With IPv6 no more wholesale scanning of the entire global address space in minutes time looking for expliotable hosts. No more 5 minutes to ownage of unpatched PCs and the associated waste of bandwidth.
No more self propogating worms using simple algorithms to divide and conquer the global network.
In the grand scheme of things it won't help much but better than nothing.
If I remember correctly, GPS will be difficult to get much more accurate than it is today to the time distortions caused by relativity.
Ionospheric delay is responsible for virtually all inaccuracies that matter in the current system.
With planned upgrades to GPS and or several competing systems from Russia, China and Europe coming online we will soon be able to very accuratly quantify local ionospheric conditions in realtime by looking at how each frequency is effected.
New UIs always get resisted because no one actually *likes* changes to their personal process of doing things unless the benefits are immediately apparent. Give it a year and no one will even remember what Win7 looked like, and those that do will be telling epic tales about the slaying of the monsters that inhabited it's Start Menu.
As the same argument can just as easily be used to justify any change even changes that are clearly backwards and counterproductive I'm not sure this argument by itself actually conveys any useful information.
You speak of benefits but don't elaborate on what you mean. What do you see as the benefits of the new UI concept over windows 7?
God you really have to be a hyprocritcal idiot to whine and bitch about other people bitching and do so in the most abusive unprofessional manner possible.. "grow a pair".. seriously?
There will always be people unhappy with anything you build or change. They should just go with their vision of what they think is right and that's what they did. They envision that with Windows 8, most new monitors will be touch enabled because of the demand so that for some functions(like clicking on links), people can use touch.
The obvious problem with this thinking is that ANY change of any kind can be justified by simply stating people are change adverse. Oh I see your unhappy that your computer was replaced with an abacus and slide rule. Relax..you'll get used to it.
I'm having a really hard time seeing how such statements are able to convey any useful information of any kind.
This should be a cautionary tale for those who wonder what happens when a company no longer "feels like" supporting a previous version of their product shutting down the online services needed to support it.
The app store was not a big deal nobody used it and there were far better sources of windows mobile software.
With the new products your ONLY choice for installing software is the vendors online service.
No conflict of interest there...vendors gain financially by pulling the plug, retroactivly retracting value from the user and forcing obsolecense/upgrade.
Look at the back of any PS3 game... see that note about the company being able to suspend online play at any time when they feel like it and there is nothing you can do? Oh well sucks to be you...buy the new version.
I prefer to not have others dictate what I should spend my money on and I am prepared to make that clear by my purchasing decisions.
It is always entertaining to watch what happens when a company abandons its base in persuit of the next fad.
If you thought carpel tunnel was fun just wait a few years until the cumulative effects of pressing against rigid display screens all day with no means to dampen the force of impact.
How many dozens of 9/11's happen each year as a result of smoking and alcohol?
Where is the public outrage, political focus and trillions of dollars in ad campaigns and treatment to avert a 9/11 that more or less occurs on schedule every month of every year over the past century?
Stop wasting our money chasing boogymen and use a small fraction of it to help real people...
Hey man looks over there those Afghan poppy fields a plenty....sort of makes one wonder where all that funding for the taliban comes from now doesn't it...if only...oh nevermind...
No reason to feel any sympathy for their behavior. They aren't the good guys. They aren't grey hats or white hats, they are the blackest of the black hat with no conscience. Remember when they release those credit card and personal information on all those people?
Lulz had style, skill and class but they did inch over the line on more than one occasion.
On balance without pressure on the system to take systems security seriously the world is worse off with them gone.
Credit cards are fundementally broke and must be replaced. The world needs to transact more like paypal where you send funds rather than giving others the means to take from you. That way there are no secrets that must be given out and protected by everyone you buy something from.
Lulz ascii art always managed to put a big shit eating grin on my face..set sail for fail...lol..
Now we're stuck with 'Anonymous' and their legion of incompetent ddosing script kiddies who produce boring whiney shit videos on youtube.
Everyones "smartness" is more or less the same. It is how much you are willing to learn, apply yourself and challenge your own bias and conclusions that really matter.
If a society is having trouble with this then maybe they should spend a little more time developing critical thinking skills and a little less time on test scores.
The only thing worse than allowing the "ignorant" to vote is not allowing them to vote.
Use the windows key to go to the start screen, which is the REPLACEMENT for the Start Menu. It uses the Metro design language but it is not, in and of itself, "Metro".
The trouble is speaking for myself I can't have the entire screen changing on me whenever I want to launch an application or scroll through a list of programs and documents... this is counterproductive to say the least.
There is nothing wrong with windows7 as is...annoying me sure as hell is not going to make me upgrade.
You have options.
If there were knobs to retain the windows 7 behavior there would be no issue. As registry hacks have shown MS has the capability to easily offer this as an option but refuses to do so.
MS wants to force me to use a paradigm not suited for simultaneous management of large numbers of applications. I reject this because the paradigm does not provide value to me and makes my work more difficult.
As a separate matter I need to continue to use my expensive high resolution monitor for something other than viewing one or two programs at a time... the inability to run all possible applications from within the desktop is an issue going forward for the continued viability of the windows platform.
If Microsoft refuses to meet my needs I will go elsewhere.. Simple as that.
I'm not against all GMO. There are plenty of "natural" plants that will kill you instantly if you ate them. There is plenty of âoenaturalâ mutagenic insecticides nature invented that are not so good for you either. In the end it is the final product and its nutritional value that matters rather than means of production.
We simply don't have the technology to understand the first, second and nth order effects of cutting and pasting DNA from other species on the food and repercussions of complex interactions with ecosystem of the planet.
If you want to produce a new drug you need to spend years in testing and trials. People then have knowledge of and a choice over what drugs they are consuming.
If you want to produce a new GM product you have to give 120 days (voluntary?) notice with FDA and fill out a little bit of paper work. Hundreds of millions of people have no knowledge or choice over their consumption of this new GM product. How the hell is this reasonable or tolerated by anyone?
There are a few problems with Monsanto as I see it.
Monsanto contractually offloads responsibility for their products to farmers.. If their seeds go ape and pollute other fields or turns the world into grey goo. The farmer not Monsanto is on the hook.
The IP protection regime especially in the face of invasive species is fundamentally insane and unfair. Knowingly going after farmers for using their IP when they must have known in advance their seed would contaminate other fields is a blatant abuse of the law.
Typical of slashdot, people are either ignorant to the fact, or ignore the fact, that the desktop interface still exists, and that metro is not intended to be used in a desktop environment.
I wonder if there could be a third option? Such as not wanting to go through another hoop to get to the desktop or the fact that when you click the start button it opens the metro interface rather than my list of apps.
Money exported to the middle east is money used to fight wars against us (the USA) and kill us. If that isn't a bad thing, I don't know what is!
"OPEC is bad" is a subjective value judgement not a statement of fact.
The strawman substitution for any money exported to any middle eastern country vs oil money to OPEC nations is amusing.
OPEC nations: Algeria, Angola, Ecuador, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela.
Which of these nations started a war against the USA? Which if these nations did the USA attack on an elective basis?
Someone could argue exporting money to China is bad because they are growing and increasing the strength of their military every time every time something is purchased from Walmart. I don't agree with this sentiment...but you and others might..that is your right...you have every right to your own OPINION. You do not have the right to assert your opinion as fact.
Right, it's just sooo much safe to carry around a 15 gallon sheetmetal tub filled with gasoline. That's exactly what I'd want to get in a crash with...
In the real world, CNG vehicles have a good safety record..
If gasoline were unsafe how come the containment structure is allowed to be so flimsy?
Look at what it takes to store CNG... the advanced design and vigorous validation regime needed to fabricate pressurised containers. These containers need to be hydrotested at regular intervals to ensure continued integrity.
Since when do gas tanks need to be integrity tested? Most people replace theirs after it starts leaking but the car is usually sold for scrap long before that happens.
The assertion was CNG is safer than gasoline... I have yet to see any citations of statistical evidence supporting this claim.
Is there any statistical evidence showing CNG canisters are safer than gas canisters made by the lowest bidder in an average automobile? What is the basis for this conclusion? The URL you provided?
Strict safety standards make CNG vehicles as safe as gasoline-powered vehicles. In the event of a spill or accidental release, CNG poses no threat to land or water; it is non- toxic.
A canister containing 3000 psi of nothing but fresh air is dangerous by itself. Scuba tanks explode spontaneously for no apparent reason blowing walls out of houses and killing people in the vacinity...
Reported incidences of bus fires are related to engine failures
Try bus explosions... There *was* a nice video on youtube showing a CNG powered bus stopped and then exploded but it is no longer avaliable...WTF is up with that? You can still read the article.
Electric cars are running off energy generated at electricity plants which means you're running your car off coal or natural gas anyway. Why not cut out the middle man?
You then get to use any form of energy production wind, solar, nuclear, hydro, geo, methane, coal and ultimately if batteries get better electric drive is simple and reliable.
Critics of the frac process have found only 2 alleged cases of groundwater polutions and industry experts disagree with those 2 cases.
Remind us what all those industry experts had to say about the health benefits of smoking again? Use of industry experts = unprofessional + conflict of interest. Independant experts are needed.
These are just SOME of the facts... please research as much as you can. Opinions aren't important, only the facts....
Unfortunatly when people assert things as facts that are actually not facts (including conclusions based on evidence) real facts are lowered to the level of opinion. This can be very problematic as it can mean those with opinions may enjoy the same level of legitimacy as those with evidence.
Gas tanks can blow up during an accident even if punctured. In reality it is very (TV fantasy excloded) rare due to low air mixing ratios required to prevent ignition.
When CNG tanks under >3k PSI explode they leave craters in the ground where the vechicle once was. Even a compromised tank of ordinary air at that pressure is extremely dangerous.
Check out youtube there are several videos of what happens when CNG tanks explode.. Some occurances have been when the vechicle is left parked unattended.
I'm sure you can engineer the problem away but would the result be cost effective? How many craters would be needed to scare the rest of the market away?
We just need batteries that don't suck then you can use natural gas or whatever fuel is avaliable to fill up your vechicles.
The DSL/Cable/Satellite modem in the end users home? Are you trusting the average home user to set that up securely and police themselves?
Yes. If this is not realistic the answer is to provide the user with necessary tools and or education to make it realistic.
I simply don't accept your notion that the ISPs have no responsibility to police their networks and should do nothing to protect their customers. If they get good information about a user on their network actively attacking someone, I don't want them to say "it's not my problem".
I simply don't accept your notion the ISP should post a full time 24x7 safety officier in each room of a household where networked computers reside. Please enough with the strawmen.
They are common and/or contract carriers, whereas ISPs are not. You might want to brush up on the legal aspects of that, as the ISPs have been lobbying to NOT be considered common carriers as that imposes additional regulations on them.
Whatever makes non discrimination work works for me. I would rather see common carrier than the decay of a competitive market ultimatly enable discriminatory practices with location based degregation and or paywalled destinations and protocols.
several steps behind and have a poor track record stopping anything new and lots of false positives
Do you have a better idea? Would DPI really fair any better? How? On what basis? Might as well bite the bullet and amend the constitution and reality making implemention of RFC 3514 compulsory.
I believe the ISPs are in the right spot to monitor traffic and detect abnormalities.
Why? It is not the amount of traffic it is the content of that traffic that matters as I have tried to explain. What more does an ISP know about content than anyone else?
A user could drive-by download a script that deletes everything on their computer without sending any signals out twoard the network. How is DPI going to help the user? Implement the very same signature detection schemes as the anti-virus and malicious site services already use?
No the network engineers will simply look at the existing traffic patterns to determine what is normal for their network. Really, I have lots of experience in this area, and it's not difficult to spot the outliers from the norm
YES. Not all problems can be resolved within your administrative domain. Sometimes coordination with other operators is required.
I am in total awe of your ability to easily detect a request to a C&C server disguised as a request to an AD server.
It is easy to detect belligerent zombies or anything else sending garbage at line rate. It is however impossibly for everyone but yourself to detect zombies designed to secretly leak only user CC/BANK PAN and high value corporate data.
It is not the ISPs fight no more than it is UPSs fight to make sure the vendor shipped the widget you asked for. They are simply a conduit.
The ISPs need to get more proactive. They continue to sit back and ignore glaring problems like zombies and spammers because they have no financial incentive to do so. The end result is going to be the govt stepping in and establishing inflexible one-size-fits-all requirements that are guaranteed to step on the legitimate fringe cases.
Your examples contradict the need for the ISP to be involved at all. Search engines and browser filter providers can detect whether a site is infected because they have dedicated teams, massive amounts of data and metrics on all sites over time... ISPs do not have that type of data or infustructure or experience to perform such analysis.
Most issues are best mitigated by countermeasures at the edge where the most intelligence resides. The ISP should be treated as a common carrier and only act when the integrity of their network is at risk.
instead you'll get told that all smtp server need to be registered with the FCC before an ISP can legally allow the traffic.
Reality bites... addressing the problem with the wrong tool is not going to fix the underlying issue any more than a law addressing a problem in the wrong way.
One likely outcome already seen in some ISPs, is the creation of different levels of service based on the type of connectivity you need
ISPs are smart to offer value added services such as content filtering although not guaranteed to be effective.
That would simplify things for users like you who like to run MTR against web hosting companies so you get rapid notice when something goes down.
Why would you say IPv6 makes ports scanning irrelevant. Getting rid of IPv4 natting increases exposure for most home users as it removes a layer of protection and the probers are now hitting their machines directly instead of bouncing off a nat router.
SPI and NAT do the same thing and have the same security properties. The ONLY difference is that SPI does not mangle packets.
The address space of a single/64 prefix is 4 billion times the size of the entire IPv4 Internet. A probe has no chance in hell in finding any client in the first place unless they manually configure a vanity address. This is much better than the current system where viruses can easily scan the entire global address space in a matter of minutes.
Just reading all the comments i would say its you who overvalue you smarts. Spam filtering and profiling DO work. ISPs do notice spammers and shut them down. Are you saying the problem is to hard so we shouldnt bother trying? Are saying there is no value to antivirus even though it effectiveness is reduced by clever attackers?
I still get spam, and many times a week messages go missing to the ether. It reduces volume but does not solve anything.
I'm saying the network is the wrong place to do something about it. The intelligence is not in the core it is at the edge... Where the intelligence is is where you have the most options to address the problem.
The concept of anti-virus is fundementally flawed. It is useful but the underlying issue of how untrusted code was allowed to execute in the first place is the root problem. Until that is solved we will have duct tape solutions such as anti-virus that are a crapshoot as to whether they detect all threats to the user.
The attempt to have a dumb network understand and mitigate L7,8,9 issues is idiocy.
I'll admit I don't understand the reasoning why more is not always better even after reading the article. Sure the calculation overhead for topology changes increase with more choices but such costs are trivial to the overall cost of most systems. Whether the system is more or less resilliant would seem to me anyway to have everything to do with the intelligence the system is able to bring to bear to plan a stable topology based on changing conditions. You can invent and constrain a dumb network with easy to calculate properties for the purpose of simulation but this would seem to have extremely limited implications to the real world where it is cost effective for networks to not be dumb.
Perhaps might be interesting to try this sort of simulation work on power transmission networks?
To their credit they do not claim their work has applicability to the Internet.. Even if BGP made poor choices the edges provides some degree of congestion avoidance which mitigates against the sloshing of snowballs... We learned that lesson the hard way:(
Slashdot Mirror
With IPv6 no more wholesale scanning of the entire global address space in minutes time looking for expliotable hosts. No more 5 minutes to ownage of unpatched PCs and the associated waste of bandwidth.
No more self propogating worms using simple algorithms to divide and conquer the global network.
In the grand scheme of things it won't help much but better than nothing.
If I remember correctly, GPS will be difficult to get much more accurate than it is today to the time distortions caused by relativity.
Ionospheric delay is responsible for virtually all inaccuracies that matter in the current system.
With planned upgrades to GPS and or several competing systems from Russia, China and Europe coming online we will soon be able to very accuratly quantify local ionospheric conditions in realtime by looking at how each frequency is effected.
Major change prompts resistance! News at 11!
New UIs always get resisted because no one actually *likes* changes to their personal process of doing things unless the benefits are immediately apparent. Give it a year and no one will even remember what Win7 looked like, and those that do will be telling epic tales about the slaying of the monsters that inhabited it's Start Menu.
As the same argument can just as easily be used to justify any change even changes that are clearly backwards and counterproductive I'm not sure this argument by itself actually conveys any useful information.
You speak of benefits but don't elaborate on what you mean. What do you see as the benefits of the new UI concept over windows 7?
http://www.winsupersite.com/article/windows8/windows-8-consumer-preview-call-common-sense-142476
God you really have to be a hyprocritcal idiot to whine and bitch about other people bitching and do so in the most abusive unprofessional manner possible.. "grow a pair" .. seriously?
There will always be people unhappy with anything you build or change. They should just go with their vision of what they think is right and that's what they did. They envision that with Windows 8, most new monitors will be touch enabled because of the demand so that for some functions(like clicking on links), people can use touch.
The obvious problem with this thinking is that ANY change of any kind can be justified by simply stating people are change adverse. Oh I see your unhappy that your computer was replaced with an abacus and slide rule. Relax..you'll get used to it.
I'm having a really hard time seeing how such statements are able to convey any useful information of any kind.
This should be a cautionary tale for those who wonder what happens when a company no longer "feels like" supporting a previous version of their product shutting down the online services needed to support it.
The app store was not a big deal nobody used it and there were far better sources of windows mobile software.
With the new products your ONLY choice for installing software is the vendors online service.
No conflict of interest there...vendors gain financially by pulling the plug, retroactivly retracting value from the user and forcing obsolecense/upgrade.
Look at the back of any PS3 game... see that note about the company being able to suspend online play at any time when they feel like it and there is nothing you can do? Oh well sucks to be you...buy the new version.
I prefer to not have others dictate what I should spend my money on and I am prepared to make that clear by my purchasing decisions.
It is always entertaining to watch what happens when a company abandons its base in persuit of the next fad.
If you thought carpel tunnel was fun just wait a few years until the cumulative effects of pressing against rigid display screens all day with no means to dampen the force of impact.
How many dozens of 9/11's happen each year as a result of smoking and alcohol?
Where is the public outrage, political focus and trillions of dollars in ad campaigns and treatment to avert a 9/11 that more or less occurs on schedule every month of every year over the past century?
Stop wasting our money chasing boogymen and use a small fraction of it to help real people...
Hey man looks over there those Afghan poppy fields a plenty....sort of makes one wonder where all that funding for the taliban comes from now doesn't it...if only...oh nevermind...
No reason to feel any sympathy for their behavior. They aren't the good guys. They aren't grey hats or white hats, they are the blackest of the black hat with no conscience. Remember when they release those credit card and personal information on all those people?
Lulz had style, skill and class but they did inch over the line on more than one occasion.
On balance without pressure on the system to take systems security seriously the world is worse off with them gone.
Credit cards are fundementally broke and must be replaced. The world needs to transact more like paypal where you send funds rather than giving others the means to take from you. That way there are no secrets that must be given out and protected by everyone you buy something from.
Lulz ascii art always managed to put a big shit eating grin on my face..set sail for fail...lol..
Now we're stuck with 'Anonymous' and their legion of incompetent ddosing script kiddies who produce boring whiney shit videos on youtube.
Everyones "smartness" is more or less the same. It is how much you are willing to learn, apply yourself and challenge your own bias and conclusions that really matter.
If a society is having trouble with this then maybe they should spend a little more time developing critical thinking skills and a little less time on test scores.
The only thing worse than allowing the "ignorant" to vote is not allowing them to vote.
Use the windows key to go to the start screen, which is the REPLACEMENT for the Start Menu. It uses the Metro design language but it is not, in and of itself, "Metro".
The trouble is speaking for myself I can't have the entire screen changing on me whenever I want to launch an application or scroll through a list of programs and documents... this is counterproductive to say the least.
There is nothing wrong with windows7 as is...annoying me sure as hell is not going to make me upgrade.
You have options.
If there were knobs to retain the windows 7 behavior there would be no issue. As registry hacks have shown MS has the capability to easily offer this as an option but refuses to do so.
MS wants to force me to use a paradigm not suited for simultaneous management of large numbers of applications. I reject this because the paradigm does not provide value to me and makes my work more difficult.
As a separate matter I need to continue to use my expensive high resolution monitor for something other than viewing one or two programs at a time... the inability to run all possible applications from within the desktop is an issue going forward for the continued viability of the windows platform.
If Microsoft refuses to meet my needs I will go elsewhere.. Simple as that.
Actually, they aren't so flimsy anymore.
http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulations/administration/fmcsr/fmcsrruletext.aspx?reg=393.67
http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulations/administration/fmcsr/fmcsrruletext.aspx?reg=571.304
I havn't seen any evidence refuting
Burden is on person making the claim.
Wouldn't the amount of electronics in today's cars render them vulnerable as well?
Due to requirements for EMF rejection modern vechicles are EMP resistant. Don't let the electronics = vulnerable meme fool you.
Or do we only have to worry about EMP in that regard?
The rapid initial pulse of an EMP is the most destructive to localized electronics as this offers the highest level of damage via induced currents.
Sun burps are mostly a danger to transmission systems as it is sustained but lower energy over a much longer period of time.
Your car is already an electromechanical device. EMP would disable modern gasoline vehicles just as surely as it would electric vehicles.
This is a myth.
http://www.empcommission.org/docs/A2473-EMP_Commission-7MB.pdf
I'm not against all GMO. There are plenty of "natural" plants that will kill you instantly if you ate them. There is plenty of âoenaturalâ mutagenic insecticides nature invented that are not so good for you either. In the end it is the final product and its nutritional value that matters rather than means of production.
Having said this there seems to be evidence for issues concerning several popular GM products:
http://www.biolsci.org/v05p0706.htm
We simply don't have the technology to understand the first, second and nth order effects of cutting and pasting DNA from other species on the food and repercussions of complex interactions with ecosystem of the planet.
If you want to produce a new drug you need to spend years in testing and trials. People then have knowledge of and a choice over what drugs they are consuming.
If you want to produce a new GM product you have to give 120 days (voluntary?) notice with FDA and fill out a little bit of paper work. Hundreds of millions of people have no knowledge or choice over their consumption of this new GM product. How the hell is this reasonable or tolerated by anyone?
There are a few problems with Monsanto as I see it.
Monsanto contractually offloads responsibility for their products to farmers.. If their seeds go ape and pollute other fields or turns the world into grey goo. The farmer not Monsanto is on the hook.
The IP protection regime especially in the face of invasive species is fundamentally insane and unfair. Knowingly going after farmers for using their IP when they must have known in advance their seed would contaminate other fields is a blatant abuse of the law.
Typical of slashdot, people are either ignorant to the fact, or ignore the fact, that the desktop interface still exists, and that metro is not intended to be used in a desktop environment.
I wonder if there could be a third option? Such as not wanting to go through another hoop to get to the desktop or the fact that when you click the start button it opens the metro interface rather than my list of apps.
OPEC is bad
Money exported to the middle east is money used to fight wars against us (the USA) and kill us. If that isn't a bad thing, I don't know what is!
"OPEC is bad" is a subjective value judgement not a statement of fact.
The strawman substitution for any money exported to any middle eastern country vs oil money to OPEC nations is amusing.
OPEC nations: Algeria, Angola, Ecuador, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya,
Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela.
Which of these nations started a war against the USA? Which if these nations did the USA attack on an elective basis?
Someone could argue exporting money to China is bad because they are growing and increasing the strength of their military every time every time something is purchased from Walmart. I don't agree with this sentiment...but you and others might..that is your right...you have every right to your own OPINION. You do not have the right to assert your opinion as fact.
Right, it's just sooo much safe to carry around a 15 gallon sheetmetal tub filled with gasoline. That's exactly what I'd want to get in a crash with...
In the real world, CNG vehicles have a good safety record..
If gasoline were unsafe how come the containment structure is allowed to be so flimsy?
Look at what it takes to store CNG... the advanced design and vigorous validation regime needed to fabricate pressurised containers. These containers need to be hydrotested at regular intervals to ensure continued integrity.
Since when do gas tanks need to be integrity tested? Most people replace theirs after it starts leaking but the car is usually sold for scrap long before that happens.
The assertion was CNG is safer than gasoline... I have yet to see any citations of statistical evidence supporting this claim.
CNG is safer
Is there any statistical evidence showing CNG canisters are safer than gas canisters made by the lowest bidder in an average automobile? What is the basis for this conclusion? The URL you provided?
Strict safety standards make CNG vehicles as safe as gasoline-powered vehicles. In the event of a spill or accidental release, CNG poses no threat to land or water; it is non- toxic.
A canister containing 3000 psi of nothing but fresh air is dangerous by itself. Scuba tanks explode spontaneously for no apparent reason blowing walls out of houses and killing people in the vacinity...
Reported incidences of bus fires are related to engine failures
Try bus explosions... There *was* a nice video on youtube showing a CNG powered bus stopped and then exploded but it is no longer avaliable...WTF is up with that? You can still read the article.
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2010/08/123_71263.html
Just the facts:
OPEC is bad.
This is actually an opinion. Since you can't understand the difference I regret to inform you your right to use the word "facts" has been revoked.
CNG tanks are safer than gasoline tanks.
Only when empty...
With only 3000psi would could possibly go wrong?
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/cng_h2_workshop_8_wong.pdf
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/cleancities/pdfs/ngvtf10_cyl_safety.pdf
I love the smell of napalm in the morning.
Electric cars are running off energy generated at electricity plants which means you're running your car off coal or natural gas anyway. Why not cut out the middle man?
You then get to use any form of energy production wind, solar, nuclear, hydro, geo, methane, coal and ultimately if batteries get better electric drive is simple and reliable.
Critics of the frac process have found only 2 alleged cases of groundwater polutions and industry experts disagree with those 2 cases.
Remind us what all those industry experts had to say about the health benefits of smoking again? Use of industry experts = unprofessional + conflict of interest. Independant experts are needed.
These are just SOME of the facts... please research as much as you can. Opinions aren't important, only the facts....
Unfortunatly when people assert things as facts that are actually not facts (including conclusions based on evidence) real facts are lowered to the level of opinion. This can be very problematic as it can mean those with opinions may enjoy the same level of legitimacy as those with evidence.
Gas tanks can blow up during an accident even if punctured. In reality it is very (TV fantasy excloded) rare due to low air mixing ratios required to prevent ignition.
When CNG tanks under >3k PSI explode they leave craters in the ground where the vechicle once was. Even a compromised tank of ordinary air at that pressure is extremely dangerous.
Check out youtube there are several videos of what happens when CNG tanks explode.. Some occurances have been when the vechicle is left parked unattended.
I'm sure you can engineer the problem away but would the result be cost effective? How many craters would be needed to scare the rest of the market away?
We just need batteries that don't suck then you can use natural gas or whatever fuel is avaliable to fill up your vechicles.
What do you define as the edge?
The peer.
The DSL/Cable/Satellite modem in the end users home? Are you trusting the average home user to set that up securely and police themselves?
Yes. If this is not realistic the answer is to provide the user with necessary tools and or education to make it realistic.
I simply don't accept your notion that the ISPs have no responsibility to police their networks and should do nothing to protect their customers. If they get good information about a user on their network actively attacking someone, I don't want them to say "it's not my problem".
I simply don't accept your notion the ISP should post a full time 24x7 safety officier in each room of a household where networked computers reside. Please enough with the strawmen.
They are common and/or contract carriers, whereas ISPs are not. You might want to brush up on the legal aspects of that, as the ISPs have been lobbying to NOT be considered common carriers as that imposes additional regulations on them.
Whatever makes non discrimination work works for me. I would rather see common carrier than the decay of a competitive market ultimatly enable discriminatory practices with location based degregation and or paywalled destinations and protocols.
several steps behind and have a poor track record stopping anything new and lots of false positives
Do you have a better idea? Would DPI really fair any better? How? On what basis? Might as well bite the bullet and amend the constitution and reality making implemention of RFC 3514 compulsory.
I believe the ISPs are in the right spot to monitor traffic and detect abnormalities.
Why? It is not the amount of traffic it is the content of that traffic that matters as I have tried to explain. What more does an ISP know about content than anyone else?
A user could drive-by download a script that deletes everything on their computer without sending any signals out twoard the network. How is DPI going to help the user? Implement the very same signature detection schemes as the anti-virus and malicious site services already use?
No the network engineers will simply look at the existing traffic patterns to determine what is normal for their network. Really, I have lots of experience in this area, and it's not difficult to spot the outliers from the norm
YES. Not all problems can be resolved within your administrative domain. Sometimes coordination with other operators is required.
I am in total awe of your ability to easily detect a request to a C&C server disguised as a request to an AD server.
It is easy to detect belligerent zombies or anything else sending garbage at line rate. It is however impossibly for everyone but yourself to detect zombies designed to secretly leak only user CC/BANK PAN and high value corporate data.
It is not the ISPs fight no more than it is UPSs fight to make sure the vendor shipped the widget you asked for. They are simply a conduit.
The ISPs need to get more proactive. They continue to sit back and ignore glaring problems like zombies and spammers because they have no financial incentive to do so. The end result is going to be the govt stepping in and establishing inflexible one-size-fits-all requirements that are guaranteed to step on the legitimate fringe cases.
Your examples contradict the need for the ISP to be involved at all. Search engines and browser filter providers can detect whether a site is infected because they have dedicated teams, massive amounts of data and metrics on all sites over time... ISPs do not have that type of data or infustructure or experience to perform such analysis.
Most issues are best mitigated by countermeasures at the edge where the most intelligence resides. The ISP should be treated as a common carrier and only act when the integrity of their network is at risk.
instead you'll get told that all smtp server need to be registered with the FCC before an ISP can legally allow the traffic.
Reality bites... addressing the problem with the wrong tool is not going to fix the underlying issue any more than a law addressing a problem in the wrong way.
One likely outcome already seen in some ISPs, is the creation of different levels of service based on the type of connectivity you need
ISPs are smart to offer value added services such as content filtering although not guaranteed to be effective.
That would simplify things for users like you who like to run MTR against web hosting companies so you get rapid notice when something goes down.
..sigh..
Why would you say IPv6 makes ports scanning irrelevant. Getting rid of IPv4 natting increases exposure for most home users as it removes a layer of protection and the probers are now hitting their machines directly instead of bouncing off a nat router.
SPI and NAT do the same thing and have the same security properties. The ONLY difference is that SPI does not mangle packets.
The address space of a single /64 prefix is 4 billion times the size of the entire IPv4 Internet. A probe has no chance in hell in finding any client in the first place unless they manually configure a vanity address. This is much better than the current system where viruses can easily scan the entire global address space in a matter of minutes.
Just reading all the comments i would say its you who overvalue you smarts. Spam filtering and profiling DO work. ISPs do notice spammers and shut them down. Are you saying the problem is to hard so we shouldnt bother trying? Are saying there is no value to antivirus even though it effectiveness is reduced by clever attackers?
I still get spam, and many times a week messages go missing to the ether. It reduces volume but does not solve anything.
I'm saying the network is the wrong place to do something about it. The intelligence is not in the core it is at the edge... Where the intelligence is is where you have the most options to address the problem.
The concept of anti-virus is fundementally flawed. It is useful but the underlying issue of how untrusted code was allowed to execute in the first place is the root problem. Until that is solved we will have duct tape solutions such as anti-virus that are a crapshoot as to whether they detect all threats to the user.
The attempt to have a dumb network understand and mitigate L7,8,9 issues is idiocy.
I'll admit I don't understand the reasoning why more is not always better even after reading the article. Sure the calculation overhead for topology changes increase with more choices but such costs are trivial to the overall cost of most systems. Whether the system is more or less resilliant would seem to me anyway to have everything to do with the intelligence the system is able to bring to bear to plan a stable topology based on changing conditions. You can invent and constrain a dumb network with easy to calculate properties for the purpose of simulation but this would seem to have extremely limited implications to the real world where it is cost effective for networks to not be dumb.
Perhaps might be interesting to try this sort of simulation work on power transmission networks?
To their credit they do not claim their work has applicability to the Internet.. Even if BGP made poor choices the edges provides some degree of congestion avoidance which mitigates against the sloshing of snowballs... We learned that lesson the hard way :(