So slick, no answer again...you can dance for months can't you?
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Tom Piwowar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I'm still waiting for the better RAID solution.
>
> There is no "better" RAID solution.
> RAID is for old men who have not kept up with technology.
>
>
>
Please note. He did not say his hosting was with Godaddy, only the
name registration. I'm not sure anyone else - bluehost included -
actually offers 'private' domain info? Honestly, I'd never heard of it
before this thread.
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 10:16 PM, GK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree
Comcast (the sole reason I have still got dialup=yeeech! is that I don't
wanna ever deal with them) is dummer'n snot ...instead of cutting them off,
why not just make them agree to a surcharge for overages ...that way they
donna pissa offa no goons and make 'coupl'a bucks to boot !!
-Original
I agree with the general consensus at this point that it is not
necessary to go the private route. I also agree with Tom that you can
do better than godaddy. I suggest looking at bluehost.com --
regardless, you'll have to pay for privacy and it is not, imo, of much
value.
/gayley knight
Well, the "islands" quote may be yours, but John Kenneth Galbraith got there
first in 1958, with his "private splendor, public squalor" remark in the
Affluent Society.
--- On Sat, 8/30/08, Tom Piwowar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: Tom Piwowar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [CGUYS] reall
On Aug 29, 2008, at 7:54 PM, Tom Piwowar wrote:
Yes, Apple is stretching itself thin. Would you be willing to give
up the
revolutionary iPhone in exchange? I would not.
Well, I do not actually care about the iPhone, as evolutionary or
revolutionary they may be. Apple computers are my th
>Godaddy wants me to pay an additional $9 per
>year to them for privacy for the domain name.
>
>Is it worth it?
NO.
Your next project should be to find a better ISP.
After that you'll have to figure out how to filter out all the junk mail
godaddy will be sending you.
***
>It depends what he's doing, and just how 'secret' he wants his info to
>remain. Personally, I wouldn't bother, but I can imagine it might be
>worth it to some people.
If you don't register a domain with correct information you are breaking
the law. Of course, it is one of those laws that doesn't
>I'm still waiting for the better RAID solution.
There is no "better" RAID solution.
RAID is for old men who have not kept up with technology.
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** p
It depends what he's doing, and just how 'secret' he wants his info to
remain. Personally, I wouldn't bother, but I can imagine it might be
worth it to some people.
But make him aware that, when faced with a subpoena, or even a
strongly worded letter from an attorney, they _will_ cave. For $9 a
ye
I think we tend to agree on most things. At least, I can't recall the
last time we actually had a *disagreement*. Sometimes you do go off on
tangents though.
Now let's argue about top posting! :)
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 4:26 PM, Tom Piwowar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>VPN is of course the answe
Newbie at making a web site (better said: at creating a new domain name
& web hosting) has registered a domain name (godaddy) and paid for web
hosting (3essentials). Godaddy wants me to pay an additional $9 per
year to them for privacy for the domain name.
Is it worth it?
*
It's times like these I realize why I shouldn't even ask for clarification
from you. I'm still waiting for the better RAID solution.
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 2:10 PM, Tom Piwowar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >National security?? So little jonny can download more movies?
>
> Do you know what port
> Following up on the national security angle, please read...
> "Internet Traffic Begins to Bypass the US"
> nytimes.com/2008/08/30/business/30pipes.html
Oh no! The CIA will have to start outsourcing their spies!
*
** List
> National security?? So little jonny can download more movies?
Let's just call it for what it is: IMD. Internets of Mass Destruction. If
you don't support the fight against it, then you must hate your country.
"Keep throwing things! We have to see what sticks!"
*
>National security?? So little jonny can download more movies?
Do you know what portion of the US GNP comes from movies? That is still a
business the US dominates. Would you have us give up on that too?
Are you rooting for that right-wing vision for America: "islands of
opulence surrounded by
National security?? So little jonny can download more movies?
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Tom Piwowar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Here is my clear opinion: Comcast is a nasty piece of work and should be
> put down as a matter of national security.
>
>
>VPN is of course the answer, if you really MUST perform 'sensitive'
>tasks from unsecured networks. But personally, I can hold off doing my
>online banking until I get home. Normal websurfing and gmail I just
>don't worry about. Though I _do_ always use 'https' for gmail.
When Tony and I agree on
>Why is this? It is not just the Patriot Act. It is a lot of stuff
>that is causing this what is it?
The Patriot Act, just like torture by any other name, was just plain
stupid.
There is also the matter of 8 years of unrestrained greed, the
Administration not doing its job to protect the nat
>I think, a service like this will give you a false sense of security
>since you will be using this VPN tunnel to get to, in this case,
>hotspotvpn.com's network, but traffic beyond that is unencrypted and
>on regular the internet.
No, it provides the security that was asked for.
This use of a V
> I guess we're dealing with semantics then. The second paragraph
> doesn't use the word 'banned' at all, and it's speaking about a
> particular set of circumstances having to do with repeat offenders. It
> does NOT say "exceeding the cap will get you banned for a year" -
> that's said in a later c
> > use 'https' for gmail.
> if no vpn, but use https for gmail - wouldn't the wireless signal for
> a public connection still be in the clear transmitting your username
> and password?
No.
https uses SSL. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Sockets_Layer)
It uses public/private keys to make a
> You need to run a VPN on top of the wireless connection. This will
> give you a secure tunnel from your computer through to the VPN server.
> See a good tutorial at www.cites.uiuc.edu/vpn/security.html
The above web site has a couple of nice graphics showing what part
of the communication stream
Scientifically speaking Climate Change is the correct term. The
Climate has never stayed stable and has always fluctuated (Can anyone
say Ice Age?)
The scientific quandary is why the Climate changes. Are we
accelerating the change?
From what I have heard over time the Climate has been warm
You're in the wrong thread. this one is not about Comcast or caps,
it's about quoting a comment to an article as opposed to the article
itself.
But if we're talking about references, look at how different this
quote is (from the NYTimes
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/30/technology/30comcast.html?r
Tom that is very interesting but it also brings up a major question.
Why is this? It is not just the Patriot Act. It is a lot of stuff
that is causing this what is it?
Stewart
At 01:29 PM 8/30/2008, you wrote:
Following up on the national security angle, please read...
"Internet Traffic B
Those true believers don't call it global warming anymore, it's climate
change...as to cover anything from a bit of rain to hurricanes to cooling or
warming..
>
> As I see it, the same people who scoffed at global warming, are now well
> on the way to making the US an Internet backwater. The US's
On UUNET accounts it is very easy.
With a user name and password once it hits it limit you turn off the
account until it recycles.
With a standard ISP account it is not so easy unless you require them
to log in every time they access the account.
I have a cable account with Charter. They m
Following up on the national security angle, please read...
"Internet Traffic Begins to Bypass the US"
nytimes.com/2008/08/30/business/30pipes.html
"Since passage of the Patriot Act, many companies based outside of the
United States have been reluctant to store client information in the U.S."
"I
I'm not the one that gave a comment as a reference.
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 2:05 PM, Tom Piwowar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Get a grip. The "banned" claim was made in a *response* to the
>>article. Right now all Comcast is planning is to inform the violators
>>of the cap.
>
> Tony, you need to r
*If a subscriber goes over the limit a second time within a six-month period
after getting a warning, Comcast will suspend the customer's account for a
year.*
Banned, suspended...the end result is the same. No connectivity for a year
from the ISP.
I'm wondering why not implement these things at
>Get a grip. The "banned" claim was made in a *response* to the
>article. Right now all Comcast is planning is to inform the violators
>of the cap.
Tony, you need to read more slowly and pay better attention.
*
** List info
I guess we're dealing with semantics then. The second paragraph
doesn't use the word 'banned' at all, and it's speaking about a
particular set of circumstances having to do with repeat offenders. It
does NOT say "exceeding the cap will get you banned for a year" -
that's said in a later comment.
> Get a grip. The "banned" claim was made in a *response* to the article.
> Right now all Comcast is planning is to inform the violators of the
> cap.
>
> > The report I read said that exceeeding the cap will get you banned
> > for a year.
> >
> > http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/1504
People are complaining about bandwith caps, which I understand and I can't
even get high speed where I live.
Mike
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 8:34 AM, Tom Piwowar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> I think it shows that Comcast has crossed the line to being an arrogant,
> malevolent monopolist. It is
>The phone wiring in your house is a common loop, which is
>phone company jargon for the same electrical connection to
>all the outlets (phone jacks).
>If that loop is compromised then none of it works.
Finding the short should not be all that hard.
1) Make a diagram of your house showing the phon
You might use it for that reason, but not everyone does. It's just the
shorthand that develops in the course of learning specific jobs.
Mike
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 8:37 AM, Tom Piwowar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Each profession has its own private language.
>
> That's right and we use it to
Around here the price is about the same, with Comcast being slightly
cheaper. I doubt DSL will actually _implement_ a cap at 5gb/mo, but
more likely would follow Comcast's lead in whatever they do. But the
fact they put it in their new TOS means they think they can get away
with _some_ sort of cap.
Get a grip. The "banned" claim was made in a *response* to the
article. Right now all Comcast is planning is to inform the violators
of the cap.
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Tom Piwowar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The report I read said that exceeeding the cap will get you banned for a
> ye
>What I need to do is split the phone line as it comes into the house.
>One cable will be filtered and go to main telephones, the other cable
>will be for data--this is before it gets to the modem/router. Is the box
>I need called a DSL splitter? DSL junction box? It will be located in a
>crawl
>Each profession has its own private language.
That's right and we use it to keep people like you in your place. Asking
for the part designation is like asking a Mason about their secret signs.
*
** List info, subscriptio
>Granted, the cap of 250 gigabytes covers a huge amount of data.
>Comcast says consumers would have to send 50 million e-mails, or
>download 62,500 songs...
Actually no. I have a remote camera system that uploads images and
streams video. It is only active during off hours and is triggered by
mo
how much for the 5gb? how much to 250gb?
heard that a single hd movie is around 25gb. comcast has a problem. internet
sells of $40, cable sells for $100.
At 09:31 PM 8/29/2008, you wrote:
>250gb/mo is at least realistic. The local phone company (Frontiernet)
>is talking about 5gb/mo.
>
>On Fri
> 250gb/mo is at least realistic. The local phone company (Frontiernet)
> is talking about 5gb/mo.
That is a fairly decent limit, I doubt I would ever blow through it, but I'm
still strongly considering FIOS. I'm paying $133/month just for cable and
Internet!
***
44 matches
Mail list logo
