Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"
"Trump can't be elected for more than two terms."
There is more than one Trump.
Dynasties. They're a thing.
6994 posts • joined 31 May 2010
"Trump can't be elected for more than two terms."
There is more than one Trump.
Dynasties. They're a thing.
"everything else is alternative facts and fake news"
And? So? What does that mean?
If the people whose votes actually matter only care about alternative facts and fake news then why does the truth, evidence or actual facts matter? Have you even read 1984? It has some lessons about how you can run a post-truth nation that I think you missed.
I promise you: Steve Bannon didn't miss those lessons at all.
Uh...what? "He made the promise, it's up to him to keep it within the bounds of the law and the Constitution of the United States."
Stop right there, buddy. That's not how this works. Trump made promises. Trump drained the swamp. Trump shook up Washington. Everything that didn't happen exactly as he said it would is because of obstruction by disgusting progressive liberals who hate America. The only way to make America great again is to elect Trump a second time. And then a third! And a fourth! Never elect someone who is not Trump!
This thing where you think Trump voters are going to look at Trump's record as though he hast o play by any rules whatsoever is...wrong. That simply isn't how his base performs communes with alternate facts.
"But to what end? Now Trump has blown his load early, he's got nothing to do but twiddle his thumbs for 4 years."
There is plenty he hasn't ruined yet. Give him time.
I did not disagree that the people - both those in charge and those being led - actively want the Brawndoing of America...I'm just saying that it's ridiculously shortsighted. Once the 1% have sucked every last bent copper out of America, which nation will take them in and let them repeat the process?
Okay, well, the UK and Australia...but really, they'll probably have ruined themselves by the time the US milked dry anyways...
If you don't educate your electorate where will the skill come from to create an economy that can enrich the 1%?
If you don't allow your economy to enrich the 99%, how will that money ever find its way to the 1%?
The 1% can only buy so much stuff from one another...
And the best way to weaken an enemy from the inside is polonium.
If the bad guys take over, you do what you are expected to do: fight 'em until you can't.
That is what I expect them - and everyone else - to do. Full stop.
These companies oppose one particular executive order, and not Trump in general
Which makes them collaborators. Anyone who works with the enemy, for any reason...
Senior managers are why marketing is such a clusterfuck.
Sorry, not quite correct. You're confusing layers of the OSI model.
Standards with multiple lanes - which includes the 4-lane 10GbE standards - split the signals at the physical layer and then reconstitute them at the physical layer.
Say, for example, that you had 10Gbit of data coming into your XAUI-based 10GbE NIC. The 10GbE silicon would split the data stream (which it sees as a stream of 1s and 0s, not at packets) into 4 lanes of traffic and fire them out to the interface.
The interface would then either dump the signals onto copper as radio waves (each lane being it's own chunk of spectrum) or forward these to an optical transceiver. If sent via copper then the interface and silicon on the receiving end need to be able speak the same number of lanes with the same kind of encoding. So if you are using XAUI you are probably using 10Gbase-CX4 as your copper medium, for example, and you'll need some silicon somewhere in there that can pick up the 4 lanes of traffic emitted and put that back into a single 10Gbit stream that gets dumped onto the PCIe bus.
If, however, there are optical transceivers in play this is different again. The optical transceiver will take the data stream it gets (4 lane, 10 lane or just one lane) and convert that into light according to the standard it is designed for. This may mean that a 10Gbit stream from the application layer is broken into 4 2.5Gbit streams at the NIC silicon then reconstituted into a single 10Gbit optical stream that then goes through the same process in reverse.
It's also equally possible that your single 10Gbit stream goes from application layer all the way to the transceiver as a single 10Gbit stream, but the transceiver then cuts it into 100 different colours before firing down the fiber.
When optical transceivers are involved the general rule of thumb (that doesn't always apply, but let's ignore that for a moment) is that if you have two optical transceivers that speak the same optical standard they can communicate with one another, regardless of the underlying silicon/copper signal architecture. If, however, you are trying to connect using copper (I.E. forgoing the use of expensive transceiver hardware) then you can only connect up nodes if the underlying silicon can understand one another.
Hope that helps.
Why would Intel buy Supermicro servers? Intel make their own server boards.
Elon Muck is a goddamned collaborator.
I can think of at least three different ways to do this that don't break physics. Backdooring crypto is a lot harder than some metamaterials tech.
Given that vOneCloud is just a "rebranded" OpenNebula with some of the install effort already done for you, I'm willing to bet that's in the manual somewhere. Most likely some thing you change in a .yaml file in /etc/ somewhere.
Completely disagree. If you have to tinker with the guts of something to make it work, the thing isn't worth running in the first place. If, however, you can get back up and running by taking workloads/data/config and reinjecting into a clean setup and be up and running in minutes, you're golden.
Desired state configs with software that actually works is infinitely better than boosting one's own ego welding disparate pieces of shite together. I don't want to be indespensible, nor to make some other IT guy indespensible. I want a turnkey solution. And would ya look at that, they actually exist.
If I ever get to the point where I need to start worrying about "scale" enough that I am breaking the solutions on the table, then I'm in the world where I can just turn to VCE or Microsoft and buy my clouds pre-canned at rack scale.
Remember that different approaches make sense at different scales. Just because it's financially viable for Google to lock a bunch of PhDs in a room and have them reinvent the wheel every 18 months doesn't mean that's remotely rational for someone talking about setting up a two site solution in some colos.
Beauty of small deployments? I can test it all at the scale I intend to use for the next few years before I deploy. We'll worry about bigger once there's enough revenue to hire dedicated full time nerds to babysit. And that's an increasingly long way off, as the turnkey stuff gets better and better.
If I weld it together out of hope and BBQed unicorns, how do my business partners continue the solution after I've been whacked by the tiny handed fuhrer's jackbooted Twitter gestapo?
I intend to start with Backup as a Service and DR as a Service, but want to offer basic Infrastructure as a Service rather quickly. I also want a platform capable of delivering Platform as a Service as a vet and verify the templates for such.
There is money to be made there in the simple fact that not everyone is going to put their information into the tiny, tiny hands of the USA. Beyond that, there is value in being a local provider. Someone who can take your data, shove it on a hard drive and drive it down to you after an outage event.
I don't want to challenge Azure for every little thing, nor Amazon. It would be nice, but doing so is more expensive than it is remunerative. I just want to milk the most lucrative parts, and the ones where people are more likely to want to "buy local".
I cannot see the e-mails on comments, but you can contact me directly through http://www.trevorpott.com
Claiming a final winner will be quite the journey, I think. A lot of learning to do before I get there.
Who needs to go toe to toe? They want to make billions. I'm happy carving out a few hundred thousand a year. An irrelevance to them, but the ability to copy my customers' data onto a hard drive and drive it down the road to them when things go phut is something that actually matters to some folks.
I don't want the whole pie, mate. Just a nice, comfortable niche. :)
IIRC, ProxMox doesn't do full SDDC-style isolation. That said, it's been a couple of years since I really dug into it, it's probably worth looking at again.
Not having the billing piece might be a bit of a killer though...
Open source. No real money for marketing, what ya going to do? ;)
That said, the VM provided seems fine. I've been poking at it for about a week now, and I can't see anything compromising about it. It just seems like someone packaged up OpenNebula on top of CentOS 7 and did the standard customizations so that when you deploy from OVA it doesn't do silly things like have its networking explode.
Having tried to install OpenNebula from scratch onto CentOS myself, I have to say I appreciate the packaging. OpenNebula isn't the easiest thing to get up and running the way it should be.
That said, I do think I might actually know someone who knows someone who is part of the vOneCloud team. Worth pointing it out to them. ;)
Dude, it was like 5 in the morning and they were servers flying through clouds.
It will change down the road if one of the big vendors has sufficiently good reason to make it change. Alternately, you can use SimpliVity's technology to provide dedupe without necessarily using it as the underpinning of an HCI-like storage solution. There are plenty of ways to skin that cat, but I am putting my money on "HPE gets Microsoft to change the rules".
Change. It's the only constant in the universe.
I hope WD buys them. Makes great SSDs. Lots of SSDs. The most SSDs. For the love of Jibbers someone start making more SSDs!
I'm sick of this supply problem.
Man, if only I wasn't bound by NDA, I'd kick your ass so hard over this bullshit FUD...
Sorry, but you are presenting alternative facts as truths here.
Data loss events with Scale were way back in the old days before Scale was HCI, and IIRC, they involved not doing things as per the manual. Since then, a lot has changed. The entire underlying Scale storage platform has changed - at least twice - as has Scale's business model. (They've gone from external storage to HCI.)
I simply do not believe that there have been spontaneous data loss events with the Scale HCI platform, especially since the conversion to the HEAT storage engine. Indeed, I've had quite the run of bad hard drives (thanks, Dell) myself, and the system has adjusted brilliantly to each event.
Also, you know, I have spent literally hundreds of hours over the past year putting a concerted effort into trying to break Scale, to little avail. (There is geek cred to being able to bug report neat things in front of a Slack channel full of many of one's professional heroes.)
Scale isn't the most feature rich solution out there. This isn't because KVM is in some way limited, but becuase Scale automate or choose not to expose all features to the client. Fair enough. That's a design choice.
But what they do expose is pretty badass. It's easy to use, and above all it is solid. I bet my own business on Scale. Many of my customers now run Scale. My lab's infrastructure runs on Scale. I kick the crap out of their stuff - both GA and beta - all day, every day and have been doing so for over a year now.
There is nothing wrong with Scale Computing's HCI solutions. Oh, I could give a seminar on where I think they are off on business focus in one area, or where I don't think partnerships or development are going fast enough. I've had those conversations with them any number of times. But the tech itself is solid.
As for discussions of market share being too small, well...I'm bound by NDA and can't go into detail, but you are (unsurprisingly) not accurate here either. Scale has enough flowing through to justify an IPO, but they are also patient enough to wait for the right time. This SimpliVity deal has proven that "right now" isn't it.
And why should they? Between existing customers, and some of the deals in late stages they'll be profitable soon enough. Scale's channel partners are enthusiastic to the point of religion, and their customers (myself included) are basically a cult.
Scale only has to play the long game - and believe me, they're aware of all the possible scenarios, as we debate it all in excruciating detail regularly - and they'll win. They can either buy out their backers and stay a privately held company, or IPO at time of their choosing. Their backers seem (so far) cool with the idea of taking time and aren't pushing for some massively leveraged IPO with shockingly punitive run rates gushing red ink.
Scale has problems, don't get me wrong. any company does. What they aren't is a company that peddles broken gear. Debate the features or "inflexibility" or various design choices all you want, but don't spread "alternative facts" about them. They don't deserve it, and neither do El Reg's readers.
Just admit it, you're the TimeCube guy, aren't you?
That's a fantastic thing. removing the ability to completely censor information is always a good thing.
@Swarthy: except everything you said was bullshit.
Your choices were "everyone has their throat slit, their families' throat's slit, and everyone they ever knew's throat's slit" (Trump) or "a smallish chunk of people get beheaded but for the most part everything is status quo" (Clinton). Or, you could vote that you, personally, only get slapped in the face, while most of the rest of the country is randomly pushed into vats of acid (third party candidates).
Of course, you also knew full well that voting third party was futile and was never, ever going to amount to anything. But you voted that way anyways, instead of considering anyone other than yourself.
Your system sucks. Fix it. But don't waste your vote when so much is on the line. Join a political party and get them to change how they do things. Had this been Sanders versus Trump we wouldn't be in this situation. That's an example of where the system broke down, and nobody seems to give enough of a fuck in the US to actually fix it.
At least here in Canada we're having massive national debates about virtually all aspects of our electoral process, in large part because you guys showed us what not to do.
P.S. No third party stood a chance. This isn't because third parties can't win - the US has had changes in the bipartisan setup over it's history - but because your third party candidates were fucking lunatics. They didn't have a clue what they were doing and lacked either enough charisma to fake it or the osmium testes to just bullshit straight through. None of your third party candidates had a complete platform that was ready to lead a nation, nor enough money to buy one after the fact.
If you want a viable third party, get a platform together, get some politicians with history and cred to back it, build some consensus, put together enough money to make a real run of it, and you'll probably win. Trump has shown us that the US is ready for a third way. There just don't happen to be any leaders (or financiers) capable of forging that path.
@jimdandy: noone in their right mind would leave Canada to live in the United States. That's like moving out of an outdated condo to live in a cadmium tailings pond.
Whatever you're smoking, you should probably stop.
If you voted Gary Johnson I absolutely blame you. You know damn well how close the vote was, and you chose to shaft your fell Americans anyways. Sometimes, you have to hold your nose and vote strategically. This was one of those times.
You failed. You deserve everything that follows.
@Whiznot: not all American votes are equal. And the Americans that matter love the Nazi fuckwit and his entourage of hate.
@Lars Europeans have faced Trump-like decisions in 2016, and will be facing lots of them in 2017. As for the whole "you're not American, so it's not your problem" that you're trying to spew here...sorry, I don't accept it.
I'm Canadian. America heavily influences everything about our country down to the smallest detail. The difference is, we don't get to vote on who is screwing us over. We tend to be very - very - aware of USian politics. More so at times than our own.
Yes, the US had a shit choice. But it was a choice. And ultimately it chose quite possibly the least capable person on the planet. One who is driven entirely by a narcissistic need for fame and popularity. One whose only most vocal support base consists of racists, xenophobes, nationalists and actual neo-nazis. As he is driven entirely by who flatters him, he is going to follow through with threat of things like "putting identifiable groups on lists", and all the horrors that will follow.
In the meantime and between time he is going to ruin their economy, your economy, my economy and even the socio-political military alliance that enforces the balance of power in the world. For double-plus bad, the one leader who is flattering of him - Putin -now functionally controls US foreign policy...and that's going to end really, really badly.
@Jo_seph_B: the choices were shit, but Trump was still quite clearly the worst of the two. Both would have been bad for the US, but only Trump supports the alt-reich and promises to put identifiable groups on lists.
Never. Stop. Punching. Nazis.
If it came right down to it, a war with Russia is far better for the US than one with China. Sad that you can't see that.
Just because you didn't vote for Trump doesn't mean you aren't responsible for him. Anyone who voted for Trump or chose not to vote are directly responsible.
Those who voted for the other offering are indirectly responsible, because they neither did enough to get the vote out to prevent the neo-facists from taking over and, collectively, they promoted an political party and series of ideologies that led to the alienation of nearly half the country. And more importantly, the half whose votes matter far more per capita than those of people in dense urban agglomerations.
There might be people in the US who are blameless. People who were ardently pro-Sanders, worked their asses off to see him nominated, then continued to work their asses off to get the democrats to grok the problems ignoring economic disparity was causing. If those same people fought the good fight to the bitter end, held their nose and voted Clinton, all the while throwing every bit of effort they had to get as many people as humanly possible to vote against Trump...then they are among the rare few who are blameless.
But as a collective whole, the US populace is overwhelmingly responsible for the shitpile the world is facing. Just as the Canadian people were responsible for electing Harper, and for subsequently getting duped by the store-bought mannequin that promised all the right things but never had the courage to implement them.
The difference is, it doesn't matter who we elect in Canada. Oh, yes, Harper was bad for a Canadian. He broke some social mores and did some questionable things. But a Canadian establishment conservative is almost indistinguishable from a Canadian establishment Liberal. We might get wrapped up in minor economic bun fights, but none of them are going to fundamentally alter what it means to be Canadian, or what Canada stands for. We're too risk averse for that. (Though there are some populists certainly trying with the latest Tory leadership race...)
Trump, on the other hand, is not, was not, was never going to be and won't be anything like a traditional candidate. He's more like playing Russian roulette with a live nuke. (Ignore the part where he actually is a Russian sockpuppet and now controls 1400 nukes.)
Not doing enough (or anything) makes you just as guilty as voting in the monsters. This isn't some game we're playing. This isn't some mild version of politics where there are two parties and all the candidates from both are effectively identical. Trump was billed as, billed himself as, and has promised loudly to be a huge game changer.
Trump can only feed his messiah complex by creating chaos and then proclaiming loudly that only he can fix it. This was known from the very beginning. And the American people either actively encouraged it or simply let it happen.
They're guilty. Of electing him, and of everything that follows.
USians just voted that monster in. Nobody to pretend "the people" aren't guilty of the shit their government gets up to any more.
Americans knew exactly what they were getting in Trump. Ex-fucking-actly. And they elected him anyways.
Sorry, but the American people are just as guilty as those who lead them.
Remember the good old days, where you were a tinfoil hatter if you thought anti-malware companies were writing malware?
I mean, maybe they were, maybe they weren't, but there was a certain level of trust that was normalized that I miss. Nowadays for every awful conspiracy theory you can come up with, it seems like it's only a matter of ti-
I trust companies that have had a good security/privacy scare more than those that haven't. Nothing causes a rethink on the howto than getting caught with your pants down. I'm willing to bet Google have refined their approaches aggressively. Remember: they're academics. Give a nerd a puzzle...
"We do not rely on internal network segmentation or firewalling as our primary security mechanisms"
Doesn't say they don't use firewalls. Just says they're not 1990s about it like the arrogant believers in eggshell security. Willing to bet Google are at the forefront of automated incident response. None of this "nothing can get through MY defenses" machismo. Instead: "things WILL get through, but we have crazy quarantine and RCA responses automated into every layer".
You know, like actual security experts would approach things. Anyone who uses firewalls as the primary security mechanism either doesn't have an adequate budget, or doesn't care enough about the data...
(Hell, even salting and hashing your passwords in a database is accepting that firewalls can and do fail to keep the bad guys out. C'mon!...)
That move sparked the ire of Carnegie Mellon University CERT boffin Will Dormann who says the toolkit significantly improved the exploit mitigation chops of Windows 10 and should be maintained, not dropped.
Maintaining the enhanced mitigation toolkit requires money, and doesn't directly contribute to the short term quarterly goals of Endpoint Antichrist. Nor does it help to push everyone onto Windows 10, some sort of subscription or provide any additional lock-in. The only purpose it serves is to make things better for customers.
Endpoint Antichrist hasn't given any fucks about customers thus far, I am unsure why anyone would think he'd start now. Or at any point in the future.
I am, however, impressed by the engineers and/or marketdroids who convinced Endpoint Antichrist to allow resources to be spent on Windows-internal security mitigation technologies. That must have been a truly fantastic conversation. To convince him to release even a bent copper for use on something that threatened to benefit customers...hat's off to 'em!
Because the thing we need to be doing is creating a weapon that turns mammals into reavers. Yep. That's exactly what the world needs as the neo-fascists rise to power.
yadda yadda context
Nope. The context here is the assertion that people can't be "traumatized" by looking at files. That's the bullshit assertion for which I'm taking you to task. If you want to have a fight about the propriety of Microsoft rifling through people's files an unknown amount for unknown reasons and for unknown masters, well, we can argue about that too, if you'd like.
You truly are a clueless worthless peice of shit, and I deeply regret the time I have wasted READING YOUR WORTHLESS FUCKING TRASH.
Life's full of bad decisions.
You make the claims about what you've done as a journalist yet you judge me and what I have suffered based on a few posts on here?
Actually, I don't make a lot of claims about "what I've done as a journalist". Usually, I talk about what I've done as a consultant, or as a sysadmin. Sometimes even as an analyst. I've actually done very little as s journalist. Oh, I've done research into some things that is probably worth a bit of braggadocio, and I've cultivated contacts (which I hear is an important thing), but I still consider myself quite "green" as a journalist.
As for judging you, I think you need to look at it more as questioning you. Based on what you have written, the tone you present and your word choice I absolutely question the veracity of your statements. I question that veracity based on what you write. And yes, that is a form of judgement. It is not, as you seem to imply, a final or binary judgement, but what you write absolutely influences and informs my opinion of you.
That, believe it or not, is an important part of being a journalist: taking the information you have available to you and making judgements. You choose what to pursue, and what not. Who to believe, and who not.
One part of handling people is that you work their emotions to get them to reveal things. This not only helps you further classify them, but it helps the journalist find the truth of something. Truth is more than just facts. It contains intricacies of motivation, the interplay of individuals, events, emotions and circumstances.
Truth versus simple facts is the difference between describing the reality of living with crushing poverty and quoting bland statistics. It is injecting sympathy, empathy, theory of mind and a sense of shared humanity into stories instead of dehumanizing, distancing and ostracizing the subject of your stories.
With each new post a little bit more is revealed. How I perceive you changes and evolves based on that information. So far, I have enough information to have serious questions as to your veracity. I also question your capability for empathy. More data is required to make additional calls.
HURRY UP AND FUCKING DIE YOU WORTHLESS PIECE OF SHIT.
Working on it.
Given how you respond to other people's pain, I strongly suggest it is you who is the sociopath.
Ah, wouldn't that be nice? Sociopaths don't have to worry about so many things. I wish I was one!
It would be nice, for example, to be able to kill a mosquito without feeling horrible about it for weeks, months or even years afterwards. I'd really love to dispense with this part of me that insists on trapping them alive and dumping them outside. It's super annoying because they keep eating me.
Then there's that whole "inability to read the news without becoming super depressed because I tend to over empathize with the people discussed". It's a bummer, and it means I have to tightly control what I read, and when. Otherwise I become depressed and anxious to the point that it interferes with my ability to sleep or do my job.
I'd love to be a sociopath. Not caring about the feelings and problems of others, being able to dehumanize them or to lack a theory of mind such that I am unable to imagine that they suffer not only what I suffer, but also in ways I (hopefully) don't, won't and maybe even can't.
Given the diversity in our huge population, there's no reason to believe that I, personally, am able to feel every feeling there is to feel, or to think that I would respond in the same way to something as someone else, or that their experiences would mirror my own. Too much science exists to show that different people experience the same events in different ways.
A sociopath wouldn't care about that. They might not even consider or even be able to conceive of that. Several, for example, have tried to convince me that all people are innately selfish and every single thing, even sympathy is based in selfishness. That is how many sociopaths see not only themselves, but literally everyone else. They can't feel empathy, so they can't conceive that others feel this thing that they cannot.
Most people aren't like that. Most people feel sympathy and empathy. I suspect, deep down, that i feel it more than most, and possibly for a greater circle of people than most. Either way, it's wearing. Especially now, with the rise of the neo-fascists. I wish I was cold and unfeeling. Unfortunately for me, I am not.
And I have no sympathy for people who wear their emotions on their sleeves, "feel" everything, and so on. That should be obvious. Natural selection would've "selected them out" back in the cave-days. Unfortunately, in the modern era, NEGATIVE genetics like *that* are being re-enforced by enriching them via wimpy-ass LAWSUITS. Idiocracy anyone? 'Nuff.
And sometimes you just have to admit that Patton was right. "Man up". PTSD is real, but a swift kick in the ass should be a major part of the therapy.
Say that to my face. I fucking dare you.
First off, yes, those sorts of videos do exist. Boy do I (and a lot of traumatized journos) wish they didn't. And yes, there are scary groups of horrible people doing exactly these sorts of terrible things. It's one of the reasons that, for example, those ISIS fuckpantaloons are so hated. Though there are a whole bunch of genocidal asshats in sub-saharan Africa and south-east Asia that also get their rocks off doing that sort of shit and then posting it online, too.
As for the ""snuff video" hysteria of a few decades ago"...you know, that wasn't entirely overhyped. I can remember one video in particular that I ran across that I couldn't close fast enough. What I saw still haunts me in the dark hours of the night as I lie in bed trying to sleep...and I am pretty sure that having closed it less than 10 seconds in to a two minute .avi, I missed the really horrible stuff. I don't buy into the idea that organized crime was depopulating small towns to make snuff porn for the deranged westerner or any of that...but you know what? There's some really sick fucking shit on the internets.
Never, ever doubt the depth of man's inhumanity to man.
Secondly, regarding your "YOU HAVE NO FUCKING CLUE WHAT HELL I HAVE EXPERIENCED. And it is not for you to know, either. But I do know, from first hand experience, what lows people are capable of." diatribe...put simply: I don't believe you. If you had seen the lows of humanity I'd fully expect you to be capable of empathy towards those who have also had to deal with witnessing traumatic events, and your posts indicate that you don't have that empathy.
Unless, of course, you're a sociopath. They tend to be able to take a "just suck it up and move on with it" approach to witnessing trauma. I'd hardly call that a positive thing, but it is what it is...
Big difference between watching some grainy TV bomb video from a get at 40k feet bomb some truck and watching a 9 year old girl get gang raped and then burned to death with acid. Especially if she's the first of hundreds. That day.
Humans are awful, and it is quite clear you've live so sanitized a life that you haven't the first clue exactly how awful it is that we get. ...or how that affects non-sociopaths.
But you're right about one thing, unintentional that it is. A lot of people would be shocked to realize just how common sociopaths really are.
HAH. You're funny. Everything he touches with his tiny hands will turn to shit. He is probably the only person currently in any position of real power who could try to launch an anti-trust investigation against monopolists and have that end up being worse for the customer. If you're counting on him to solve literally anything, I have several river traversal mechanisms I think you may be interested in...
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017