I'm sorry, mangle not DNAT, so it's post routing / arp translation. The idea is you don't nat, but just rewrite the ip header and do the real communication all at layer 2 via mac addresses.
Why the hell is everyone saying he needs crazy vlan rules or expensive switch magic or even some rediculous number of VMs?!?!
Switches are fucking stupid and don't inspect layer 3 unless you beg them to.
Step 1, see what the list of mac addresses is with basic ping and dump
Step 2, just throw a translation table up for a pile of 10 addresses to static far side arps + DNAT and just do what you need to to those with a 5 line bash script.
This is literally a 2 minute job...
The truth is that programming isn't a passion or a talent, says Edge, it is just a bunch of skills that can be learned. Programming isn't even one thing, though people talk about it as if it were; it requires all sorts of skills and coding is just a small part of that. Things like design, communication, writing, and debugging are needed. If we embrace this idea that "it's cool to be okay at these skills"—that being average is fine—it will make programming less intimidating for newcomers. If the bar for success is set "at okay, rather than exceptional", the bar seems a lot easier to clear for those new to the community. According to Edge the tech industry is rife with sexism, racism, homophobia, and discrimination and although it is a multi-faceted problem, the talent myth is part of the problem. "In our industry, we recast the talent myth as "the myth of the brilliant asshole", says Jacob Kaplan-Moss. "This is the "10x programmer" who is so good at his job that people have to work with him even though his behavior is toxic. In reality, given the normal distribution, it's likely that these people aren't actually exceptional, but even if you grant that they are, how many developers does a 10x programmer have to drive away before it is a wash?"
I'm old enough to know exactly what you're talking about. Thanks for the memory!
Helllooo my babyy....... Hello my honneeyyyyyyyyy......
We already do for black females as they are more likely to cost us money bringing a claim against us for dismissing them. Either firing them or terminating their employment for various reasons.
As a small company we cannot afford to make a mistake with the whole weight of Federal and State laws for someone to crush us with so we have taken risk mitigation very seriously.
So you admit to the discrimination you are saying you don't want to be accused of? yeah, shocking that you might get sued...
It seems like the end game is peer-to-peer wireless.
Well that, and the amount of bullshit dropped around the place...
Nah that's just how you tell you're in the right wing of the field if you can't see the sun. It can save your life one day.
Hope you like radon.
But seeing how domain names are often treated like property, i'm not sure why it isn't expected to be treated a lot like property.
Maybe I'm reading you wrong, but my understanding is you feel that a domain owner's personal information should be clearly available in WHOIS. I disagree.
If you as the owner of a domain are party to a court case involving that domain, whether due to your operation of a business using that domain or for any other cause of action, your ownership will become public record during the legal proceedings, regardless of your domain registration preferences. It's not as if WHOIS privacy protection somehow makes the registered owner truly anonymous.
Do you drive a car? If so, I presume it displays a license plate. The license plate doesn't contain your name, your address, your phone number, or any other personally identifying information (unless perhaps you've volunteered the info by registering a vanity tag). Suppose one day you do something in traffic which another driver perceives as an asshole move, and they become enraged. Like, "I want to kill that person" enraged. They can't just go home and type `whois [your tag]` and get all of your personal information. That's a good thing, right?
If you've committed a crime, the police have access to that data and are able to unmask you in order to enforce the law. But Joe Random, who has become upset at you for some reason and wishes to do you harm, isn't readily able to derive your personal information from your car's license plate. Why should your domain name be any different? If you make a post on your blog that offends someone, should that person be able to look up your full name and address and do who-knows-what?
What? All of those things that person listed are public records that can be looked up if you go to the clerk's office and spend about $20. That was the point. You can even just look some of them up now on the web, although it usually is behind a small paywall.
True. I am preparing for a multi-year court battle myself over the right to put an antenna on my roof. I did it to myself, but fighting fascism from the inside is more effective when you're dealing with people who don't understand that in UDOTS, laws are for restricting governments, not freedom.
Still, I fear the battle is lost once you realize that a strip search at an airport is deemed reasonable. Before you argue what "a well regulated militia" means, you need to define "infringed". Well, I mean to say, you need to stop running words through Google translate English--doublespeak.
More to your point, I suggest you start reviewing the laws in your own town. Just because you haven't been prosecuted for violating a city ordinance or tax law, doesn't mean you're not guilty.
There shouldn't be any court battle over this if you did it correctly. FCC trumps.
Dick Cheney brought us the current mess. He set the bar. W was just his sock-puppet.
Oh yeah, that makes sense. The son of a former President, former CIA Director, grandson of a U.S. Senator, and great-grandson of one of the 19th centuries rail barons was merely a sock puppet serving the interests of the son of a minor bureaucrat with the Department of Agriculture. You know, people should look at the nature of history before they start building conspiracy theories.
Every family has their dumbass.
Says the guy that doesn't have to manage a network that just outgrew an
This also explains using names like John Connor. You and I would be able to recognize the source of the name. It's much less likely that a senior citizen would, so it gives them a way to filter out the people least likely to fall for the scam.
Really? The original Terminator movie came out in 1984. People now in their 60s would have been about the same age as most of us here. Someone now in their 90s might not know about the movie, but I would bet at least as many people in their 60s and 70s know the name John Connor as do people in their teens and 20s.
Actually it would be the opposite.
The original terminator movie came out in 1984, the sequel came out in 1992. Someone born in 1984 is now 32 years old, you get a lot of people in their 20's who have never seen terminator.
If we add a non-western culture into the mix (in Australia, a lot of these telemarketers/scammers have thick Indian accents) they will likely have never seen Terminator, let alone make the John Conor connection. Also, it's not an unusual name.
I want to know how someone born in 1984 is somehow 32 years old in 2014. This isn't even hard math. The last digit is the same...
Got anything better?
Remove the laws and regulations holding back community fiber projects.
If you truly believe this is the problem, then you clearly have never tried to run a business in that market.
Jeff Sessions, Tea Party Guy. Of course he's going to take the nativist view. He probably thinks Microsoft could just take the 18,000 people it's laying off and repurpose them to fill whatever positions it's trying to use H1B visas for. Because tech skills are interchangeable, right? And all those 18,000 are totally okay relocating across the country (or globe) right?
Just because a lot of his opinions are idiotic, doesn't mean this one is. Tea Party people terrify me, and I still agree with this point.
If all you see is the source in a vote, and not the individual messages or topics, you're part of the problem in our system of government.