The dynamics have changed somewhat. Mainly because ISPs became monopolies when dialup died. Remember Earthlink or Mindspring, Speakeasy? Or Netzero? Big old ISPs that nobody uses now because they were merged into global conglomerates or went out of business.

In the old days Netflix could say "hmm, we're an outbound only company with lots of cash and nobody will peer with us.. why don't we buy an eyeball company and balance our traffic so peering is fair"

Now there is nobody to buy, unless you want to buy some giant companies.. or get bought by one of them.

Also, ratio based peering was a model that made sense in the old days because it was the easiest way to determine fairness amongst multiple providers. Even in/out means you aren't stealing my eyeball customers and I'm not stealing your server customers right? Or at least we're stealing both in equal amounts?

Now that argument doesn't hold true when you're talking about Amazon or Google or Netflix, or Rackspace or anyone else doing cloud business. They aren't eyeballs and don't want your eyeball customers. Most of the time if you talk to them directly they'll peer based on your inbound traffic from them. The same applies to CDNs like Akamai or Cloudflare. Again, they aren't getting in the residential market and aren't your competitor so why not peer to ease congestion?

Ok, so big monopoly telcos that do both content and customers don't understand this, their arguments are pretty feeble.. "it costs big $$ to peer!" Well, run a dark fiber down the street and peer out of joes basement peering for $10/xconnect .. "but optic costs!!".. are cheap if you're doing 10gig MM or SM with no fancy wavelengths. "Port costs?" Same.. buy cheaper gear.

The only question is if netflix and friends end up flinching and paying to connect to AT&T and Comcast, then nothing will change.

You should set it up so their only ingress is through a reverse ssh tunnel outward. Preferably secured with a key you send to them so their reused passwords aren't the only thing keeping people out. You should also restrict it by IP range to whatever machine they're coming from.

If the vendor refused any of my security stipulations for their audit I'd invite them to come to me and do the audit onsite. Of course they might threaten to shutdown your CRM but then you can always sue for breach, or better yet just name and shame them online since obviously they don't care about their customers security. Usually if you're processing credit cards anywhere then PCI compliance dictates the exact ways they can be provided access for the audit.

Make sure you have a permanently opened bug report about the security problems. Maybe they do look at those and want to fix them but other priorities come first, or their developers could be hopelessly unaware even though support/engineering knows how bad it is. Most of the time there is someone in the organization that knows and cares but doesn't have the ability to task anyone to fix it. In any case, it's helpful to reference this ticket each year when the auditors want to know why you aren't rolling over and playing nice like the rest of their customers.

You aren't supposed to use a phone in a theater. It's courtesy not to use a phone in lots of cases.. in the line while waiting for your sandwich, in a meeting or conference with lots of other people, etc.

Make a courtesy area that people are allowed to use their phone and make an airline rule that you can't use a phone and that is fine. Making it illegal because you think it's rude is ridiculous. What if there is an ACTUAL emergency. My parents aren't very good with text and they always know when I'm on a flight. If I got a call from them while I was flying it might be a life-or-death thing.

Your wife is 9 months pregnant and you get a call from her doctor, do you answer it?

I doubt the viewers are actually that unhappy. By saying this rogue is stirring up controversy, it in fact will stir up controversy. People who don't care will start tuning in to see what the fuss is about. Regular watchers will keep watching to see if he finally fails.

If it's too distruptive I'm sure they'll change the rules, but right now they're probably just loving the extra attention for the show.

In managed environments you honestly have to do this. Windows (or the drivers) is real stupid about which band it wants to use so 90% of your devices hop on 2.4Ghz, which is congested already with all your neighbors also being on it. If you've got 100 people in a 5th floor downtown office it can get awful even if you put a bunch of APs in.

So we make two SSIDs, one for 5G and disable it on the 2.4 radio.

Having played with cheap quadcopters, I feel there is a valid answer to this.

Their battery life is shit and turbulence ruins any chance of it being a stable platform for imaging. Even if you fix it so they hover okay you'll still have issues having it follow a vehicle. Granted I'm not sure how well the drones they're using cope with any of this either.

Also you gotta remember they're not looking for people crossing the border, they're looking for drugs. Or any other high value target that gets them money or press. If they saw an individual crossing a border they would probably just phone the local PD to check it out. It sounds like they're tailing boats and cars with the drones.

I wish they would devote 8-10% of their resources to making their voice recognizer worth a damn. It was hilariously bad on xbox 360 and then I watched some xbox one launch parties and saw what a travesty it still was.

I agreed with you until Windows 8 came along and could cold boot to GUI in less than 3 seconds. I would still agree for servers. Boot up speed doesn't matter if you never shut down, but the market is changing.

Boot speed matters if you spinup and shutdown instances all the time. It also matters on the desktop, both markets are larger than the "pure server" market. So you can either maintain two boot sequences for different purposes or you can put all your attention into the new sequence. The advantage of the second is that even people who don't need fast boot now are learning how the new stuff works.

And it sucks, but that doesn't mean it can't be improved and made as good as the old system or better.

Except most telemarketers just changed their system to ignore those tones and continue the call for X amount of time or dead air or whatever.

Instead of this I built a PBX for my house back when I had a house phone. You had to dial my extension to talk to me (the extension was in the greeting). It cut telemarketing calls by 100% but having to explain to non-technical family why they had to dial an extension was a bit rough.

Now I only use a cellphone. I still get automated calls occasionally. What we need is a widely accepted captcha for phones, with white listing for people who call you often. ... probably won't happen because disability laws would prevent it. I'm not sure if TDD could/would accept something like that.

The summary was painful to read so I checked the article and found it a direct copy. As an example:

“To my knowledge, the training planes are the only ones in the Air Force fast enough to make a bird strike lethal, and with a windshield too flimsy to deflect one,”

I know it's a direct quote from a "one-time Air Force pilot" but you need to exercise some editorial control and clean that shit up. How about:

"To my knowledge, the training planes are the only ones in the Air Force with a windshield too flimsy to deflect a lethal bird strike at high speeds."

You would expect retribution for not turning in a key? How silly. I would agree if you decided to install your own lock but if you're just holding a key the company gave you, it's their responsibility to hold on to another copy.

The entire story, no matter what you think about the person, is a ludicrous example of bad network maintenance. If they had proper config backups they don't need the password, just reboot the routers/switches/whatever and reload the config with a new password. Don't like downtime from a person leaving and taking the only copy of the passwords with him? Use TACACS or any other AAA login scheme to handle users.

In fact, not using AAA is negligence in itself. Without it you don't have an audit trail of changes made on the network so you're just guessing who made changes.

You could argue, probably correctly, that these things were his responsibility, but that would mean that the city was leaving the entire network administration and maintenance in one persons hands, no backup person or trainee to handle continuity if the network engineer dies suddenly. Nobody to take over for them if they go on vacation. That points to management negligence.

Finally, their abuse of city resources to put this guy in prison for 5 years as a CYA is really reprehensible. They never had an outage. It's pretty sad when everyone involved in a non-violent, non-criminal action can't sit down at the end of it and apologize, or reach an agreement that doesn't put a person in prison.

Maybe this is the new "hearing voices"

Debian has a habit of not using things until they work. I expect they would fix most of the issues or they wouldn't ship it.

Maybe not. Your wrist has major arteries (veins? I dunno) close the the skin. Placing something to cool you there will cause the blood to carry it throughout your body.

I found out someone had made a peltier cooler for a person who can't sweat a while back. I wanted one so I google searched for it but apparently nobody makes them. Hopefully the MIT guys will actually come up with a cheap product for everyone.

And I think I could summarize it by finishing the sentence he was going for:

"Don't talk to the police... without a lawyer."

First, if you're brought in for interrogation they have already "arrested" you. I.e., put you in handcuffs in the back of the car, no you aren't free to go, that sort of thing. The police officer says he's let a couple of people go who he knew were innocent after their interrogation. You don't describe the circumstances so we'll never know if he found out they were innocent after talking with them and their lawyer, or if they just talked. Even if the person just talked to the cop without a lawyer present and they decided to let him go, that's taking a big chance considering you don't know if you'll get the cop with the heart of gold going into it.

The cop is trained to talk like a good guy because they want to coerce a confession out of criminals. Even with that in mind, there are times when things don't add up in the cop mind and they decide the person is guilty. I've been in a couple of real far-fetched situations and tried to explain to the cop what was happening (things like, my mom buying a car one day so I'm driving a car with no tags. She hasn't yet signed the title. I'm in a state where she bought the car, she lives in a different state and I live in a third state. She bought it used from someone out of a parking lot so I'm trying to explain all this while praying the guy didn't just steal the car and sell it to my mom..)

So yeah, luckily they didn't take me down to the station. They didn't handcuff me. If they had handcuffed me I would've stopped talking then and asked for a lawyer because having watched the video I know, from what the cop even said, you aren't talking your way out of handcuffs. They are taking you to jail.

As far as evidence entered into the courtroom, I think you'll find that each side is allowed to present evidence however they see fit and the cops/DA will spin it towards you being guilty. That's IF your case goes to trial because the DA is going to lean hard on you to take a plea bargain (saves money for them).

Here's the situation (happened to my friend):

My friend and a buddy are hanging out after going to the shooting range together. Later that night drunken argument of some kind happens, guy pulls friends gun on him (unloaded apparently) and guy leaves the apartment with my friends gun. He throws that gun in the bushes. My friend locks up the buddies gun and figures the dude will sober up and come by the next day to get his gun.

Buddy calls the cops. They show up at 3:00am, arrest friend, confiscate gun. They don't believe the story (I'm not even sure I believe the story but whatever.. it's a story)

The buddy told the cop that my friend pointed the buddies gun at him, so he grabbed the other gun and fled. At the grand jury, the buddy decides the story isn't suspicious enough so he alters his testimony to say the friend broke into his car.

That right there should be a lawyer's paradise. They should have had enough evidence to show the buddy is an unreliable witness and dismiss the whole thing, but the DA goes to my friend who's still in jail and says this: It's your first felony, we'll get you probation only if you plea bargain now (oh, plus fines and this all being on his record and things..) the caveat being if he fights it then the plea goes away and they'll push for 5-20 years in prison. Additionally he doesn't qualify for appointed representation because his salary (which was lost due to him being in jail) is too high.

So what would you do in that situation? Go to prison on principal because you're innocent and your buddy is a poor liar, but somehow they made the case stick? Do you take that chance or accept the plea bargain?

I really suggest you retain a lawyer or pursue law if you think you're onto something new and exciting. The truth of the matter is that the 5th amendment is there to protect anyone who may be innocent and you can't know what circumstances they would need to use those rights without careful study of the law (lawyers can research and find example cases for you for a fee if you wish)