There. Fixed it for you. :)

Mainframe computers were designed around the idea of doing a large volume of repetitive transactions... and mainframes do that very well. If that's what you need done, a mainframe is actually quite a good choice if you can deal with the operational and maintenance costs.

The government is responsible for providing for the general welfare and all these things it does directly benefit the general welfare, QED.

Wrong. The government is responsible for providing for the common defense and promoting the general welfare. The government is not responsible for providing for the general welfare.

Despite what Supreme Court rulings over the years may imply, the words "provide" and "promote" do not mean the same thing.

Those of us who know better will mourn. The computer world has lost one of its greatest architects. You laid the foundation for quite possibly EVERYTHING in the modern computer world. I can only hope we will use what you gave us for good things.

Having experienced what happens in a socialized, European system through what happened to my grandparents, I can tell you that you really don't want it. When they finally identified the cancer with my grandmother, they only would give her pain medication. They would not treat her with surgery, chemo, radiation, or whatnot. She died in the hospital and there was a state-mandated autopsy. When my grandfather needed anything, they gave him pain meds and sent him home... no matter how my mother or my aunt argued with the doctors. The "death panels" are quite real... though they aren't necessarily called that. They do make decisions in those systems regarding what they will and won't do based on a person's age, condition, etc.

Socialized medicine works fine for an overall healthy population that takes care of itself and doesn't have junk food shoved down its collective throat. Until you can get the corn refiners and big pharma out of their shared bed, the US will continue to be a generally unhealthy population.

You are aware that the same venture capitalist who helped get Paxfire off the ground is the same venture capitalist who helped get OpenDNS going. http://web.archive.org/web/20100517145950/http://minorventures.com/

But the software that hijacks the NXDOMAIN traffic can't do anything about DNSSEC-enabled requests. If they hijack the response, then the receiving program will know whether or not something intercepted it because the NXDOMAIN stuff is actually issued by the root DNS servers and those were signed for many TLDs. Whether or not the actual response is signed is irrelevant. They have to skip requests that have DNSSEC turned on or they won't be invisible to the end user.

DNSSEC will help you avoid the NXDOMAIN hijacking. Use a DNS server that has it enabled.

This is a problem with the downsizing of companies. They try to push as much work as possible onto as few people as possible, often burning out the good people because they never get any time off, are constantly on outage calls, etc., and then nobody listens to them because they've identified a myriad of problems... but fixing them would require not putting out that extra new feature so they use operations to hold things together while disregarding their importance.

I've had the opportunity to meet him at a concert when I was one of his extras. He is a good man and has a wonderful family. He treats people with respect it's difficult to not give it back to him... especially when he requests permission to do all of the spoofs even though he doesn't legally need to do so.

And I can't listen to several songs without the Weird Al spoof popping into my head either.

Best wishes to you, Weird Al!

Umm, the last update/version of the client that I found was an FC10 RPM with version number 2.1.0.81 back in January, 2010. Is that providing a client? Yes... but they barely pay any attention to it.

Probably time to start looking for an alternative...

"If we come out with one now, we can't shed our, 'Me too!' image."

And in all honesty, it's not exactly the worst move for them either.

Actually, this can frequently be done pro bono as well, in which case the lawyer or law firm is doing it at their own cost.

I get tired of people who hide behind AC thinking they can get away with harassment and forum owners who won't take control of the situation. At least this requires a court order, which means the person or group demanding the information be made available must provide a reasonable justification to the court as to why it must be done. It's not a perfect system, but it's better than saying, "You can't allow anonymous posting."

I'm always amazed at how so many people can so easily fall for something that was at best a third grade attempt. Several of my coworkers and I were unhappy, to say the least, because we all took one look at the email and said that a blind man should've been able to pick up on this. And then someone chimed in with probably what was the best comment about why this happened. He suggested that it's been many years since we've seen this kind of attack go this rampant so everyone's guard was let down such that they didn't believe these attacks happened any more.