You'd think, with my affection for automotive means, I'd have known that. However, I completely was thinking Type 44 which is a rifle used by Japan during WWII.
That's certainly colorful and all but I'm not entirely sure it's as accurate as you're implying. In your instance, the renting of the property may well have been transfered as a condition of purchase, this does happen. They're called renter's rights. They are awesome for those one lucky renters.
So, they won't need guns. They've got the force of law on their side. The new owner should just burn the place down and collect the insurance and pay to put 'em up in a new apartment for a little while. It depends on how the lease was written but lease rights usually transfer with ownership - it's a negative applied to valuation. Well, it's supposed to be. It happens in NYC a bit and I believe protocol is to make it unlivable or to torch it. By the time the courts sort it own, it'll be four years later and there will be a new set of high-rise condominiums on the spot unless Stephen Segal is there to save them.
I've seen this movie... Guns don't mean shit. Wait... What?
Oh, yeah, no... That's real. Except for Segal. He doesn't usually show up. It makes the local news, people protest, shit goes to court, place mysteriously burns and a guy named Frank moved to New Jersey for a few months. At least until his parole officer catches up with him and... No, that's a movie again.
At any rate... Ostensibly, they get rights. Depending on who and what they are, they may get to enforce those rights. Ideally, it's covered in the valuation, including the duration, and adjusted accordingly and all goes well as they gentrify around the old lady. Hmm... That might be a movie again.
I'm thinking short-haul, probably off a fiber splitter type of deal at the junction on the pole. Big fat bastards, not quite as large as your image - obviously.
In case it's not painfully obvious, I haven't been inside of a real network closet in... Wow, like 15 years. Well, I've gone in and looked at the pretty lights a few times. I've even spliced fiber - with loads of help. I wouldn't let me near your closet. I do manage my own fairly well. I can crimp me some CAT-5 and 6. I got that down.:/
But yeah, short haul - probably from the pole - maybe to a hub in an apartment complex or the comms room in a large building. Seems to me it'd work - frail as all hell but they should be able to figure that out by now. They'd be thick cables, obviously. I dunno, how many twisted pair can you fit in a half inch? However many that is, that many. (I got these technical details and number *all* figured out... *nods*)
So, yeah, something about that size. That'd probably be, what, 30 pair? More? That'd still be pretty flexible. It's only gotta go to a router - it can split off in regular wireless or CAT-6 from there. That gets the bandwidth there to max out those lines - if it's doable. I really don't see why it wouldn't work but I am pretty far from guru status. Hell, I'm barely competent status. I've connected some pretty complicated things for, oh, circa 1999. I even used wire ties - and sticky labels.
Did you not notice the headline? It's about making stuff (for better or worse) on the moon. Beaming the gathered energy back up to the moon probably isn't realistic, now is it? FFS, it's got "on the moon" right in the title. How do you figure that building robots on the moon can be done cheaper by gathering the energy here? If that were the case, they'd just build the robots here.
> Fer God's sake, fusion energy is just around the corner...
You laugh and it's a rather traditional joke around here but it *does* look like they're getting closer and closer. Of course, I'm old and fusion power has been anywhere from five to thirty five and even fifty years away. The funky looking machine the Germans are building is claimed to have some potential - they've had it spun up and run it at some pretty high temperatures - if I understand their last press release properly.
Hmm... I'm 58. It was 5 years away when I was a kid. It was 50 years away when it was the 1970s. It was 35 years away in the 1980s. It was 50 years away during the 1990s. It was 35 years away in the 2000s. It's 5 years away now.
I am, by no means, an authority on the subject. I didn't even read all of the page. It just seems to be the better of the few - others listed it and had some usage. That one gets into where it comes from - or where they claim it comes from. Buggered if I know, buggered if I am an authority.
It's up to you, I suppose, as to what you believe. Horses do things like take you home when you're drunk. I figured it came from there and things like that - things learned in experience. I'd never heard it used as a pejorative. My linguistic capacity is mere grunts and occasional pointing. Any of my utterances making sense is entirely incidental and orthogonal to intent. You'd probably get better etymology information from a trained monkey than you will from me.
But, that's how I understand it and how I've seen it used. The validity of that use is subject to debate, a debate for which I am unqualified, and I can only share how I've witnessed the usage and interpreted said usage.;-)
Sometimes, just need to be shattered in order to pick up the pieces and build something better than what they were. It would be me or someone else but it's destined to happen - if they're to reach fruition. It is not my doing, it's the hand of fate acting through me.
After all, what would the world be without some chaos?
As an aside, I know no CSS. I'm in the process of making a Stylish theme for Slashdot. Holy shit is this thing horrendous. I am so not a designer. It looks like a combination of an emo kid, angel-fire, and time cube. I am *not* doing well at this.
I keep going back to a VM with GhostBSD. Man, I really wish I could get past a few things and run it on bare metal. I really like my browser and I really like VMWare. If I can get past that, I can use GhostBSD. I just can't do it. I really, really don't like Firefox. I really don't like VirtualBox. I understand there's a shim to get Linux software running but I've no idea how to make it work properly and get Opera and VMWare working. I'd *love* to switch to GhostBSD.
I've HAMMERED on it via VM. I've thrown gobs of data at it for fun. I've stripped away its resources and beat the hell of it. It slows down, boy does it slow down, but it takes it. It has yet to freeze, it has yet to fail, it has yet to do anything it wasn't meant to do. I've pushed, pulled, injected, ejected, poked, prodded, compressed, twisted, and pressed like I was having my way with a fat woman in the back of a bar in Juarez. And, like a fat chick, it's taken it all and asked for but a box of Ho-hos in return.
I'd love to put it in bare metal and have my way with it - again, like a fat woman in the back of a bar in Juarez. But, it just can't keep me satisfied yet - and the future isn't looking too bright either. Hmm... GhostBSD is a fat woman in the back of a Juarez bar. That does have some positive attributes, I guess. And, like her, I can keep going back for more.
That is AWESOME! Is it marked up? That may actually belong in a museum. That's a chunk of history, right there.
I do wonder how many folks have actually figured out your username and the potential association with Japan? *chuckles* It's kind of like the guy running around with (Base 64 I think) "slashdot sucks" as a username. I don't think anyone's ever noticed. I read usernames way too often. *sighs*
At any rate, that's awesome. I kind of want a pic.;-) Signed? Any authenticity to actually *prove* it was originally Perry's? How the hell did he end up with it in his possession?
My mother's side was Prescott and McDonnell. So, you can put those together and guess I've a bunch of Navy history in my family. My father's side were all Marines which is, technically, a Department of the Navy. I did my eight and ravaged the GI Bill for all it was worth.
As a *very* odd aside - but I'm reminded of it when I mention this (something to do with work ethic) - I've been pondering going back to work for a while if things are different this autumn. I don't need money but I've been doing very little for a while. A few years back I spent a summer building houses for Habitat for Humanity. That was kind of fun but I'm thinking something in the tech sector. It probably does seem like an odd aside but, really... They're strangely related. I don't really know what to think, I guess. Maybe I'll start *and* run a business of my own - besides those I've already got my fingers in.
I keep going back to the idea of a consulting business where Graybeards are given their due and are called in as emergency personnel (more or less) and are recognized experts in their field and thus able to put the terms *they* want into their contracts. Yes, that includes being able to put their right to wear their underwear outside of their pants into their contracts if they so desire. They can even stipulate that they're allowed to wear a mask and a cape and that everyone has to refer to them as Super Henry or whatever they want. After all, they're the best of the best and it is a crisis, are they going to argue or not? Also, the pay rate will be what the contractor insists they're worth.
So, not just you but anyone who might be interested should keep poking me to make sure that I keep pondering how to go about achieving that. I've got ample starting capital. I can even run the damned thing as a non-profit if I wanted. But, I've gotta do something - and soon.
Ah well, that's really off-topic but I'm strangely reminded of it.:/ Maybe my head is broken. I dunno... They tell me I'm sane.
Yeah, it is Meade. Hmm... I'll see what I can dredge up about it. I have some friends that are still in and have increased in rank a great deal. However, they're all Marines or Navy. Still, they might have some scuttlebutt. If anything interesting pops up, I'll email you. No need to respond, obviously.
Oh, it wouldn't have been the same culturally, granted. The Free Software movement was already in place, however. That needs to not be overlooked. I admit, I don't really like the goobers who run around insisting it's GNU/Linux but they do have a point.
Note: I did not say that it would be the same. In fact, I said it'd be different. What I assert is that the jobs would still exist, even without Linux in particular, and that things would have ended up much the same. I'm not sure how to articulate that better? The path would have been different but the destination likely very similar. I guess that's the best way I can think of to describe it.
Would it have been BSD? Hell, could Amiga have made it further? Would it have been RISC? MINIX? SunOS? I do not know... HURD? Maybe... There were so many things in play at the time, and not long after. I've read a bunch of things that go into this, at some detailed levels even, and there really were a lot of other options in play at the time but Linux took off and those seemed to move to the wayside. Linus has a powerful personality but I'd imagine it'd have still happened.
Don't get me wrong - please. I'm very grateful to Linus and for Linux. I'm using Lubuntu right this minute to post this. But, I was there and I've been here since. I really do think something else would have taken its place.
They might get there and be a more realistic option. Remember, they've changed the industry to reflect the needs of the many and that has resulted in aiming for the lowest common denominator. There's not a lot that can be done, with any immediacy, in that area. I suspect I dislike it as much as you - I'm big on personal responsibility and knowing how to use your tools if you're going to use them at all.
I'm not a fan of the monolithic kernel architecture. I use it because it, its ecosystem more so than anything else, is my only realistic option - coupled with the nature of the beast in that I really don't have anything to worry about. I've no vast treasure troves of data that will ruin me if they are leaked. I do operate with least privilege routines, I do filter at the hardware level, I do check logs from hardware that is not under the control of the same operating system.
In an effort to demonstrate that it can be done, I used a Windows system (several different OS versions) without running resident/active anti-malware. I practices safe hex and operated accordingly. With heavy monitoring to ensure that this was true - I found zero evidence of any security incidents and no outbound traffic that could not be accounted for and permissions expressly granted, and knowingly granted. I did that for several years, actually. I would not recommend that for the feint of heart. I would not recommend that for the home user of norm. But, it was done and was a good learning experience.
I've played with Qubes OS before. It intrigues me and I like their goal. I suspect you're reading into me something that I am not. That something that I am not is a zealot. I'm a pragmatist. You, on the other hand, are starting to come off as a zealot. That may or may not be true. That may or may not be a problem for you. That may or may not be your intent.
I do not, largely, disagree with your sentiment. I just feel that it is not only impractical, at this time, but that it's going to be a while longer before it happens and, even then, it's unlikely to go mainstream. Remember, it was us that urged people to get a computer - all those years ago. This is our fault. We are reaping what we sowed. We put boxes into people's homes and then told them to read the fucking manual. We expected them to do so.
They've trashed our ecosystem. They've turned our networks into hell. They've made us deal with stupid regulations, inferior products, and sub-par standards. This is your fault - you did this. Own up to it and move on. I'm just as guilty as you are - and the barn door is still wide open as now we push them onto dumb terminals known as phones and tablets. To top it off, we've then pushed them back onto the mainframe as they resort to cloud services. Truth be told, that might be for the best. I'm kind of glad that they're on Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, YouTube, and 4chan. It shows me where I don't want to go.
It was us, us who urged them to get computers which are now transmitting malware more rapidly than they have ever been able to before as we urged them to get broadband and made the content even richer. It was us who told them to cut their cords. It was us who told them how to pirate. It was us who, way back when, told them how to find Usenet. We invited them here and we rejoiced when they came because they gave us money - and power.
And while it may seem that I'm waxing philosophical, I urge you to think again as to how those things all tie into this. Oh, don't get me wrong... I love a microkernel. I love the separation, the design, the utility, and the security. I love the fact that a driver or server or service can halt and be brought back up without crashing the whole system. I know, and understand, the layers associated and I appreciate the differences.
And before you ask what I have done... Why, I've donated to Qubes not just once but multiple times - sometimes a fairly good sized donation. This thread is relatively old now so I'm thinking few will notice it. I'd rather it not be spectacular and I alr
I don't know if I'd say "STOP." That seems less than intelligent to say. I'd say stop doing so for trivial reasons. I'd say stop doing so without good reasons. I'd say stop doing so for proprietary reasons. But, I'd not say stop doing so entirely.
Why? I speculate that improvements will be had in the future. I say that gains will be made and technology will advance even further. I'd rather not prevent that. I'd rather not force them to not make new standards. I'd rather they had the freedom to make newer, better, and different.
I'm presuming that there's a diminishing law of returns there at some point. But, and this is a question - I simply do not know, is there really any reason we can keep expanding to having multiple twisted pairs all sending/receiving with well-timed off-sets so that it was a bit round-robin-esque and perhaps multiple simultaneous connections? A bit like poor-man's broadband where you multi-linked a couple of dial-up connections...
I imagine it'd be fragile as hell but I don't see why it's not realistic - to a certain point where it becomes impractical. I'm thinking something akin to the trunks or OCs running into buildings and the likes - only more specifically aimed at a closer to the desktop, such as the router, the cable to the NIC even, etc...
I know a bit about networking - the fundamentals. I've done some work with it because I had to but it's vital to point out that I've not touched anything professionally (really) since about 2000. I don't really see a reason why a thumb-width cable full of twisted pairs of copper can't be brought to the unit or even to the end-point. It's more resilient than fiber is, in the physical sense. Hell, with error correction it could just send notice and then function in limited capacity as it routes around failures. At least it can in the picture that I have in my head.;-) (The picture in my head may not actually fit reality as well as I'm thinking.)
What am I missing? Why is this not done? Why is there no CAT-55, CAT-60, or the likes? Things already support multiple streams. Even if they didn't, splitting stuff into that wouldn't be too damned hard. I imagine that it'd be a bit frail, potentially. I imagine that scaling might be a problem but that's what error correction is for. I imagine that error correction is going to add a bunch of computational overhead and that there's a diminishing return at some point but - are we at that point? Is there anything I'm missing that prevents us from going further?
Why am I fixated on copper? More so, why am I fixated on copper when the rumor mill assures me that my *very* remote area is going to get a fiber service? 'Cause I've seen copper on the ground, bent by trees, and blown completely off multiple poles and buried under ice and *still* had reasonable throughput. They'll be hanging the fiber from the poles and not laying it in the ground - yes, they're going to and yes they already do. I'll take something slower but more reliable. Oh, I'll be jumping on fiber the minute it arrives. I'll also be keeping DSL and figuring out a way to automatically fail-over to DSL when the fiber inevitably goes down.
I doubt it has a formal answer. Commonsense is that which everyone should know. Horse sense is that which certain people, probably in a specific area, would have (or should have) learned through experience.
That's just my interpretation. It's not authoritative but it is so because I said it is so!;-) (After all, it's commonsense.)
I did not know that. I wonder where the outrage is, seriously? I've been told, many times, that a boss sleeping with an employee can never be consensual. I'm told that it starts on uneven terms and that there's no way that the employee can make the choice to be a part of that relationship. I've been told this multiple times and by multiple people.
I'm going to speculate that, by being the owner of the company, they're in a position of authority (or were) and thus any relationship is coercive and illegal/immoral/rape - depending on who has shared those views. I'm really kind of surprised I'd not heard about this. I'm surprised that nobody is outraged or was outraged.
How the hell does that even happen? I have been online in some form or another since the mid 1980s. I've never not said what I wanted to say and I've never once been kicked from anything - except for intentionally getting kicked out of chat rooms.
During the mad-cow epidemic, I would go into "horse lover" type chats, those often full of young ladies, and talk about how I loved horse. They'd all agree and I'd slowly lead 'em along until they finally realized that I was talking about eating horse because there was no cow available to eat.
So, yeah... I've been kicked out of chat rooms but that was intentional. Everywhere else, I've said what I had to say and to hell with the consequences. I don't suppose that it has something to do with *how* you say it? 'Cause I say some pretty outlandish things - sometimes just to spark a conversation, other times it may be to show people there are new ways to look at things, other times I might be aiming for insightful. Sometimes, people are even offended.
Yet, never - ever, have I been kicked out of a site. Ever... No, not once. I've never been banned on a forum. I've never been timed out on a forum. I've never been banned from chat unless I was intentionally doing so (like mentioned above). I've never been kicked form comments sections. I've never been kicked from someone's blog. I don't think I've even ever had a comment moderated away to the bit bucket.
I'm fairly polite about how I say things. Hell, I write giant novellas - they're scatted across the 'net. I've sat down and typed 15,000 word replies to someone's inane blog post - and the post remains there to this day. I've even called 'em idiots in said posts - though I typically avoid being so crass but I've certainly done so.
Hell, I get comments from around the globe based on my comments - and not always do I get comments that thank me. I've had various amusing threats, hate mail, and was even doxxed once. (Which was amusing 'cause it resulted in them with documents that showed I was not, in fact, lying and that I'd been completely truthful.) But never, ever, have I been kicked from a site.
Chat? Yes. That was intentional. And fun. A site? Not once and I do not have a history of withholding my views.
As much as I like Linux, and I am using it right this very minute, I'm inclined to speculate that those jobs would exist even without Linux. Something else would be in its place. Many, many kernels and operating systems have come and gone and still exist. There was a need and software, like life, seems to find a way. I may be waxing philosophical but I really do believe the ecosystem would exist without Linux specifically.
It might have been BSD, it might have been QNX, it might have been MINIX, it might have been SunOS/Solaris - even when it was open, it might have been any one of a number of things. Life finds a way. Software seems to be a bit like that as well. The jobs might have different titles but the goals would be largely the same. Instead of "Linux Evangelists" we'd have "BSD Evangelists."
There's a chance, albeit a minuscule chance, that we'd have people being paid to be "HURD Evangelists." It could happen.
But, the jobs would probably still exist sans Linux. They'd just be titled differently but the ends would be the same. I see no reason to believe that niche would not have been filled by someone/something. I love Linux, I really do. I am inclined to believe that people would have had the same goals and passions without it. It's really likely that something else would have taken its place.
Sorry to bug you but I can't help but notice the replies you've received. I'd speculate that it is ignorance, perhaps willful ignorance, but premised on very Western views. Were I a more paranoid person, I'd speculate that they'd based their beliefs on propaganda.
Japan's culture and history is largely based on a feudal caste system with inherent bias, prejudice, and inherited status. There's speculation about the changes but, at the same time, they've still got people *actively* engaging in ancestral worship with regards to war criminals. They were forced, at gunpoint, to open up their society.
As an outsider looking in, and doing so objectively (I think), it appears that there are still a number of people, people with power, who resent that. That, coupled with a society that appears to be rather conformational and largely disinterested in externalities and you have a volatile situation that could make drastic changes in less than a generation.
Before people guess, I've *been* to Japan more than once and have enjoyed the time and the people. I did lose relatives in WWII to the Japanese and had others who barely survived their capture by the Japanese. However, I was not there and I'd like to think that I can still be objective as I do not hold any particular grudges with this. In fact, if I did then I'd say nothing and hope that their society imploded or turned aggressive and was annihilated. I wish that on nobody.
If I could make any changes, it would be to get their average citizen interested in both politics and things that go on outside of their borders. They might also wish to look internally and see what they can do about those people who still deny, or minimize, things like Unit 731, prisoner abuses to numerous to mention, the Rape of Nanking, sexual slavery of Koreans, chemical warfare tests on living Chinese, and treachery. Then, they may wish to just be open about the way their history played out. No, life was not good for the average person and that lasted well into the 20th century. *sighs*
It's not hard, as an individual, to get past that sort of stuff. I've no idea how to do it en masse... I do wish them luck but, as an outsider, it really does look largely dysfunctional and based on false premises. Seriously, worshiping war criminals? In the 1970s the people doing so were old. I see it today, when it does make the media, and I've noticed that they're not a bunch of old veterans any more. It's a mix of a few old people and a whole lot of young people.* It was sort of understandable when it was just a bunch of old vets. I can understand and accept that. I know what it's like to carry a firearm and (sort of) fight for your country.
* How does that even happen? Seriously, I don't get it. What did they tell those kids to get them to engage in that ancestor worship and laying wreaths on war criminal's tombs? These aren't speculated criminals. These are accused and tried criminals who are responsible for atrocities, by any definition of the word, and were sentenced to death in some instances. It was understandable, if regrettable, when it was the old and dying who still kept them in their memory. How the hell did they get kids to keep this tradition up? Do the kids not know? Do they not understand? Have they been told the truth?
Yes, those are questions. I have no idea what the answers are. Your opinion is, of course, valued and you may well know what I do not. I could go on but I'm lazy tonight.;-)
It is important, to me, to realize that it doesn't have to be in isolation. Innocuous looking code may be truly benign -- until it is compounded by externalities beyond the control of the user and their systems. Who's to say, for example, that there's no hidden magic where packets are injected with content while in transit and that the injection doesn't alter the results? There's no reason to believe it needs to be simple, there could be many varied (and trivial-seeming) manipulations that chance the expected behavior without actually changing the expected results.
Security is a process, not an application. Nothing is completely secure - nor will it ever be. Security is deciding what you want to do and making informed choices about the risks you'll accept to achieve the goals needed to reach the desired end. It is about accepting risks - or not accepting risks. It is about varied levels as there is no such thing as complete security. It is not a binary thing and the answer is not even remotely associated with software licenses.
I've said many times how much I admire Snowden but his continued opining on things he knows nothing about is annoying. That doesn't mean we should stop giving him attention - not at all. We just need to accept that he's annoying as of late. We need to keep him around and in the limelight a while longer, ideally until a conclusion is reached. It was amusing to hear him opine on Apple. The guy's been out of the scene since before the phone was released, was never a part of the FBI, but felt qualified to authoritatively and affirmatively state the capabilities of multiple parties. I pointed that out. Nobody actually bothered to pay attention to what they were responding to and seemed more interested in asserting that Snowden somehow, mysteriously, was eminently qualified to make absolute statements.
Speculation? I'd have been more open to. "It seems likely that they can do..." Instead it was, "They can do..." Pointing out the difference made me a troll, for some reason? I kind of giggled at the replies. They simply fail to see the difference.
This is the second time, in one thread, you've made some very backwards statements about BTC. BTC is not anonymous and was never intended to be. Your ID can be obfuscated, to some extent, but it is not (nor has it ever been) anonymous. Why would you think so?
I mean that as a question. I'd really like an answer. Who told you it was anonymous or even meant to be? Why did you listen to them? Did you check their credentials? Did you bother to look for yourself?
I do not use BTC. I do not own any BTC. I have problems with BTC (nothing major) and I did mine some but those were donated to EFF after I'd forgotten I had done so and some kind soul reminded me that they existed and had gained a lot of value. I had 48 of 'em and donated 'em to EFF when they were a bit over $600 each so it's nice that I was reminded.
At any rate, why would you think they're anonymous? Nobody has ever suggested they are - at least nobody that knows anything about them. By their very nature, they're tracked, that's what the block-chain does. Up above, you said that they were not only not exchangeable for cash but that they never would be. That's just silly talk. Why the hell would you believe that or state that?
It does sound reasonable and professional. Is it? I'd like to think so.
At first blush, and compounded with other happenings of late, people are thinking/opining that the cracks in the façade are starting to appear. That's one way to look at it. However, it seems the cracks are being repaired as they appear and are less drastic than many of the naysayers speculated they would be. That is, of course, the least popular way to look at it - especially in these parts where anger, mockery, and indignant outrage are the typical responses to everything. To be fair, that's kind of what we do and have always done.
Slashdot Mirror
You'd think, with my affection for automotive means, I'd have known that. However, I completely was thinking Type 44 which is a rifle used by Japan during WWII.
That's certainly colorful and all but I'm not entirely sure it's as accurate as you're implying. In your instance, the renting of the property may well have been transfered as a condition of purchase, this does happen. They're called renter's rights. They are awesome for those one lucky renters.
So, they won't need guns. They've got the force of law on their side. The new owner should just burn the place down and collect the insurance and pay to put 'em up in a new apartment for a little while. It depends on how the lease was written but lease rights usually transfer with ownership - it's a negative applied to valuation. Well, it's supposed to be. It happens in NYC a bit and I believe protocol is to make it unlivable or to torch it. By the time the courts sort it own, it'll be four years later and there will be a new set of high-rise condominiums on the spot unless Stephen Segal is there to save them.
I've seen this movie... Guns don't mean shit. Wait... What?
Oh, yeah, no... That's real. Except for Segal. He doesn't usually show up. It makes the local news, people protest, shit goes to court, place mysteriously burns and a guy named Frank moved to New Jersey for a few months. At least until his parole officer catches up with him and... No, that's a movie again.
At any rate... Ostensibly, they get rights. Depending on who and what they are, they may get to enforce those rights. Ideally, it's covered in the valuation, including the duration, and adjusted accordingly and all goes well as they gentrify around the old lady. Hmm... That might be a movie again.
I'm thinking short-haul, probably off a fiber splitter type of deal at the junction on the pole. Big fat bastards, not quite as large as your image - obviously.
In case it's not painfully obvious, I haven't been inside of a real network closet in... Wow, like 15 years. Well, I've gone in and looked at the pretty lights a few times. I've even spliced fiber - with loads of help. I wouldn't let me near your closet. I do manage my own fairly well. I can crimp me some CAT-5 and 6. I got that down. :/
But yeah, short haul - probably from the pole - maybe to a hub in an apartment complex or the comms room in a large building. Seems to me it'd work - frail as all hell but they should be able to figure that out by now. They'd be thick cables, obviously. I dunno, how many twisted pair can you fit in a half inch? However many that is, that many. (I got these technical details and number *all* figured out... *nods*)
So, yeah, something about that size. That'd probably be, what, 30 pair? More? That'd still be pretty flexible. It's only gotta go to a router - it can split off in regular wireless or CAT-6 from there. That gets the bandwidth there to max out those lines - if it's doable. I really don't see why it wouldn't work but I am pretty far from guru status. Hell, I'm barely competent status. I've connected some pretty complicated things for, oh, circa 1999. I even used wire ties - and sticky labels.
Did you not notice the headline? It's about making stuff (for better or worse) on the moon. Beaming the gathered energy back up to the moon probably isn't realistic, now is it? FFS, it's got "on the moon" right in the title. How do you figure that building robots on the moon can be done cheaper by gathering the energy here? If that were the case, they'd just build the robots here.
> Fer God's sake, fusion energy is just around the corner...
You laugh and it's a rather traditional joke around here but it *does* look like they're getting closer and closer. Of course, I'm old and fusion power has been anywhere from five to thirty five and even fifty years away. The funky looking machine the Germans are building is claimed to have some potential - they've had it spun up and run it at some pretty high temperatures - if I understand their last press release properly.
Hmm... I'm 58. It was 5 years away when I was a kid. It was 50 years away when it was the 1970s. It was 35 years away in the 1980s. It was 50 years away during the 1990s. It was 35 years away in the 2000s. It's 5 years away now.
It probably won't happen in my lifetime. ;-)
I went and found this:
http://www.phrases.org.uk/mean...
I am, by no means, an authority on the subject. I didn't even read all of the page. It just seems to be the better of the few - others listed it and had some usage. That one gets into where it comes from - or where they claim it comes from. Buggered if I know, buggered if I am an authority.
It's up to you, I suppose, as to what you believe. Horses do things like take you home when you're drunk. I figured it came from there and things like that - things learned in experience. I'd never heard it used as a pejorative. My linguistic capacity is mere grunts and occasional pointing. Any of my utterances making sense is entirely incidental and orthogonal to intent. You'd probably get better etymology information from a trained monkey than you will from me.
But, that's how I understand it and how I've seen it used. The validity of that use is subject to debate, a debate for which I am unqualified, and I can only share how I've witnessed the usage and interpreted said usage. ;-)
Sometimes, just need to be shattered in order to pick up the pieces and build something better than what they were. It would be me or someone else but it's destined to happen - if they're to reach fruition. It is not my doing, it's the hand of fate acting through me.
After all, what would the world be without some chaos?
As an aside, I know no CSS. I'm in the process of making a Stylish theme for Slashdot. Holy shit is this thing horrendous. I am so not a designer. It looks like a combination of an emo kid, angel-fire, and time cube. I am *not* doing well at this.
No, he's been shunned by the community.
Err... I'm going to assume you're not retarded and just don't know. If you want MATE and BSD, get GhostBSD.
http://www.ghostbsd.org/downlo...
Why would you say such stupid things? Seriously?
I keep going back to a VM with GhostBSD. Man, I really wish I could get past a few things and run it on bare metal. I really like my browser and I really like VMWare. If I can get past that, I can use GhostBSD. I just can't do it. I really, really don't like Firefox. I really don't like VirtualBox. I understand there's a shim to get Linux software running but I've no idea how to make it work properly and get Opera and VMWare working. I'd *love* to switch to GhostBSD.
I've HAMMERED on it via VM. I've thrown gobs of data at it for fun. I've stripped away its resources and beat the hell of it. It slows down, boy does it slow down, but it takes it. It has yet to freeze, it has yet to fail, it has yet to do anything it wasn't meant to do. I've pushed, pulled, injected, ejected, poked, prodded, compressed, twisted, and pressed like I was having my way with a fat woman in the back of a bar in Juarez. And, like a fat chick, it's taken it all and asked for but a box of Ho-hos in return.
I'd love to put it in bare metal and have my way with it - again, like a fat woman in the back of a bar in Juarez. But, it just can't keep me satisfied yet - and the future isn't looking too bright either. Hmm... GhostBSD is a fat woman in the back of a Juarez bar. That does have some positive attributes, I guess. And, like her, I can keep going back for more.
That is AWESOME! Is it marked up? That may actually belong in a museum. That's a chunk of history, right there.
I do wonder how many folks have actually figured out your username and the potential association with Japan? *chuckles* It's kind of like the guy running around with (Base 64 I think) "slashdot sucks" as a username. I don't think anyone's ever noticed. I read usernames way too often. *sighs*
At any rate, that's awesome. I kind of want a pic. ;-) Signed? Any authenticity to actually *prove* it was originally Perry's? How the hell did he end up with it in his possession?
My mother's side was Prescott and McDonnell. So, you can put those together and guess I've a bunch of Navy history in my family. My father's side were all Marines which is, technically, a Department of the Navy. I did my eight and ravaged the GI Bill for all it was worth.
As a *very* odd aside - but I'm reminded of it when I mention this (something to do with work ethic) - I've been pondering going back to work for a while if things are different this autumn. I don't need money but I've been doing very little for a while. A few years back I spent a summer building houses for Habitat for Humanity. That was kind of fun but I'm thinking something in the tech sector. It probably does seem like an odd aside but, really... They're strangely related. I don't really know what to think, I guess. Maybe I'll start *and* run a business of my own - besides those I've already got my fingers in.
I keep going back to the idea of a consulting business where Graybeards are given their due and are called in as emergency personnel (more or less) and are recognized experts in their field and thus able to put the terms *they* want into their contracts. Yes, that includes being able to put their right to wear their underwear outside of their pants into their contracts if they so desire. They can even stipulate that they're allowed to wear a mask and a cape and that everyone has to refer to them as Super Henry or whatever they want. After all, they're the best of the best and it is a crisis, are they going to argue or not? Also, the pay rate will be what the contractor insists they're worth.
So, not just you but anyone who might be interested should keep poking me to make sure that I keep pondering how to go about achieving that. I've got ample starting capital. I can even run the damned thing as a non-profit if I wanted. But, I've gotta do something - and soon.
Ah well, that's really off-topic but I'm strangely reminded of it. :/ Maybe my head is broken. I dunno... They tell me I'm sane.
Yeah, it is Meade. Hmm... I'll see what I can dredge up about it. I have some friends that are still in and have increased in rank a great deal. However, they're all Marines or Navy. Still, they might have some scuttlebutt. If anything interesting pops up, I'll email you. No need to respond, obviously.
Oh, it wouldn't have been the same culturally, granted. The Free Software movement was already in place, however. That needs to not be overlooked. I admit, I don't really like the goobers who run around insisting it's GNU/Linux but they do have a point.
Note: I did not say that it would be the same. In fact, I said it'd be different. What I assert is that the jobs would still exist, even without Linux in particular, and that things would have ended up much the same. I'm not sure how to articulate that better? The path would have been different but the destination likely very similar. I guess that's the best way I can think of to describe it.
Would it have been BSD? Hell, could Amiga have made it further? Would it have been RISC? MINIX? SunOS? I do not know... HURD? Maybe... There were so many things in play at the time, and not long after. I've read a bunch of things that go into this, at some detailed levels even, and there really were a lot of other options in play at the time but Linux took off and those seemed to move to the wayside. Linus has a powerful personality but I'd imagine it'd have still happened.
Don't get me wrong - please. I'm very grateful to Linus and for Linux. I'm using Lubuntu right this minute to post this. But, I was there and I've been here since. I really do think something else would have taken its place.
They might get there and be a more realistic option. Remember, they've changed the industry to reflect the needs of the many and that has resulted in aiming for the lowest common denominator. There's not a lot that can be done, with any immediacy, in that area. I suspect I dislike it as much as you - I'm big on personal responsibility and knowing how to use your tools if you're going to use them at all.
I'm not a fan of the monolithic kernel architecture. I use it because it, its ecosystem more so than anything else, is my only realistic option - coupled with the nature of the beast in that I really don't have anything to worry about. I've no vast treasure troves of data that will ruin me if they are leaked. I do operate with least privilege routines, I do filter at the hardware level, I do check logs from hardware that is not under the control of the same operating system.
In an effort to demonstrate that it can be done, I used a Windows system (several different OS versions) without running resident/active anti-malware. I practices safe hex and operated accordingly. With heavy monitoring to ensure that this was true - I found zero evidence of any security incidents and no outbound traffic that could not be accounted for and permissions expressly granted, and knowingly granted. I did that for several years, actually. I would not recommend that for the feint of heart. I would not recommend that for the home user of norm. But, it was done and was a good learning experience.
I've played with Qubes OS before. It intrigues me and I like their goal. I suspect you're reading into me something that I am not. That something that I am not is a zealot. I'm a pragmatist. You, on the other hand, are starting to come off as a zealot. That may or may not be true. That may or may not be a problem for you. That may or may not be your intent.
I do not, largely, disagree with your sentiment. I just feel that it is not only impractical, at this time, but that it's going to be a while longer before it happens and, even then, it's unlikely to go mainstream. Remember, it was us that urged people to get a computer - all those years ago. This is our fault. We are reaping what we sowed. We put boxes into people's homes and then told them to read the fucking manual. We expected them to do so.
They've trashed our ecosystem. They've turned our networks into hell. They've made us deal with stupid regulations, inferior products, and sub-par standards. This is your fault - you did this. Own up to it and move on. I'm just as guilty as you are - and the barn door is still wide open as now we push them onto dumb terminals known as phones and tablets. To top it off, we've then pushed them back onto the mainframe as they resort to cloud services. Truth be told, that might be for the best. I'm kind of glad that they're on Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, YouTube, and 4chan. It shows me where I don't want to go.
It was us, us who urged them to get computers which are now transmitting malware more rapidly than they have ever been able to before as we urged them to get broadband and made the content even richer. It was us who told them to cut their cords. It was us who told them how to pirate. It was us who, way back when, told them how to find Usenet. We invited them here and we rejoiced when they came because they gave us money - and power.
And while it may seem that I'm waxing philosophical, I urge you to think again as to how those things all tie into this. Oh, don't get me wrong... I love a microkernel. I love the separation, the design, the utility, and the security. I love the fact that a driver or server or service can halt and be brought back up without crashing the whole system. I know, and understand, the layers associated and I appreciate the differences.
And before you ask what I have done... Why, I've donated to Qubes not just once but multiple times - sometimes a fairly good sized donation. This thread is relatively old now so I'm thinking few will notice it. I'd rather it not be spectacular and I alr
And what did they do about it?
Methinks your latter sentence could be directed towards you. But I suspect you'll refuse to acknowledge that.
I don't know if I'd say "STOP." That seems less than intelligent to say. I'd say stop doing so for trivial reasons. I'd say stop doing so without good reasons. I'd say stop doing so for proprietary reasons. But, I'd not say stop doing so entirely.
Why? I speculate that improvements will be had in the future. I say that gains will be made and technology will advance even further. I'd rather not prevent that. I'd rather not force them to not make new standards. I'd rather they had the freedom to make newer, better, and different.
I just wish they'd not do so for trivial reasons.
Make sense?
I'm presuming that there's a diminishing law of returns there at some point. But, and this is a question - I simply do not know, is there really any reason we can keep expanding to having multiple twisted pairs all sending/receiving with well-timed off-sets so that it was a bit round-robin-esque and perhaps multiple simultaneous connections? A bit like poor-man's broadband where you multi-linked a couple of dial-up connections...
I imagine it'd be fragile as hell but I don't see why it's not realistic - to a certain point where it becomes impractical. I'm thinking something akin to the trunks or OCs running into buildings and the likes - only more specifically aimed at a closer to the desktop, such as the router, the cable to the NIC even, etc...
I know a bit about networking - the fundamentals. I've done some work with it because I had to but it's vital to point out that I've not touched anything professionally (really) since about 2000. I don't really see a reason why a thumb-width cable full of twisted pairs of copper can't be brought to the unit or even to the end-point. It's more resilient than fiber is, in the physical sense. Hell, with error correction it could just send notice and then function in limited capacity as it routes around failures. At least it can in the picture that I have in my head. ;-) (The picture in my head may not actually fit reality as well as I'm thinking.)
What am I missing? Why is this not done? Why is there no CAT-55, CAT-60, or the likes? Things already support multiple streams. Even if they didn't, splitting stuff into that wouldn't be too damned hard. I imagine that it'd be a bit frail, potentially. I imagine that scaling might be a problem but that's what error correction is for. I imagine that error correction is going to add a bunch of computational overhead and that there's a diminishing return at some point but - are we at that point? Is there anything I'm missing that prevents us from going further?
Why am I fixated on copper? More so, why am I fixated on copper when the rumor mill assures me that my *very* remote area is going to get a fiber service? 'Cause I've seen copper on the ground, bent by trees, and blown completely off multiple poles and buried under ice and *still* had reasonable throughput. They'll be hanging the fiber from the poles and not laying it in the ground - yes, they're going to and yes they already do. I'll take something slower but more reliable. Oh, I'll be jumping on fiber the minute it arrives. I'll also be keeping DSL and figuring out a way to automatically fail-over to DSL when the fiber inevitably goes down.
I doubt it has a formal answer. Commonsense is that which everyone should know. Horse sense is that which certain people, probably in a specific area, would have (or should have) learned through experience.
That's just my interpretation. It's not authoritative but it is so because I said it is so! ;-) (After all, it's commonsense.)
I did not know that. I wonder where the outrage is, seriously? I've been told, many times, that a boss sleeping with an employee can never be consensual. I'm told that it starts on uneven terms and that there's no way that the employee can make the choice to be a part of that relationship. I've been told this multiple times and by multiple people.
I'm going to speculate that, by being the owner of the company, they're in a position of authority (or were) and thus any relationship is coercive and illegal/immoral/rape - depending on who has shared those views. I'm really kind of surprised I'd not heard about this. I'm surprised that nobody is outraged or was outraged.
Ah well... That is fairly off-topic, I suppose.
How the hell does that even happen? I have been online in some form or another since the mid 1980s. I've never not said what I wanted to say and I've never once been kicked from anything - except for intentionally getting kicked out of chat rooms.
During the mad-cow epidemic, I would go into "horse lover" type chats, those often full of young ladies, and talk about how I loved horse. They'd all agree and I'd slowly lead 'em along until they finally realized that I was talking about eating horse because there was no cow available to eat.
So, yeah... I've been kicked out of chat rooms but that was intentional. Everywhere else, I've said what I had to say and to hell with the consequences. I don't suppose that it has something to do with *how* you say it? 'Cause I say some pretty outlandish things - sometimes just to spark a conversation, other times it may be to show people there are new ways to look at things, other times I might be aiming for insightful. Sometimes, people are even offended.
Yet, never - ever, have I been kicked out of a site. Ever... No, not once. I've never been banned on a forum. I've never been timed out on a forum. I've never been banned from chat unless I was intentionally doing so (like mentioned above). I've never been kicked form comments sections. I've never been kicked from someone's blog. I don't think I've even ever had a comment moderated away to the bit bucket.
I'm fairly polite about how I say things. Hell, I write giant novellas - they're scatted across the 'net. I've sat down and typed 15,000 word replies to someone's inane blog post - and the post remains there to this day. I've even called 'em idiots in said posts - though I typically avoid being so crass but I've certainly done so.
Hell, I get comments from around the globe based on my comments - and not always do I get comments that thank me. I've had various amusing threats, hate mail, and was even doxxed once. (Which was amusing 'cause it resulted in them with documents that showed I was not, in fact, lying and that I'd been completely truthful.) But never, ever, have I been kicked from a site.
Chat? Yes. That was intentional. And fun. A site? Not once and I do not have a history of withholding my views.
As much as I like Linux, and I am using it right this very minute, I'm inclined to speculate that those jobs would exist even without Linux. Something else would be in its place. Many, many kernels and operating systems have come and gone and still exist. There was a need and software, like life, seems to find a way. I may be waxing philosophical but I really do believe the ecosystem would exist without Linux specifically.
It might have been BSD, it might have been QNX, it might have been MINIX, it might have been SunOS/Solaris - even when it was open, it might have been any one of a number of things. Life finds a way. Software seems to be a bit like that as well. The jobs might have different titles but the goals would be largely the same. Instead of "Linux Evangelists" we'd have "BSD Evangelists."
There's a chance, albeit a minuscule chance, that we'd have people being paid to be "HURD Evangelists." It could happen.
But, the jobs would probably still exist sans Linux. They'd just be titled differently but the ends would be the same. I see no reason to believe that niche would not have been filled by someone/something. I love Linux, I really do. I am inclined to believe that people would have had the same goals and passions without it. It's really likely that something else would have taken its place.
Sorry to bug you but I can't help but notice the replies you've received. I'd speculate that it is ignorance, perhaps willful ignorance, but premised on very Western views. Were I a more paranoid person, I'd speculate that they'd based their beliefs on propaganda.
Japan's culture and history is largely based on a feudal caste system with inherent bias, prejudice, and inherited status. There's speculation about the changes but, at the same time, they've still got people *actively* engaging in ancestral worship with regards to war criminals. They were forced, at gunpoint, to open up their society.
As an outsider looking in, and doing so objectively (I think), it appears that there are still a number of people, people with power, who resent that. That, coupled with a society that appears to be rather conformational and largely disinterested in externalities and you have a volatile situation that could make drastic changes in less than a generation.
Before people guess, I've *been* to Japan more than once and have enjoyed the time and the people. I did lose relatives in WWII to the Japanese and had others who barely survived their capture by the Japanese. However, I was not there and I'd like to think that I can still be objective as I do not hold any particular grudges with this. In fact, if I did then I'd say nothing and hope that their society imploded or turned aggressive and was annihilated. I wish that on nobody.
If I could make any changes, it would be to get their average citizen interested in both politics and things that go on outside of their borders. They might also wish to look internally and see what they can do about those people who still deny, or minimize, things like Unit 731, prisoner abuses to numerous to mention, the Rape of Nanking, sexual slavery of Koreans, chemical warfare tests on living Chinese, and treachery. Then, they may wish to just be open about the way their history played out. No, life was not good for the average person and that lasted well into the 20th century. *sighs*
It's not hard, as an individual, to get past that sort of stuff. I've no idea how to do it en masse... I do wish them luck but, as an outsider, it really does look largely dysfunctional and based on false premises. Seriously, worshiping war criminals? In the 1970s the people doing so were old. I see it today, when it does make the media, and I've noticed that they're not a bunch of old veterans any more. It's a mix of a few old people and a whole lot of young people.* It was sort of understandable when it was just a bunch of old vets. I can understand and accept that. I know what it's like to carry a firearm and (sort of) fight for your country.
* How does that even happen? Seriously, I don't get it. What did they tell those kids to get them to engage in that ancestor worship and laying wreaths on war criminal's tombs? These aren't speculated criminals. These are accused and tried criminals who are responsible for atrocities, by any definition of the word, and were sentenced to death in some instances. It was understandable, if regrettable, when it was the old and dying who still kept them in their memory. How the hell did they get kids to keep this tradition up? Do the kids not know? Do they not understand? Have they been told the truth?
Yes, those are questions. I have no idea what the answers are. Your opinion is, of course, valued and you may well know what I do not. I could go on but I'm lazy tonight. ;-)
It is important, to me, to realize that it doesn't have to be in isolation. Innocuous looking code may be truly benign -- until it is compounded by externalities beyond the control of the user and their systems. Who's to say, for example, that there's no hidden magic where packets are injected with content while in transit and that the injection doesn't alter the results? There's no reason to believe it needs to be simple, there could be many varied (and trivial-seeming) manipulations that chance the expected behavior without actually changing the expected results.
Security is a process, not an application. Nothing is completely secure - nor will it ever be. Security is deciding what you want to do and making informed choices about the risks you'll accept to achieve the goals needed to reach the desired end. It is about accepting risks - or not accepting risks. It is about varied levels as there is no such thing as complete security. It is not a binary thing and the answer is not even remotely associated with software licenses.
I've said many times how much I admire Snowden but his continued opining on things he knows nothing about is annoying. That doesn't mean we should stop giving him attention - not at all. We just need to accept that he's annoying as of late. We need to keep him around and in the limelight a while longer, ideally until a conclusion is reached. It was amusing to hear him opine on Apple. The guy's been out of the scene since before the phone was released, was never a part of the FBI, but felt qualified to authoritatively and affirmatively state the capabilities of multiple parties. I pointed that out. Nobody actually bothered to pay attention to what they were responding to and seemed more interested in asserting that Snowden somehow, mysteriously, was eminently qualified to make absolute statements.
Speculation? I'd have been more open to. "It seems likely that they can do..." Instead it was, "They can do..." Pointing out the difference made me a troll, for some reason? I kind of giggled at the replies. They simply fail to see the difference.
This is the second time, in one thread, you've made some very backwards statements about BTC. BTC is not anonymous and was never intended to be. Your ID can be obfuscated, to some extent, but it is not (nor has it ever been) anonymous. Why would you think so?
I mean that as a question. I'd really like an answer. Who told you it was anonymous or even meant to be? Why did you listen to them? Did you check their credentials? Did you bother to look for yourself?
I do not use BTC. I do not own any BTC. I have problems with BTC (nothing major) and I did mine some but those were donated to EFF after I'd forgotten I had done so and some kind soul reminded me that they existed and had gained a lot of value. I had 48 of 'em and donated 'em to EFF when they were a bit over $600 each so it's nice that I was reminded.
At any rate, why would you think they're anonymous? Nobody has ever suggested they are - at least nobody that knows anything about them. By their very nature, they're tracked, that's what the block-chain does. Up above, you said that they were not only not exchangeable for cash but that they never would be. That's just silly talk. Why the hell would you believe that or state that?
It does sound reasonable and professional. Is it? I'd like to think so.
At first blush, and compounded with other happenings of late, people are thinking/opining that the cracks in the façade are starting to appear. That's one way to look at it. However, it seems the cracks are being repaired as they appear and are less drastic than many of the naysayers speculated they would be. That is, of course, the least popular way to look at it - especially in these parts where anger, mockery, and indignant outrage are the typical responses to everything. To be fair, that's kind of what we do and have always done.