If you're using a *nix box somewhere on your devel network, "dig +trace host.domain.tld" is a beautiful thing as you'll avoid the cache (and therefore any potentially broken caching nameserver behavior) as all the nameservers you hit will be authoritative. You can see if it truly has propagated, which you can't do with a simple nslookup due to negative caching if your first lookup wasn't successful. Right now you could have a negative record cached for the TTL in the SOA and would have to wait until it expires before you see the live record, while it was already live for everyone else. You'll also be able to devel your app faster because you won't hit the caching server until it's live. There may be an equivalent flag on nslookup but I haven't found it after a few minutes of poking around.

Sure it makes me judgmental, but I'm judgmental for this reason: I feel that American society has too much of a tendency to buy consumer trash that won't actually make them happy and freely gets in debt to do so rather than weighing pros and cons of purchase (immediate temporal happiness vs. long term debt and unhappiness down the road if mismanaged) vs. further growth and stability. Do you not think that society would be much healthier if the average person cut down their consumerish tendencies and got what they needed and a few things of convenience/toys rather than catering exclusively to how they feel at the cost of long term savings or stability? If you're so lacking in judgment, how do you feel about people who are 100k in consumer debt? 50k? 20k? Where do you draw the line, and what guidelines do you put in? If you still don't feel fit to pass some sort of judgment, then how do you feel about the fact that right now the average savings rate is negative, and the average household credit card debt (counting everyone, not just households with debt) is $8.3k as of late 2008? Do you deny that there is an irresponsible way to use credit? Do you believe that society as a whole can be healthy if society as a whole isn't saving in any stage in its life? That is why I judge.

Re: para 2: It does harm to society if you cannot support yourself at later points in your life because your behavior is that of rampant consumerism and show no signs of stopping. It sounds like you're not one of those, so I again don't understand why you're offended. If you want to borrow some money, cool. Just don't be in overall debt on borrowing unless it's a good reason. The guidelines that I put forward were only that. And sure, it may not be my business, but neither will it be my business to support you when you fail. Too bad American society has deemed that it is my business to support you if you fail, so it became in my interest (also known as my business) that you be responsible for thyself (which it sounds like you are!) instead of being a consumer whore and running up your debt expecting the rest of society to owe you a living. Try telling me that there aren't plenty of folks out there doing exactly that, while having exactly that attitude.

I would genuinely love to see the renting vs. owning argument and what percentage of the population it applies to in which portion of their life. I personally believe that owning is something that one should do as soon as its feasible in their lives if they're not in an insane area, and relocate if they can't afford to buy in an area (I escaped CA for this reason, and we can see how well the average person who bought a $400k house on my budget is doing now). I don't see how renting can be sustainable until you're dead while maintaining a lifestyle devoid of savings (because renting was a sign that you shouldn't carry overall debt, remember?).

If you don't ignore student debt, you can most certainly attempt to put a monetary value on it over the course of your life in expected earnings and add it to the balance sheet as a reverse loan (accrues money over time), adjusted for how you'll actually use it vs. what the statistics say (e.g. if you're flipping burgers your degree doesn't add anything to your salary). In an attempt to give the benefit of the doubt to most student debt, I figured that I would take its value for granted (as you have) and simply ignore it. Car debt is debt on a depreciating asset, and consumer debt often worthless. Consumer goods are generally something that you buy yourself after you have standing to responsibly buy them (you've saved/budgeted money for them over the course of a few months after your saving/bills). This is something that our society has forgotten in its quest to fill the void of unhappiness with temporal pleasures. Overall debt is wrong if you are accruing it for the wrong reasons. You should strive to save, so as to have a healthy lifestyle and as a consequence a healthy economy.

Regarding your new house (congratulations, by the way!) it sounds like you actually will be close to if not in the black on that transaction as you put forward $10k when you closed. If you're not quite in the black, that's still an example of debt for the right reason, and you'll be in the black shortly anyhow. Congratulations for seeming to have done everything right. Please stop being offended for people who are doing it all wrong.

Re: judgemental and unrealistic: Unrealistic my ass. I'm a homeowner at under 25 while making under $50k a year, make extra payments so as to be on track to pay my house off in 18 years, STILL put money in savings, don't have student debt, do have an education, don't have car debt, do have reliable transportation, am currently growing my income still with advancement/certification at work, fully expect to hit six figures by the time I'm 35 at the latest, haven't had a month's salary on plastic since I was working in grocery in college, have stellar credit, and did it all on my own (caveat: I had good parents who were firmly middle class, so I had a good home life). Please call me unrealistic again. Pretty please.

Re: having 24 months interest free on plastic: That's an exception as long as you can manage it and don't fall into the common trap of overextending yourself. If you can make that money work for you and still have it set aside to pay it off in that no-interest timeframe, then you're ahead of the game and I applaud you. You're also in the minority and not who the initial poster was talking about, hence my comments about you getting indignant about comments not even directed at you.

Re: your renting rant: I'm sorry for not being more clear in my post, renting wasn't a bullet point that alone represents irresponsibility. It was more of an indicator that you shouldn't have things on plastic and carry student debt/car debt/etc. as well. If there's a commonality between most of the people that I have seen not be able to manage money and are in debt, it's that they're renting well beyond when they should because they can't manage to save.

Re: six figure spending habits: Going back to my comment about being in the black overall, which is the best marker of you know.. not being in debt... If you're not in the black (ignoring student debt, which again I already covered as being a type of investment that doesn't show up on a balance sheet as neutral), and you're making six figures.. you may want to re-evaluate your spending on consumer crap unless you're otherwise investing in long term gains (e.g. starting a business). If you're in the black, THEN QUIT BEING OFFENDED BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT IN DEBT.

If you can't sell all of your possessions and be in the black, you're in debt. Judging from your earlier post about having a mortgage, if you were to sell your house and put it towards the mortgage you would hopefully be in the black still. If you're driving reasonable cars that hold their value or are buying cars that aren't a significant portion of your net worth (and therefore won't wipe you out when they do depreciate) then you're fine. Tuition loans are a different class of debt, you're doing the same as a mortgage except your assets aren't tangible (at least you can't get foreclosed on your knowledge!)

The people he's talking about are the sorts that are:
a) paying rent (or spent a ridiculous sum on a house before the bubble burst, expecting to get rich)
b) have more than a month's salary on a credit card (and aren't paying it off every month as you suggest)
c) are upside down on car payments
d) spent more money on college than they can ever afford to pay off because they spent far more on tuition than they could ever expect to pay off reasonably in their career choice

or any combination of the above. Quit acting indignant and as if you've been personally attacked as being irresponsibly in debt because you have a mortgage

"Nonetheless, highway deaths are down in the USA"

The National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration has upped their standards, so up yours!

I have a few problems with this strategy...

You can already use blade servers/chassis which have two fans on IBM BladeCenter H models, and a larger number of smaller fans (8) on the HP C7000 blade chassis (incidentally I believe the C7000 is more efficient than IBM H chassis on average, but it's been a while since I've specced full chassis out). You can jam 14/16 blades (hp/ibm respectively) into 4 chassis per rack. The servers have an extremely dense footprint and the newer blades Nehalem procs will virtualize the vast majority of workloads. Put these chassis into a datacenter with a pressurized cold row (still use existing cooling and raised floor ideas, just put a door preventing cold row from mixing with hot row) and all of the cooled air will have to go through the server and the fan can spin at lower RPMs to cool, but is still there in case of adverse conditions. You can build extremely efficient racks this way without need for all of the cooperation between vendors that your solution requires. Lastly, for all of the workloads that you can't virtualize with bladecenters and external storage, you can get large boxen that have large fans in them anyhow, and you wouldn't need too many of these.

I just don't see the need to make the solution particularly complex when there are already very viable and dependable/reliable strategies to deal with this.

You are authorized by the web server which is providing a public facing service. The law for unauthorized acces is intended to cover services which are not public, e.g. I gain access to the shell via an exploit of your web service. If I break your TOS, you're more then welcome to ban me from your public facing service. Simply saying that I'm breaking your TOS while your server happily performs the function that you specifically designed it to do (serve up web pages) and trying to have me prosecuted is ludicrous.

Actually, you'd just wind up under arrest if you refused to comply when the officer had probable cause. PC is all that is needed to search your car. This is known as the "Motor Vehicle Exception"

The iPhone (and iPod Touch) seemed to have a significant number of third-party apps already available at launch, so marketshare can't explain it all away.


The iPhone was released on June 29, 2007 in the US. The SDK allowing third party applications was released for version 2 a year later.

Wikipedia:

"The App Store opened early in the morning on July 10, 2008 via an update to iTunes. Applications were immediately available for download at that time. However, iPhone and iPod Touch software version 2.0 was not yet available through Software Update, making the applications unusable. The iPhone OS 2.0 was released on July 11, 2008, and applications were able to be transferred onto the newly updated devices"

Your statement that there was no market before third party app development took place is patently false.

The OTAP is going to be used only in a WLAN controller /lightweight AP environment. "central management" is a prerequisite to even start thinking about using OTAP.

In this case, I don't particularly feel that there is hypocrisy, any more than the GPL is hypocrisy.

Issues of the actual legality of this aside (which looks flimsy), everyone involved seems fairly offended at the idea or concept of keeping people from publishing pictures that they've taken themselves, and the taking of copyright of them. The taking of copyright is the only mechanism that would allow fast takedown of the pictures from news outlets, websites, etc due to DMCA clauses. I may be giving the organization too much credit, but I would imagine that this is actually to ensure more freedom by sacrificing the freedom to do as you please with your pictures: if you know that you can do what you want without being photographed by arbitrary third parties, you have more freedom to do as you please. Individuals can still take and enjoy pictures on their own for their own consumption, but the pictures won't be published without the consent of the organization.

The GPL is formulated in nearly the exact same way: it works within the copyright framework to take away some freedoms (the freedom to redistribute however you damn well please), but it gives the work itself more freedom since it can't be closed by arbitrary third parties and resold for profit without the freedoms of the license coming along with it.

Once again in summary: I fail to see the philosophical problem with attempting to take away a smaller subset of freedoms to guarantee larger ones. That is hardly hypocrisy. I do however agree with most of the other posts though that state that the method of implementing this doesn't look like it is particularly viable.

I would kill for intelligent stoplights that are networked with each other, but I don't foresee being able to have cars transmit their intentions to allow intelligent decisions. I think that optical or other sensor-based decision making will occur that is difficult to spoof.

In the short term at least, having cars signal their intentions in order to start moving traffic a certain way would be rather prone to malicious/DoS behavior. Eventually you could probably corroborate that data with evidence that the car is following the instructions to the destination that you filed, but I really don't appreciate the privacy implications thereof.

I think that a system that doesn't rely on two-way comms or identifying individual cars is the way to go, which would mean simply providing direction for an aggregate and letting the intelligence happen on the device that is trying to go places, rather than any centralized effort to guide individual cars in traffic. You could provide the metrics and that would be good enough. Dealing with two-way communication and all of the implications thereof may eventually happen, but I personally wouldn't want to have it

I think that's a pretty narrow vision of how navigational aids will work...

I'd wager that eventually navigational aids will work like routing protocols do, favoring links with more bandwidth updated in real-time with actual road conditions. Imagine being able to seamlessly route around wrecks in real-time with the route that the city itself wanted to fail over to.

Currently, we have self-routing going on, to the detriment of overall traffic patterns. If there was a centralized decision, as long as it was honest traffic patterns would improve as people started using it. Cities could direct traffic to larger links and throughput concentrated into those, instead of side links that intersect with them becoming clogged as well. When people route themselves, they make really stupid/belligerent decisions sometime, causing havoc on the road in general. You'll never get rid of selfishness, but you could make the official paths far more rewarding than non-official paths. Currently this is hard to do because there's no way to broadcast or indicate the "correct" way to route yourself.

I personally look forward to the day that there is real-time routing information. Currently I do flat-out refuse to use GPS as I'd rather keep my personal navigational intuition honed, but I'd trade that in a heartbeat for real-time conditions and an actual calculation of the fastest route.

Actually, furthering your analogy.... It would be more like Ford put an engine kill in the car if you decided you want to drive on a dirt road. Yeah, there's plenty of cool shit attached to dirt roads, but you know what not everyone needs to go there and there might be potholes and stuff, we'd better make sure that you can't. So if you want to do that, you have to replace the engine and ECU. Too bad we just recalled something else on the car and can't work on it now!

Not to mention the fact that they're more than happy to sell you the actual NWA song "fuck tha police"