First it was PC sales are declining because PCs are so retro and only dinosuars buy them anymore.
Then it was PC sales are declining because Windows 8 sucks.
Now it is PC sales are declining cause everyones old shit still works.
You know what I think? Anyone who starts a sentance with "PC sales are declining because..." will end it by stating an opinion without any supporting evidence.
The only thing I know for sure is that windows 8 sucks.
First off IAU has no authority to tell the public what they can and can't "officially" name anything neither do they have the right to redefine terms used by the public for thousands of years such as "planet". If they are seen as a legitimate authority within their little club good for them.
Second how can any of us be certain these exoplanets are actually planets since I doubt we can really tell whether they have yet to clear their neighborhood?
Finally spending money to name/vote on planets is a fairly seedy activity leaving me with a low opinion of both organizations.
Metro is the bridge between touch screen and non touch screen. Best implementation? No. Just like the idevice launch screen and one button interface isn't either. But here's what Microsoft did for you: it gave you the same OS for both, without stripping out the power of desktop programs. How would you have done better?
All they had to do was add a handful of options allowing users to bypass metro, start and disable associated charm inducing gestures and all of this bad press would have never happened. Finally allow metro apps to run within the desktop.
They received exactly this feedback during betas loud and clear and promptly filed it in the circular cabinent.
Their calculation was imposing windows store/tablet/phone on desktop would ultimatly improve their tablet/phone app problem ultimatly raking in more money than offset by pissed off customers refusing to upgrade.
The central problem here is a loss of customer centric focus. Eventually if you only twist arms and do things that provide value for the vendor but not the end user your user base begins to evaporate. There is no logic in being hostile to your current market in the name of chasing down new ones. There is such little MS needs to actually do to fix this it makes the whole situation quite sad.
That was not a drone. It was a video feed from an Apache. You are a complete idiot.
Its been years since I've looked at this garbage... I confused this with follow on where a building was blown up with a missle. I just remember the yaw warnings flashing on screen and thought it was all the same thing... As far as me being an idiot that should be obvious.
The helicoptor was in an active combat zone. There were reports of RPG fire. The press were not wearing identifying uniforms that press in an active warzone are expected to wear.
The children in the van were only visible when looking carefully at the footage and freeze framing, not in a combat situation (wtf were they doing driving children to the site of a bombing) and the van appeared to be insurgents recovering the weapons and preventing wounded combatants being captured
I have no doubt the drone pilots made an honest mistake in misidentification. The problem occurs when you watch without the sound muted they are all bloodlusted with no respect for human life and nobody in the command structure has any fucking problem with it. The criminal act is in allowing people like this to pilot drones in the first instance.
and the van appeared to be insurgents recovering the weapons and preventing wounded combatants being captured
Quite fasinating how the mind races to fill in the gaps consistant with ones preconcieved notions aint it?
If by he you mean everyone in the government who lied to start a war with Iraq under false pretenses or those who enabled and carried out "collateral murder" I would agree with you.
It would fix nearly all DNS-based DOSes if they filtered source addresses of outbound packets to eliminate spoofed UDP packets. If it's leaving their network, the packet should say it came from their network.
Oh bullshit the Internet is not trustworthy full stop. Continuing to tolerate protocols that depend on the network not telling big lies is fruitless, stupid and dangerous.
Why is TCP not subject to amplification and exhaustion attacks? Why is it just a handful of UDP based protocols causing all these problems? The answer is because they are shit protocols that would never pass review today.
All we need to do is implement stateless cookies in DNS and the problem goes away...conicidently so would most of the need for DNSSEC.
Perhaps after DNSSEC is deployed and people really start getting tired of the amplification attacks then maybe just maybe stateless cookies will have been added to DNS. It is such a trivial, fully backward compatible change with negligable network or processing overhead I can't help but invoke utter incompetence or DNSSEC promoting conspiracies as the reason this has not yet been implemented.
We added cookies to TCP years ago and today virtually all stacks support them. If we would have done the same then none of this shit would be a problem today. Servers would simply rate limit requests without cookies for the few remaining resolvers left without support.
I think it is great to have more countries get off their collective asses and start publishing competing geospatial datasets and stop smooching off the devil/great satan/colonial empire..ad nauseum.
The problem is if your an Iranian citizen you are likely to be better off with the spookes behind google earth vs mullaearth from the perspective of local oppression especially if "competition" really means we're also going to block google earth so you have no choice.
Oh look what a shock...the third party doctrine striking again...who'd have guessed?
This is what we deserve when we depend so much on third parties for everything even when it makes little to no difference where the data is stored. With a little effort and slight inconvinence it does not have to be this way.
Run your own mail server, run your own web site. Say no to aggregation of control within "the cloud" where the US constitution is just a mirage.
The reason why police forces go with these things is to raise revenue. Nobody in the history of the world has installed an automated speed trap or red light camera (which really exist to detect the lack of full stop while making right turns) to improve public safety. Law enforcement does the same thing by hanging out on cash crop hills with nothing around but ridiculously low speed limits at the bottom while totally ignoring things like oh I don't know school zones. It is not about safety it is about raking in violations.
Sometimes these things actually reduce safety as the city and or private companies administering these things get more money with more violations. There have been very famous instances where yellow lights have been tweeked to *produce* more violators leading to increased numbers of rear end accidents.
What ultimatly happens enough people get PO'd local officials feel political pressure enough where this shit gets pulled or drastically changed or enough people don't care where the political cost is not high enough for anyone to care.
At the end of the day the algorithm problem is not solved in law it is solved by asking the question what can you reasonably get away with. This may not even be the case at first but eventually it will happen as budget constrained local governments see $$$ in production of violations. It essentially becomes a tax..a form particularly corrosive to public trust.
Truly effective encryption is not available to the public
OTP is truly effective and easy enough to use it can be done on paper without a computer.
All you need is to exchange a pool of high quality actually random garbage with your drug dealer buddies. Given storage capacity of a typical micro SD card a thumbnail sized pool enables the holders to exchange messages with each other day and night from anywhere in the world for the rest of their lives with impunity.
No quantum computer or scary three letter agency has any chance in hell of cracking your conversations ever regardless of any unforseeable technological advance.
Only problem is they can still crack you or your shady buddies with impunity which is why the tired old LEA "going dark" arguments against encryption don't work. If you can get a warrant to break the encryption you can get a warrant to install recording devices and get the information a different way.
The FBI's push to make "information services" CALEA accessible is discusting. They just don't care or think about anyone or anything but their own mission.
but my surface RT is the best travel computer I've ever owned. When I'm on the road I don't need to compile apps or do heavy lifting. I need to check email, use word / excel and browse the web. So why is it better than any regular tablet? It's as light as a tablet when I want tablet mode but has support for a real mouse / keyboard when I don't.
This is a trick question. A portable computer with a keyboard and mouse is called a laptop not a tablet.
I recently bought a W7 tablet. Jesus fucking christ, what a piece of shit. It's like a Cyrus Cybernetics Corporation product. And I LOATHE apple products, so don't call me a shill. But W7 could never be considered usable by touch by anyone sane who is not a shill.
"The outcome of Alice's measurement is random. Alice cannot decide which state to collapse the composite system into, and therefore cannot transmit information to Bob by acting on her system. Causality is thus preserved, in this particular scheme. For the general argument, see no-communication theorem"
I think FTL communication is simple
This is ususally a good clue your understanding is incomplete.
setup spin detector aparatus, and ensure exact distances are known... then use a basic binary representation for spin=binary, and the instant action of the paired photon can be seen at the other end...
Now go try and develop a protocol which exchanges useful information this way.
I'm wrong about the instantaneous communication bit. Instantaneous communication could cause observers to have messages arriving before they were sent.
It really depends on how information travels thru space. If instantaneous communication method does not *propogate* thru 8 light minutes distance of space then there is no inverting of cause and effect in any reference frame.
It is only if the information has to propogate thru space using a method locally exceeding c that these weird reversals of cause and effect would occur.
I think we should parse what we mean by FTL communication carefully there are some possibilities that don't require changes to TCP detailed in RFC 6921.
First we have schemes like EVE online fluid routers which hack entanglement to communicate instantaneously between routers. There is no backwards time travel here.
Second we have wormholes or warp capable ships loaded with tape drives. There is also no backwards time travel here as you are taking shortcuts thru stretched space rather than locally exceeding c.
Third we have to think about what we mean by communications... If you are in a space ship traveling to the nearest star and you are going 99.9999...% the speed of light the 4 ly journy might only seem to you to take a few minutes if you throw in enough 9's. Once you arrive you can carry out normal delay tolerant IP exchanges without ever having to wait 4 years to communicate with the reciving party however they would have waited about 4 years to communicate with you.
Finally we have tachyons which propogate superluminally with reversed cause and effect. This is the only scheme of the bunch that requires RFC 6921.
I'm a bit surprised that there aren't stations monitoring HF for emergency broadcasts. Aircraft still use HF for oceanic communications, and ships spend far more time out at sea
Me too, last time I checked (2 minutes ago) there are a shit load of them listed in Appendix B of radio navigational aids. (PUB 117)
Urm, if they had that kind of radio equipment a standard mayday call on marine VHF channel 16 (156.8MHz) FM is all that is needed.
VHF is LOS (Line of Sight) it does not _normally_ work over the horizon regardless of how much wattage is at your disposal. HF (High Frequency) can bounce off the ionosphere and reach anywhere if you select the right frequencies for conditions and range.
Sailors shorthand for height of eye to horizon (in normal miles) is 1.5 * sqrt feet of antenna height above water + the same of reciving antenna minus whatever the 1st fresnel for 156mhz works out to it is not hard to see why there was no response on VHF... apparently captains of any other ships that might have normally been in range that day decided to be elsewhere...big mystery why.
What excites me more than shuttle missions are satellites and probes NASA has been sending out all these years.
MRO and to a lesser extent MSL are worth 20 round trip human mars missions as far as I'm concerned. New telescopes like JWST are likely to be as priceless as HST and WMAP have proven to be.
It is simply cheaper and more productive to push technology without having to worry about earthly things like human safety.
My only problem with the video other than being slightly cheezy is the video is all rockets and no science.
It certainly sounds like this guy found himself quite a loophole to effectivly circumvent the 3oz liquid restriction.
If the TSA has no way of disambiguating a "tropical energy drink" from medicine and there are no medical documentation requirements plus other laws provide privacy and accessibility protections for medical conditions then anyone can use these constraints to get any soft drinks they want thru in any amounts.
I say don't be hatin on the loophole finder for expliotin. Loopholes are fair game. Certainly less morally objectional than expliots of the cherckoff group and others who have directly profited from TSA "security theatre" egrgiously wasting US taxpayer dollars.
Second, is an out of band feature which provides a mechanism where the recipient of a packet can flag that packet as malicious and ask the upstream connection to shut them down at their source. This feature should be recursive, and with the same sanity checks to make sure the requests are legitimate.
LOL flag this packet as spam.. There is already a packet option for this in RFC 3514.
As a result of these two, a ddos begins: The recipient computer starts flagging IP address and requesting that their host provider shut off the flows from each IP as they are identified.
How do you identify an attack(er)?
Host provider filters everything from that IP.
Why should they trust your attack classification or anything you tell them? It sounds like a good way for them to get sued into oblivion.
which finds itself disconnected for 10 minutes. If
Why ten minutes? What if I have IPv6 and a number of IPs equal to 4 billion IPv4 Internets? Will it still target single hosts?
If the owner is private, then they will call their ISP to find out why their connection sucks
LOL I think most ISPs would pass unless your volunteering to sit there and pick up the phone for free.
your machine is taking part in an illegal ddos.
In some countries people and their payloads actually get to be innocent until proven otherwise. You still need to explain how you would classify something as an attack...People have spent billions trying to classify email messages as spam vs legitimate and they are still no closer to getting that right.
The biggest complaint I always hear about this plan, is what if someone spoofs shutdown requests to get someone disconnected. That kind of spoofing could only work if one of the intermediate nodes is compromised, or the IP
So in other words your idea only works if the network is trustworthy and we all know that aint so.
I'm not so sure it would be a good thing for the network to ever become trustworthy cause that would have less than positive implications for freedom of speech especially in areas of the world where people are facing actual oppression.
validation is not enabled
What is IP validation?
Think of the whole system as an autoimmune reaction to infection. Terribly effective and largely automatic.
It is fine to dream up solutions to things but the only way to learn and make your ideas better is to be its most vigorous opponent.
Slashdot Mirror
First it was PC sales are declining because PCs are so retro and only dinosuars buy them anymore.
Then it was PC sales are declining because Windows 8 sucks.
Now it is PC sales are declining cause everyones old shit still works.
You know what I think? Anyone who starts a sentance with "PC sales are declining because..." will end it by stating an opinion without any supporting evidence.
The only thing I know for sure is that windows 8 sucks.
First off IAU has no authority to tell the public what they can and can't "officially" name anything neither do they have the right to redefine terms used by the public for thousands of years such as "planet". If they are seen as a legitimate authority within their little club good for them.
Second how can any of us be certain these exoplanets are actually planets since I doubt we can really tell whether they have yet to clear their neighborhood?
Finally spending money to name/vote on planets is a fairly seedy activity leaving me with a low opinion of both organizations.
I'm going to submit my resumes using netscape navigator 4.0 from now on to weed out any employers who would do this from even considering me.
Metro is the bridge between touch screen and non touch screen. Best implementation? No. Just like the idevice launch screen and one button interface isn't either. But here's what Microsoft did for you: it gave you the same OS for both, without stripping out the power of desktop programs. How would you have done better?
All they had to do was add a handful of options allowing users to bypass metro, start and disable associated charm inducing gestures and all of this bad press would have never happened. Finally allow metro apps to run within the desktop.
They received exactly this feedback during betas loud and clear and promptly filed it in the circular cabinent.
Their calculation was imposing windows store/tablet/phone on desktop would ultimatly improve their tablet/phone app problem ultimatly raking in more money than offset by pissed off customers refusing to upgrade.
The central problem here is a loss of customer centric focus. Eventually if you only twist arms and do things that provide value for the vendor but not the end user your user base begins to evaporate. There is no logic in being hostile to your current market in the name of chasing down new ones. There is such little MS needs to actually do to fix this it makes the whole situation quite sad.
That was not a drone. It was a video feed from an Apache. You are a complete idiot.
Its been years since I've looked at this garbage... I confused this with follow on where a building was blown up with a missle. I just remember the yaw warnings flashing on screen and thought it was all the same thing... As far as me being an idiot that should be obvious.
The helicoptor was in an active combat zone. There were reports of RPG fire. The press were not wearing identifying uniforms that press in an active warzone are expected to wear.
The children in the van were only visible when looking carefully at the footage and freeze framing, not in a combat situation (wtf were they doing driving children to the site of a bombing) and the van appeared to be insurgents recovering the weapons and preventing wounded combatants being captured
I have no doubt the drone pilots made an honest mistake in misidentification. The problem occurs when you watch without the sound muted they are all bloodlusted with no respect for human life and nobody in the command structure has any fucking problem with it. The criminal act is in allowing people like this to pilot drones in the first instance.
and the van appeared to be insurgents recovering the weapons and preventing wounded combatants being captured
Quite fasinating how the mind races to fill in the gaps consistant with ones preconcieved notions aint it?
He deserves the firing squad.
If by he you mean everyone in the government who lied to start a war with Iraq under false pretenses or those who enabled and carried out "collateral murder" I would agree with you.
It would fix nearly all DNS-based DOSes if they filtered source addresses of outbound packets to eliminate spoofed UDP packets. If it's leaving their network, the packet should say it came from their network.
Oh bullshit the Internet is not trustworthy full stop. Continuing to tolerate protocols that depend on the network not telling big lies is fruitless, stupid and dangerous.
Why is TCP not subject to amplification and exhaustion attacks? Why is it just a handful of UDP based protocols causing all these problems? The answer is because they are shit protocols that would never pass review today.
All we need to do is implement stateless cookies in DNS and the problem goes away...conicidently so would most of the need for DNSSEC.
Perhaps after DNSSEC is deployed and people really start getting tired of the amplification attacks then maybe just maybe stateless cookies will have been added to DNS. It is such a trivial, fully backward compatible change with negligable network or processing overhead I can't help but invoke utter incompetence or DNSSEC promoting conspiracies as the reason this has not yet been implemented.
We added cookies to TCP years ago and today virtually all stacks support them. If we would have done the same then none of this shit would be a problem today. Servers would simply rate limit requests without cookies for the few remaining resolvers left without support.
I think it is great to have more countries get off their collective asses and start publishing competing geospatial datasets and stop smooching off the devil/great satan/colonial empire..ad nauseum.
The problem is if your an Iranian citizen you are likely to be better off with the spookes behind google earth vs mullaearth from the perspective of local oppression especially if "competition" really means we're also going to block google earth so you have no choice.
Oh look what a shock...the third party doctrine striking again...who'd have guessed?
This is what we deserve when we depend so much on third parties for everything even when it makes little to no difference where the data is stored. With a little effort and slight inconvinence it does not have to be this way.
Run your own mail server, run your own web site. Say no to aggregation of control within "the cloud" where the US constitution is just a mirage.
The reason why police forces go with these things is to raise revenue. Nobody in the history of the world has installed an automated speed trap or red light camera (which really exist to detect the lack of full stop while making right turns) to improve public safety. Law enforcement does the same thing by hanging out on cash crop hills with nothing around but ridiculously low speed limits at the bottom while totally ignoring things like oh I don't know school zones. It is not about safety it is about raking in violations.
Sometimes these things actually reduce safety as the city and or private companies administering these things get more money with more violations. There have been very famous instances where yellow lights have been tweeked to *produce* more violators leading to increased numbers of rear end accidents.
What ultimatly happens enough people get PO'd local officials feel political pressure enough where this shit gets pulled or drastically changed or enough people don't care where the political cost is not high enough for anyone to care.
At the end of the day the algorithm problem is not solved in law it is solved by asking the question what can you reasonably get away with. This may not even be the case at first but eventually it will happen as budget constrained local governments see $$$ in production of violations. It essentially becomes a tax..a form particularly corrosive to public trust.
Truly effective encryption is not available to the public
OTP is truly effective and easy enough to use it can be done on paper without a computer.
All you need is to exchange a pool of high quality actually random garbage with your drug dealer buddies. Given storage capacity of a typical micro SD card a thumbnail sized pool enables the holders to exchange messages with each other day and night from anywhere in the world for the rest of their lives with impunity.
No quantum computer or scary three letter agency has any chance in hell of cracking your conversations ever regardless of any unforseeable technological advance.
Only problem is they can still crack you or your shady buddies with impunity which is why the tired old LEA "going dark" arguments against encryption don't work. If you can get a warrant to break the encryption you can get a warrant to install recording devices and get the information a different way.
The FBI's push to make "information services" CALEA accessible is discusting. They just don't care or think about anyone or anything but their own mission.
Here a money quote from an article in Wired:
Another quote from the same article you cited.
"a lot of foreign government stuff we've never been able to break is 128 or less."
but my surface RT is the best travel computer I've ever owned. When I'm on the road I don't need to compile apps or do heavy lifting. I need to check email, use word / excel and browse the web. So why is it better than any regular tablet? It's as light as a tablet when I want tablet mode but has support for a real mouse / keyboard when I don't.
This is a trick question. A portable computer with a keyboard and mouse is called a laptop not a tablet.
I recently bought a W7 tablet. Jesus fucking christ, what a piece of shit. It's like a Cyrus Cybernetics Corporation product. And I LOATHE apple products, so don't call me a shill. But W7 could never be considered usable by touch by anyone sane who is not a shill.
All tablets are useless pieces of shit.
"spooky action at a distance"
Quoting from the same wikipedia article:
"The outcome of Alice's measurement is random. Alice cannot decide which state to collapse the composite system into, and therefore cannot transmit information to Bob by acting on her system. Causality is thus preserved, in this particular scheme. For the general argument, see no-communication theorem"
I think FTL communication is simple
This is ususally a good clue your understanding is incomplete.
setup spin detector aparatus, and ensure exact distances are known... then use a basic binary representation for spin=binary, and the instant action of the paired photon can be seen at the other end...
Now go try and develop a protocol which exchanges useful information this way.
I'm wrong about the instantaneous communication bit. Instantaneous communication could cause observers to have messages arriving before they were sent.
It really depends on how information travels thru space. If instantaneous communication method does not *propogate* thru 8 light minutes distance of space then there is no inverting of cause and effect in any reference frame.
It is only if the information has to propogate thru space using a method locally exceeding c that these weird reversals of cause and effect would occur.
I think we should parse what we mean by FTL communication carefully there are some possibilities that don't require changes to TCP detailed in RFC 6921.
First we have schemes like EVE online fluid routers which hack entanglement to communicate instantaneously between routers. There is no backwards time travel here.
Second we have wormholes or warp capable ships loaded with tape drives. There is also no backwards time travel here as you are taking shortcuts thru stretched space rather than locally exceeding c.
Third we have to think about what we mean by communications... If you are in a space ship traveling to the nearest star and you are going 99.9999...% the speed of light the 4 ly journy might only seem to you to take a few minutes if you throw in enough 9's. Once you arrive you can carry out normal delay tolerant IP exchanges without ever having to wait 4 years to communicate with the reciving party however they would have waited about 4 years to communicate with you.
Finally we have tachyons which propogate superluminally with reversed cause and effect. This is the only scheme of the bunch that requires RFC 6921.
Is it possible to create a coherent sentance which rot13's into a different equally coherent sentance?
I tried and failed miserably...
She try or envy tang abba one reef rat
Fur gel be rail gnat noon bar errs eng
There are. It doesn't do any good if the radio doesn't work, or the antenna blew down, though.
Which obviously was not the case because they were able to send email using the same frequencies.
I'm a bit surprised that there aren't stations monitoring HF for emergency broadcasts. Aircraft still use HF for oceanic communications, and ships spend far more time out at sea
Me too, last time I checked (2 minutes ago) there are a shit load of them listed in Appendix B of radio navigational aids. (PUB 117)
Urm, if they had that kind of radio equipment a standard mayday call on marine VHF channel 16 (156.8MHz) FM is all that is needed.
VHF is LOS (Line of Sight) it does not _normally_ work over the horizon regardless of how much wattage is at your disposal. HF (High Frequency) can bounce off the ionosphere and reach anywhere if you select the right frequencies for conditions and range.
Sailors shorthand for height of eye to horizon (in normal miles) is 1.5 * sqrt feet of antenna height above water + the same of reciving antenna minus whatever the 1st fresnel for 156mhz works out to it is not hard to see why there was no response on VHF... apparently captains of any other ships that might have normally been in range that day decided to be elsewhere...big mystery why.
What excites me more than shuttle missions are satellites and probes NASA has been sending out all these years.
MRO and to a lesser extent MSL are worth 20 round trip human mars missions as far as I'm concerned. New telescopes like JWST are likely to be as priceless as HST and WMAP have proven to be.
It is simply cheaper and more productive to push technology without having to worry about earthly things like human safety.
My only problem with the video other than being slightly cheezy is the video is all rockets and no science.
It certainly sounds like this guy found himself quite a loophole to effectivly circumvent the 3oz liquid restriction.
If the TSA has no way of disambiguating a "tropical energy drink" from medicine and there are no medical documentation requirements plus other laws provide privacy and accessibility protections for medical conditions then anyone can use these constraints to get any soft drinks they want thru in any amounts.
I say don't be hatin on the loophole finder for expliotin. Loopholes are fair game. Certainly less morally objectional than expliots of the cherckoff group and others who have directly profited from TSA "security theatre" egrgiously wasting US taxpayer dollars.
Second, is an out of band feature which provides a mechanism where the recipient of a packet can flag that packet as malicious and ask the upstream connection to shut them down at their source. This feature should be recursive, and with the same sanity checks to make sure the requests are legitimate.
LOL flag this packet as spam.. There is already a packet option for this in RFC 3514.
As a result of these two, a ddos begins: The recipient computer starts flagging IP address and requesting that their host provider shut off the flows from each IP as they are identified.
How do you identify an attack(er)?
Host provider filters everything from that IP.
Why should they trust your attack classification or anything you tell them? It sounds like a good way for them to get sued into oblivion.
which finds itself disconnected for 10 minutes. If
Why ten minutes? What if I have IPv6 and a number of IPs equal to 4 billion IPv4 Internets? Will it still target single hosts?
If the owner is private, then they will call their ISP to find out why their connection sucks
LOL I think most ISPs would pass unless your volunteering to sit there and pick up the phone for free.
your machine is taking part in an illegal ddos.
In some countries people and their payloads actually get to be innocent until proven otherwise. You still need to explain how you would classify something as an attack...People have spent billions trying to classify email messages as spam vs legitimate and they are still no closer to getting that right.
The biggest complaint I always hear about this plan, is what if someone spoofs shutdown requests to get someone disconnected. That kind of spoofing could only work if one of the intermediate nodes is compromised, or the IP
So in other words your idea only works if the network is trustworthy and we all know that aint so.
I'm not so sure it would be a good thing for the network to ever become trustworthy cause that would have less than positive implications for freedom of speech especially in areas of the world where people are facing actual oppression.
validation is not enabled
What is IP validation?
Think of the whole system as an autoimmune reaction to infection. Terribly effective and largely automatic.
It is fine to dream up solutions to things but the only way to learn and make your ideas better is to be its most vigorous opponent.