dedward

66 ms·

691.
by dedward 16y ago
That creates a real net neutrality issue, wheras the simple issue of rather imbalanced peers doesn't. Free peering only works, and is only reasonably fair as long as traffis is, on average, about equal. If one network is really genreating
692.
by dedward 16y ago
Those smaller providers will be paying for transit with someone larger, no?
693.
by dedward 16y ago
At a basic level - a court order from the US (whatever level of court) issued directly to, say, a registrar in the UK would have absolutely no legal standing as far as the registrar was concerned. The US may have a heck of a lot of swing wh
694.
by dedward 16y ago
None. I messed it up all by msyelf.
695.
by dedward 16y ago
It doesn't make it okay, it just makes it not a "net neutrality" issue. It's more of a "good neighbour" issue.
696.
by dedward 16y ago
IT has nothing to do with net neutrality, but it does have to do with the stability and reliability of the internet at large. If everyone, for example, tweaked TCP in different, incompatible ways, we'd have contention all over and things j
697.
by dedward 16y ago
I realize that it's technically possible - but what I'm wondering is if icann (or someone else) actually did this without involving the registrar, or if the registrar simply complied with some kind of order.
698.
by dedward 16y ago
What I want to know - was the registrar involved in this, and acting on instructions from US authorities, or acting on instructions from ICANN, or was the domain record actually modified at a higher level than the registrar had control over
699.
by dedward 16y ago
I wish this would automatically omit locally attached networks -although easy enough to do from the command line.
700.
by dedward 16y ago
edit: CCV proves that you at one time had access to the CCV number. Online merchants are supposed to comply with PCI-DSS - not store your CCV ever, never transmit your number unencrypted, never store cardholder information unencrypted, plus
701.
by dedward 16y ago
Thanks - that's awesome. Pandora is back. Nice piece of code - tons of interesting possibilities there.
702.
by dedward 16y ago
Cool from the hacker perspective - but I can't help thinking it could equally have ended up a "How I caused an electrical/grease/plastic fire in my back yard, causing a toxic lithium-ion battery explosion, and definitely ruined the bird."
703.
by dedward 16y ago
As soon as we have a reliable app that competes with BBM for ease of use and reliablity and is cross platform, everyone I know who can afford it will immediately dump their blackberries and switch to Android or iPhones. Staying in touch wi
704.
by dedward 16y ago
It's only dumb and short-sighted until you look at the amount of money at stake. BBM truly is the only app holding a great many people back from ditching their blackberries for android or i-devices. The second we find a reliable way to tra
705.
by dedward 16y ago
Yup - and he was offerred this earlier on in the story - though when he pushed the police on the pat-down procedure, they wouldn't commit to anything. They said they "might" have to pat him down before escorting him (which seems reasonable
706.
by dedward 16y ago
The problem then is that the TSA is tasked with protecting an area that also contains people who do not intend to board aircraft - the airport design is faulty - there is no way for people who just need to pass customs and leave the airport
707.
by dedward 16y ago
Currently.
708.
by dedward 16y ago
This makes a lot of sense. Had someone with authority said "Sir, unfortunately, the way the airport is laid out, you must enter the secured area of the airport in order to leave, and therefore we have to put you through our screening proces
709.
by dedward 16y ago
He started out prepared for that - he had nowhere to be and time to kill, and felt strongly about the issue.
710.
by dedward 16y ago
It would be a waste of time - but if the airport layout would give those people access to the secured area of the airport, and there was no way to channel the connecting passengers separately from the exiting passengers, then you'd pretty m
711.
by dedward 16y ago
Because they are controversial, show you naked, expose you to x-ray, and they thought this would be a better way for people to accept it from a PR point of view. Metal detectors are non-invasive, efficient, don't take naked pictures of you,
712.
by dedward 16y ago
I know they will if you land at your first destination in the US and are catching a connecting flight - they will run you through security a second time before letting you into the secure area of the airport where you might board another ai
713.
by dedward 16y ago
I'm theorizing here - maybe someone can answer - would the flight & airport in question be laid out such that, once passing through immigration, you were still in the secure area of the airport and able to board another aircraft, or was
714.
by dedward 16y ago
This was not about airport security - he had already de-planed and was trying to leave the airport, having already passed through immigration. One of the things the US is supposed to be really big on is freedom from Big Brother. Having le
715.
by dedward 16y ago
I'm just thinking that's unlikely to happen as long as some level of competition is maintained - nobody is going to put up with a walled-in internet. As soon as the cable company does this the telco will capitalize on it like mad, and vice
716.
by dedward 16y ago
This has nothing to do with net neutrality - we're talking about routing policy, not traffic policy.
717.
by dedward 16y ago
One would imagine that this isn't even remotely close to what government agencies have in terms of crypto breaking power. Don't underestimate what a basically unlimited budget can buy you. For every instance you an go out and get they prob
718.
by dedward 16y ago
While completely true - it's not an obstacle in a simple implementation of password hashes. Any string that produces the same hash will suffice as a password - as the password is by definition anything that hashes to that value.
719.
by dedward 16y ago
Could be read that way. The point, though, was to prove the computers weren't playing automatically and that the human was the one actually making decisions - the computers were just helping with the manual non-strategic aspects of running
720.
by dedward 16y ago
Interesting in and of itself. The only reason, though, that this is necessary is due to public perception. A bunch of bots battling it out at an online poker table isn't by itself a concern for the online poker site - they get paid either

More ›