Why should we be shipping our fresh water south by the truckload?
Because, thank the proverbian god, the Conservatives got kicked out before they sold Canada's water by river/channel-full. Look at the James Bay crap. Then earlier in the 60s there was the NAWAPA proposal.
In NAFTA, it states that bulk water is not covered. BUT if Canada starts selling bulk water, we cannot stop (under NAFTA). That's why a company selling bulk water to Middle East (oil to us, water to them) got shut down by the government.
Let's hope that the current brand of Convatives (political party of canada) do not ever get a majority. They might just sell our most important asset. Brian Mulroney sure tried.
Magnification does nothing. It is light intensity that counts. You may use a magnifier to focus the light from a larger area to a smaller area - you don't magnify it. The mirrors do the same thing.
Proof: Take a microscope and set it to 500X. Point the objective at the sun. Do you death rays spewing from the eyepiece? (Answer: no). To find out why, read the first paragraph or ask someone that *really* knows. (Hopefully someone that took some optics (physics) or astronomy)
In Canada broadband is not limited to urban centers. For example, MTS (Manitoba) is rolled out broadband in many rural areas. Some of the places where broadband is available have less than 1000 potential customers.
https://ocm.mtsadvanced.com/servlet/Eligibility
There is even service to tiny places like Miami, Manitoba http://www.cici.mb.ca/miami/. Population: 400+. And this is not just some crap broadband. We are talking of up to 5Mbps/400kbps for about US$50
I'm sorry, but your analogy blows. Do you know what vaccines do? They DO NOT prevent infections. They are there to allow your immune system to respond to an infection in a timely manner. If you want a computer analogy, then they are to disease what virus definition files are to your virus scanner (aka. the immune system).
Actually, it is the connection tracking of NAT that is the band aid. What source NAT (minus the connection tracking part) is is more of a cage for your computer that monitors what data your computer can receive on what ports. Unauthorized communication is prohibited.
Source NAT is a jail for your computer so that others on the Internet cannot communicate with is. It is a I-call-you,-you-don't-call-me type of a deal.
In hindsight, the Internet was designed to thwart a nuclear attack on the comptuer network. I guess they didn't envision Network Address Translation.
NAT allows me to not have to pay an extra $15/mo to my cable company to get 3 additional systems online
IPv6 allows you to have a minimum of 2^64 addresses. You would never have to pay for extra IP addresses. (unless you want to run multiple networks or something)
The truth is, my 4 systems don't all need their own IPs. I simply don't allow my windows machines to be exposed to wild traffic floating around on the internet
That's what a firewall is for. Furthermore, there would not be any random network traffic with IPv6. The address space is 2^96 bigger! Random IP traffic would not work.
So I'd say NAT is a pretty good solution, and unlike IPv6, it's here now.
Go to tunnelbroker.com and get your free/64 IPv6 addresses. You will need a static IPv4 address though.
IPv6 "is here" 5 years ago. You don't hear about it because it is much better for your ISPs to sell off one IP for $5/mo and only offer real static IPs for "business" acconts.
They're actually orthogonal--I'm sure we'll see NAT on top of IPv6, and I don't see anything wrong with that, for exactly the reason you described: to be able to install XP without getting immediately infected.
I think you don't understand what IPv6 address space means. You get 2^64 addresses. Pick a random one. Now, what is the probability that a random scan of the 2^64 block will find you?
New XP boxes would NEVER get infected by random worms. Internet worms (not the email type) would be obsolete. You would have an almost infinate amount of time to get to windowsupdate to patch your box (unless you go to getmystupidemailsmileys.com and get infected from that site:).
IPv6 also puts an end to spammers easily finding fresh open relays. You can't scan a given address block for hosts listening on:25.
NAT and IPv6 or not mutually exclusive. But NAT's main purpose is obsoleted by IPv6.
IPv4 fell apart long time ago. The problem is people don't see it. A parallel is if you go to heavily poluted areas like Bangladesh, where the leading cause of death for traffic cops is lung cancer, people will not see polution as a major concern! Even on days when you can't see half a mile thanks to smog, people say they need more roads and want a car. They don't even mention they want clean air and a quiet environment.
Exactly the same crap is occuring with IPv4. Sure, there is lots of IP addresses, if everyone gets one number that changes all the time. Then you have to be a second-class "internet citizen", always stuck behind a NAT. Want to run a game server? maybe some bittorrent? Then you have to jump though hoops forwarding freaking ports all the time.
And let's not get started with port scans, virus probes and spammers wasting your bandwith. And that's on a new IP address. Some places can get a GB/mo of crap like this.
IPv6 solves all of these problems. No more NAT cruft or virus scans. A new IP address, when not in use, is acutally *clean* (no traffic). IPv6 solve many, many more problems than just increase number of addresses.
Oh, most people might not know or care, but has anyone seen some of the enormous routing tables on the internet? IPv4 is soooo fragmented, that the routing tables are now a serious problem in scallability of the internet. And everyone is paying higher prices thanks to this.
In the hearing with congress yesterday, anytime anyone asked him if he was on roids or saw anyone (yes/no asnwer) talking them he kept saying "I'm not here to talk about the past" and bullshit about "I want to be positive about this".
He also looked much, much smaller now than then (when he was playing)
The parent is *insightful*? What?? *ANY* system can be brought down by local users and most systems can be brought down by a sigle user. The admin can't do anything about it, but prevent people from getting local access, period. I mean, how do you stop,
int memoryPerProcess = 10*1024*1024;// 10M, adjust as needed unsigned int i; for( i=0; i<1000; i++ ) fork();
And how do you stop this from trashing the system? You can only stop this for a single user if that user cannot use ALL of the capabilities of the box.
Resource exhaustion of a local user is impossible to stop. It is much more productive to track down the users that do this and shut them down out from the system.
You forgot about the Nazis and the Swiss banks. Most of the money (gold, mostly) is still there.
What about the billions Saddam Hussein stole from Iraq? Most never recoved. There were a few billion withdrawn in *cash* from the national bank in Iraq before the latest war.
"We see some of the same things occurring that did to Unix -- it could splinter into many different types of languages. We are quite cautious about Linux and its deployment," said Rasmussen."
Languages?? WTF? They call themselves "industry heavyweights". I doubt we'll see Linux fork in Ruby or C#!
First we saw this talk with SCO, now with the rest of them. I must agree with parent - a bunch of losers *to* Linux.
Also in my twenties, I visited the mineral and gem room of the American Museum of Natural History, which I had visited many times with pleasure, and this time I confronted with the loudest "ultrasonic" sound I've ever heard the displeasure of hearing. I'm pretty sure it was higher than 15,750 Hz
That's like going to get a TV where all of them are on one huge wall. Very annoying.
Now if you want loud HF sound, you need to check out some of the 1200+L/min turbo molecular pumps. Some are *extremely* loud, yet no one but me could hear them.
If you create/new/ code, but it depends on a GPL item, then you can release your code under whatever license you see fit - open or closed source.
True, but for example, let's take Trolltech's Qt 4 that will be released under GPL for Windows. When you build your application against the GPL library, you can relicense it under any license you want. *BUT*
You CANNOT distribute or link the non-GPL version with the GPL library (that's in the GPL license)
You CANNOT link your relicensed version with the non-GPL Qt from Trolltech (that's in their commercial license, not GPL).
So you are correct, but that can be remedied as in case of Trolltech's commercial license.
It doesn't matter. A dual PPro would be ok as long as you have 100+MBps bandwidth to waste! (this is a big static file, requested over and over and over and over... again)
Re:Latest Fedora-development has gcc 4.0
on
GCC 4.0 Preview
·
· Score: 1
It is in Debian experimental as well. Unlike Fedora, this is NOT the default compiler.
Virtually all architectures will still be there, just in the SCC branch. They will never be "stable", but most people running Debian on that hardware are running sid anyway.
The entire point of this excercise is to reduce load on the security team and on the mirrors. There is not enough primary mirrors for precisely the reason of space requirenments.
Slashdot Mirror
Because, thank the proverbian god, the Conservatives got kicked out before they sold Canada's water by river/channel-full. Look at the James Bay crap. Then earlier in the 60s there was the NAWAPA proposal.
Even now, G.W.B. wants to buy Canada's water in bullk. http://greatlakesdirectory.org/zarticles/101702_gr eat_lakes3.htm.
In NAFTA, it states that bulk water is not covered. BUT if Canada starts selling bulk water, we cannot stop (under NAFTA). That's why a company selling bulk water to Middle East (oil to us, water to them) got shut down by the government.
Let's hope that the current brand of Convatives (political party of canada) do not ever get a majority. They might just sell our most important asset. Brian Mulroney sure tried.
Proof: Take a microscope and set it to 500X. Point the objective at the sun. Do you death rays spewing from the eyepiece? (Answer: no). To find out why, read the first paragraph or ask someone that *really* knows. (Hopefully someone that took some optics (physics) or astronomy)
For example, Dugald https://ocm.mtsadvanced.com/help/adsl/res_dugald_m ap.html has a population of is less than 12000 http://www.granite.mb.ca/erdc/springfield/dugaldco mm.html
There is even service to tiny places like Miami, Manitoba http://www.cici.mb.ca/miami/. Population: 400+. And this is not just some crap broadband. We are talking of up to 5Mbps/400kbps for about US$50
Actually, it is the connection tracking of NAT that is the band aid. What source NAT (minus the connection tracking part) is is more of a cage for your computer that monitors what data your computer can receive on what ports. Unauthorized communication is prohibited.
Source NAT is a jail for your computer so that others on the Internet cannot communicate with is. It is a I-call-you,-you-don't-call-me type of a deal.
In hindsight, the Internet was designed to thwart a nuclear attack on the comptuer network. I guess they didn't envision Network Address Translation.
Thank you. You can now consider your passport stamped.
google for http. microsoft.com is first on the list. That's why you go there. Firefox uses google to search for non-domains.
IPv6 allows you to have a minimum of 2^64 addresses. You would never have to pay for extra IP addresses. (unless you want to run multiple networks or something)
The truth is, my 4 systems don't all need their own IPs. I simply don't allow my windows machines to be exposed to wild traffic floating around on the internet
That's what a firewall is for. Furthermore, there would not be any random network traffic with IPv6. The address space is 2^96 bigger! Random IP traffic would not work.
So I'd say NAT is a pretty good solution, and unlike IPv6, it's here now.
Go to tunnelbroker.com and get your free /64 IPv6 addresses. You will need a static IPv4 address though.
IPv6 "is here" 5 years ago. You don't hear about it because it is much better for your ISPs to sell off one IP for $5/mo and only offer real static IPs for "business" acconts.
I think you don't understand what IPv6 address space means. You get 2^64 addresses. Pick a random one. Now, what is the probability that a random scan of the 2^64 block will find you?
New XP boxes would NEVER get infected by random worms. Internet worms (not the email type) would be obsolete. You would have an almost infinate amount of time to get to windowsupdate to patch your box (unless you go to getmystupidemailsmileys.com and get infected from that site :).
IPv6 also puts an end to spammers easily finding fresh open relays. You can't scan a given address block for hosts listening on :25.
NAT and IPv6 or not mutually exclusive. But NAT's main purpose is obsoleted by IPv6.
Exactly the same crap is occuring with IPv4. Sure, there is lots of IP addresses, if everyone gets one number that changes all the time. Then you have to be a second-class "internet citizen", always stuck behind a NAT. Want to run a game server? maybe some bittorrent? Then you have to jump though hoops forwarding freaking ports all the time.
And let's not get started with port scans, virus probes and spammers wasting your bandwith. And that's on a new IP address. Some places can get a GB/mo of crap like this.
IPv6 solves all of these problems. No more NAT cruft or virus scans. A new IP address, when not in use, is acutally *clean* (no traffic). IPv6 solve many, many more problems than just increase number of addresses.
Oh, most people might not know or care, but has anyone seen some of the enormous routing tables on the internet? IPv4 is soooo fragmented, that the routing tables are now a serious problem in scallability of the internet. And everyone is paying higher prices thanks to this.
He also looked much, much smaller now than then (when he was playing)
Aside: take that than/then slashdot nazis!
And how do you stop this from trashing the system? You can only stop this for a single user if that user cannot use ALL of the capabilities of the box.
Resource exhaustion of a local user is impossible to stop. It is much more productive to track down the users that do this and shut them down out from the system.
What about the billions Saddam Hussein stole from Iraq? Most never recoved. There were a few billion withdrawn in *cash* from the national bank in Iraq before the latest war.
Known?? What? Nothing is known in science until it is measured. Hawking radiation was never measured because we never had a BH to observe.
If these "fireballs" are a result of a BH decaying as Hawking radiation, then and only then we can say that we know that Hawking radiation exists.
And why would I want this on my workstation? How *I* choose to authenticate myself is my business, not Microsoft's.
"We see some of the same things occurring that did to Unix -- it could splinter into many different types of languages. We are quite cautious about Linux and its deployment," said Rasmussen."
Languages?? WTF? They call themselves "industry heavyweights". I doubt we'll see Linux fork in Ruby or C#!
First we saw this talk with SCO, now with the rest of them. I must agree with parent - a bunch of losers *to* Linux.
I thought Oracle was using Linux for development exclusively (or nearly so).
There is the Apple G4 where power consuption is 10W and battery life 6h.
If you have an MSDN Universal Subscription, then yes, it is "free"
I'm an internet user using the internet browser since windows 98. What is this 'Firefox' you speak of?
That's like going to get a TV where all of them are on one huge wall. Very annoying.
Now if you want loud HF sound, you need to check out some of the 1200+L/min turbo molecular pumps. Some are *extremely* loud, yet no one but me could hear them.
True, but for example, let's take Trolltech's Qt 4 that will be released under GPL for Windows. When you build your application against the GPL library, you can relicense it under any license you want. *BUT*
So you are correct, but that can be remedied as in case of Trolltech's commercial license.
It doesn't matter. A dual PPro would be ok as long as you have 100+MBps bandwidth to waste! (this is a big static file, requested over and over and over and over... again)
~$ apt-cache policy gcc-4.0
gcc-4.0:
Installed: (none)
Candidate: 4.0-0pre5
Version Table:
4.0-0pre5 0
1 http://http.us.debian.org experimental/main Packages
The entire point of this excercise is to reduce load on the security team and on the mirrors. There is not enough primary mirrors for precisely the reason of space requirenments.
Yeah, but a year ago it was $30, at a former exchange rate :P