notice. Similarly, one Jim Fleming in Chicago has hacked the IP header to get workable 34 bit addressing. He just found 3 more intrnets worth of addresses. Folow @techno_cat on twitter for details.
"The ink cartrides that come with the printeres are never 100% full, they are only about 25% full. It's just starter ink, to get you to buy more in."
For a number of years this hasn't been universally true. I boiught an Epson pingment ink photo printer for $99 that had an honest $160 worth of ink. When it ran out of ink I bought another one...
Keep in mind ink is $9 a quart from the right place. You're paying for more than ink.
That's why I say I'm something more respectable like a marijuana farmer or an abortionist.
Keep in mind they may be lying. We're supposed to believe with 10 years to work on this they're surprised that tha files are big? Uh, hello, no.
I suspect what's really going on is they just found the intellectual property gotcha inherant in DNSSEC that IMO is gonna prevent it from ever being widespread. It's as damning to the IP/TM guys as the Kaminsky was to technical correctness of the DNS and I suspect the project's been put on hold... and may not come back in its present form.
And then there's the .se debacle, and .de dropping off the net briefly last week.
Imagine a world without .com
Right now the International Governance Forumn is going on in Egypt. This is the UN bunch of wonks that would like to have control of the Internet DNS cause they think US control ism well, it's not them.
They've been meeting for 4 years talking about this. Nobody in the US seems to take them seriously, and it really seems like a way for people in every contry to self select some "internet governance" guy then they all go drink bad wine and listen to bead speeches ad Keiren McCarthy opined.
John Zittrain from Harvard/Berkman was there, and Milton Mueller and the usual US policy wonks. One of Zittrains posters was torn down by a UN security official because the Chinese protested - the poster mentioned the great firewall of China.
The first rule of the great firewall of China at the UN is you don't talk about the great firewall of China at the UN.
http://twitter.com/zittrain
UN security forces destroy our poster at Internet Governance Forum for mentioning China's firewall: http://bit.ly/3nF2AG #IGF09 #UN-FAIL
"I would just like to point out that everyone is getting their information from a single point: Michael Geist's blog."
Not at all. Jamie Love has been covering this for ages. http://twitter.com/jamie_love
I met Jamie 10 years ago in the formative icann debacle; he and Ralph Nader got involved and were bitch slapped by Esther. http://web.archive.org/web/20030228143244/dns.vrx.net/funnies/mystified/
RT @Techno_Cat http://is.gd/4JAAj "There are 40 applicants who paid
#ICANN $50,000 each" Mike Roberts said there were applicants the U.S. Government denied.
"Every time something new is created, the squatters make millions, and everyone else has headaches. Does that not sum up ICANN's contributions in the last decade?"
That makes little or no sense. ICANN hasn't *done* *anything*. They've say on their hands for a decade when they were formed to, and told by the US government that formed them to make new tlds.
Apart from some truly lame tlds burped up in 2000 (the enormously popular .museum and .coop and others, which haven't even broken even yet) there have been no new tlds since 1986. So, respectfully, WTF are you on about?
"Any existing 2nd-level domain registrant automatically gets assigned a new TLD equivalent to the current 2nd-level name minus the TLD suffix. Collision priority scheme is .edu, then .com, then .org and .net, then .gov, and finally .mil. Ignores ccTLDs."
The "move the dot to the left one" argument came up in 1997. I liked it. Course, I suggested it.
Having to pick a "winner" from com/net/org/edu etc means win-lose. Much better I think would be for them to run it in a cooperative manner. Recall that originally the Internic was run as an NSF cooperative agreement between three companies: GA, NSI and AT&T. I think consumers would feel better knowing there are multiple companies than any one outfit. Plus it's one-one.
Then you only have the problem if having 150 million tlds. ICANN will probably say there are "issues" and somebody with a DJBDNS box supporting this will no doubt shortly after echo "what issues?".
Thank you for bringing this up Karl; right now there's a certain Euphoria about IDN's and tons of people who didn't do any work on them are patting themselves on the back: it's newsworthy; people come up to me on the street and tell me the news.
And per AVC's suggestion they think maybe they can get started on new "g"tld apps, another source of institutional euphoria. I suggested long ago to him to organize a tld-apps "union".
I'm not sure anything short of a lawsuit would awaken the memory of the ICANN 2000 TLD apps, to say nothing of Postels list of tlds that IANA had noticed in 1997.
But who'd want to fund that kind of action? Seems they'd rather just pay again. Class action?
The .xxx reconsideration should be out any day. Fleming says the judges will say "hey the bylaws let them act like assholes and they acted like assholes".
" For that matter, Slashdot isn't really an organization, so why is it under .org?" .org isn't really for organizations. it's a catch-all. The way the rfc is worded, com is for commercial organisations, net is for network infrastructure org is for things that don't fit any of these. It's just shorter than ".other".
" When will Slashdot move under .slashdot?"
http://slash.dot/ has worked for a decade for those in the know.
Christian Neilson on the BOFH-net list suggested it and set it up.
"Should mention that this wiki is being served off a SheevaPlug"
And it still works despite the fact you mentioned it here. Impressive!
This is somewhat misleading. While it was indeed the US government sponsored arpa-net and IP-network protocols that use use today, keep in mind that the ad-hoc uucp network was bigger than the tcp/ip network until 1996.
Now imagine being locked in Bell Labs and you get out and are told unix is everywhere now, your first reaction might be to say "holy crap we need to keep rack of some of the important bits" only to be told "oh, iana and icann take care of all of that".
I don't recall when switching from uucp to tcp/ip where it said "this is all undefined and we'll change details of commerce and administration on the fly, and in the worst way possible"
Holy Jesus the squirrels are really all out tonight. Transparency in passing packets, which is how we've always operated so far is now being challenged by Fox saying Obama is taking over the Internet and bloggers saying this will be the end of the USA.
Wow. Just wow.
If McCain is really concerned the government is taking over the internet he should dismantle the ICANN his client AT&T spent so long and so many millions on, mostly in secret in their clandestine "steaks for staffers" programme.
If you look carefully, the "the government is taking over the internet!" came from AT&T. Now McCain is saying it in public too.
AT&T seems to have called in a favor. Few poeple understand the net less than John McCain and only a fool would take advice for net.policy from somebody this undereducated and unfamiliar with the way our network interoperates.
And what is this crap about legislation affecting Telcos ability to innovate? Excuse me? Telcos didn't build the net or innovate, they were usually standing in the way with their hands out, eventually doing things so bad congress felt obliged to do something about the overwhelming public outcry of problems with Telcos.
Jamie Love was told by Oracle that they want to control the copyright to MySQL. My impression was if they don't get it it's a deal-breaker. It might even be the only reason they want it.
"Let's pray that science wins out over irrationality."
That's what the article's point is! It's not saying "vaccines don't work" it's saying "they say vaccines reduce the death rate by 50% and the numbers don't bear that out. What's the real number?"
And that's a fair question. We know the virus isn't 100% effective, it damn near killed this girl: http://www.google.com/search?pg=q&fmt=.&q=dystonia+flu+vaccine
Neither though is anybody saying the vaccine is zero percent effective or universally toxic, what happened above is a rare edge case (but as an aside it would be nice to be able to predict when this was going to happen, this is a fairly *catastrophic* edge case).
But the examples brought up in the article do suggest there is sustantive argument that the claimes reductin of 50% reduction in martaliry rate is indeed in question, that's all.
Nobody's actually measuring people who have anti-bodies of a specific type, the data gathered is fairly meaningless by lumping a lot of things (rhinovirus, coronovirus etc) as "flu", also the cohort factor and related effects do have a demonsterable non-zero effect on the mortality rate.
So, it's not a question of is the vaccine useful or nor, more like a plea for more accurate analysis and gathering of the data in question.
"Just you wait, many purchases will scrub both Android & Windows 7 and install their favourite distro be it Debian, Fedora, SUSE, or the dreaded *buntu (only joking, xbuntu is pretty good)"
For a very very small definition of "many".
"Wouldn't be better to offer fast booting Linux (Moblin?) and dual boot with Win? Then users can access nice and quick Linux environment or wait for Win if they "really" need Office."
A client sent me an xls and doc file to my android phone.
They just worked.
I don't use spreadsheets and always refuse doc files replying with "I don't use proprietary formats, send me txt or html".
Apparently my Android phone is a part time xls/doc consumer appliance.
I was gobsmacked frankly.
I've used Opera exclusively for 7 years and was used to having to fire up IE every now and again. Long ago it was for certain parts of ebay and even longer ago, paypal.
But, in the past year to 18 mos I haven't had to use IE at all, ever. Maybe I don't get out much.
I did have to try IE about 4 mos ago on some site that didn't work with Opera but it didn't work with FF or IE either. Go figure.
DHT. Thanks for asking. Efforts are already underway, quietly, so ICANN doesn't notice and cannot co-opt it. Oh, and name and address shortages? Thing of the past.
The end of an era where artificial scarcity to promote a monopoly to make the insiders very wealthy is nearly at an end. http://forum.icann.org/lists/bc-gnso/msg00134.html
I'm shocked nobody is asking "what have all those poeple done for 10 years and many many millions of dollars".
It's not "a" dot, it's "every" dot. A bad script adn DNSSEC are to blame. Note that this is version 4 (5?) of dnssec. The earlier ones just didn't work.
And there's a real bad gotcha in the current one they haven't found yet that has still to raise it's ugly head. In time.
BIND was the spec for DNS for a while. But recently Vixie has washed his hands of that mess by saying "Don't use BIND as a spec".
Like that helps Paul.
One of the things we learned in the DNS wars is the lobbing technique of AT&T. The spend millions of dollars on this, and anywhere you turn you find AT&Y wonks buying dinner and drinks for anybody of import, aside from the lobbying efforts inside DC. Congress critters are so receptive to this it just isn't funny.
So this thing that's happening now? AT&T bought it and it has nothing to do with the merits of the situation.
The most cogent write up of this is Lauren Weinstein's: http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000623.html
Lauren is heavily involved with net.neutrality and has been around for ages. I met him when he was a Lucent (Bell Labs) guy, he had the office next to Brian Reid.