KCLUG

kclug@kclug.org

1 participants
3240 discussions

NIC Promiscuous Mode
by Greg Lawson 20 Jul '08

20 Jul '08

I need to demonstrate the differences of a NIC being in promiscuous mode and when it's not for a college class. Can anyone think of any good shell commands to run "before and after" which show what traffic the NIC can and can't see? Greg Lawson Rolling Hills Consolidated Library 1912 N. Belt Highway St. Joseph, MO 64506

6 7

Re: Flashing the FON device. A question about semi-automating the process if possible.
by Billy Crook 19 Jul '08

19 Jul '08

Important detail: On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 15:48, Luke -Jr <luke(a)dashjr.org> wrote: > On Saturday 19 July 2008, Billy Crook wrote: >> >> That port would have to be open, and would have to be bound to an IP >> address other than 0.0.0.0. > > On the 2200 FONs, it is.

2 1

Flashing the FON device. A question about semi-automating the process if possible.
by Oren Beck 19 Jul '08

19 Jul '08

2 or so meetings back there was some demonstration of flashing the FON devices thru the on board serial port. The operation as I seem to understand it has some complexities. One of which is needing to open circuit a lead in the comm path until after a mode change is shown. That indication showing on a terminal screen as a + sign if I recall properly. Based on that having timing issues I have not yet tried a flash here. If someone with better scripting skills than I have could script -Monitoring for that + and thence controlling either a relay or other switching device to make that connection. Hand tapping connectors reminds me conceptually of "Field Flashing" older automotive generators. Which later became obsolete for other reasons. The summary query then becomes- I wonder if a program controlled relay could make and break that serial path for semi-automating the flash process. -- Oren Beck 816.729.3645

2 1

None
by Leo Mauler 19 Jul '08

19 Jul '08

--- On Wed, 7/16/08, Luke -Jr <luke(a)dashjr.org> wrote: > On Wednesday 16 July 2008, Oren Beck wrote: > > Consider how YOU would write a RFC draft to > > sever adult from non-adult content ! > > 1. Please don't refer to immoral images as > "adult"; there are still some decent adults > left, no matter how many damn themselves with > this crud. Well, to be entirely fair "porn" has traditionally included "scenes of beings (human or otherwise) having sex", and us adults were all laughing about a recent posted link to an image of a devil having sex with a penguin. There's also the slight difference between "porn" and "instructional sex videos". Mature adults who want to spice up their home lives might buy the latter while utterly condemning the former, even though the difference between the two is largely semantic. And to top it all off, why is a photograph of a nude woman "pornography" while a painting of a nude woman is "art"? This distinction has allowed people to get away with all kinds of stuff in the Pornographic Painting Industry. Sculpture too, as you can even see "David's" tallywhacker on half a dozen websites, entirely for free. Pornographic paintings have been around for centuries. Shakespeare's "The Taming of the Shrew" is actually his first use of a "play within a play", and the outer play involves a drunken tinker who is snuck into a lord's house while the lord pretends that the tinker is actually a lord. The servants are told to provide the tinker with everything that the lord would normally get, and so one servant offers to show the tinker "his" (the lord's) collection of paintings of nude women. Some of those paintings most likely hang in modern museums and are viewed without condemnation as "crud". Immoral images can be adult, its just in how you present them. > 2. Standards on how to say "I am porn!" never work > because the porn industry does not want filters > blocking access to them. Not only do they *want* > children and others to get addicted, they certainly > aren't going to participate in something any ISP > blocks off entirely without user consent. Porn filters never work because of the sheer collective lust drive of teenage boys. There could be 100% acceptance of a porn filter and teenage boys would still get access to porn. "Dilbert" gets a few strips a year from this very topic, where Dilbert can't build a porn filter that a teenage boy can't overcome quickly. Recent News: Schoolboy downs Australia’s $84m porn filter with ease http://tinyurl.com/6m84xa What I find especially funny is that the Australian government, in response to the kid's 30 second porn filter bypass, immediately implemented a much stronger filter. The same schoolboy then bypassed the new "stronger" porn filter in about 45 minutes. However, I can think of a very good reason why the porn industry doesn't want children gaining access to their pornography: MONEY. Every child who gets on a porn website is a child who is using a credit card in an unauthorized manner, which represents the bane of the retail industry: the "refund". Sure, there are unscrupulous "fly by night" websites which don't care if children log into their websites with Daddy's American Excess Card, but established, practically mainstream porn websites aren't going to want to have potential lawsuits on their hands when Billy's parents complain to the Attorney General after Billy wanted to see boobies. They're going to want Billy not to have access in the first place. They're going to want to make him wait until he gets his first college credit card, because then his money is theirs, all theirs.

1 0

Re: Usenet NEWS vs. Bittorrent
by Leo Mauler 19 Jul '08

19 Jul '08

--- On Mon, 7/14/08, Jonathan Hutchins <hutchins(a)tarcanfel.org> wrote: > On Monday 14 July 2008 11:18:50 am Leo Mauler wrote: > > > Most of the posts are binary posts... > > What? How do you determine that? Did you download > 20,000 groups and count by hand? Ever since I started quoting NetNews statistics, the source I'm quoting from downloads all the NetNews groups 240 times daily and counts by computer. Of the NetNews daily postings, currently only 0.2% are text-only posts, which is actually a dip in the number of text-only posts (down from 0.3%). Perhaps TWC had more text-only newsgroup users than anyone expected (though that, unlike the NetNews posting statistics, is merely speculation). > I think we've had enough imaginary statistics in this > "discussion". My statistics have never been "imaginary" in this discussion. > If you cite a statistic from here out, cite a source. Jonathan, I've been posting a source since I started quoting statistics, the source I get all my NetNews numbers from. www.newsadmin.org The direct link to the type of messages posted on NetNews is at http://www.newsadmin.org/msgtype.htm. This is updated daily. The current total number of daily NetNews posts is The current percentage of NetNews posts (as of this E-mail) which are text-only is 0.2%. As of this E-mail date and time: The current percentage of jpeg/gif postings is: 50.7% The current percentage of par/rar postings is: 17.2% The current percentage of mp3 postings is: 1.1% The current percentage of avi/mpeg postings is: 0.6% The current percentage of exe/zip postings is: 0.6% Also note that Newsadmin.org does not open RAR files to determine their contents, so the jpeg/gif/avi/mpeg/mp3 numbers could be slightly underestimated.

1 0

NIC Promiscuous Mode Demo
by glawson 18 Jul '08

18 Jul '08

Thanks to all for the suggestions. I ended up just using ipconfig to show the NIC in and out of promiscuous mode, and used tcpdump with and without the -p flag to show the output. It all worked out fine. Greg ------------------------ On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 13:50 -0500, Greg Lawson wrote: > I need to demonstrate the differences of a NIC being in promiscuous > mode and when it's not for a college class. Can anyone think of any > good shell commands to run "before and after" which show what traffic > the NIC can and can't see? > > Greg Lawson > Rolling Hills Consolidated Library > 1912 N. Belt Highway > St. Joseph, MO 64506

1 0

NSFW image totally about the BSD Vs Linux "Dissing" scene - warning- no food or drink in mouth while first viewing the link
by Oren Beck 16 Jul '08

16 Jul '08

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/07/14/software-licensing-f.html Since this is on Boing Boing it's not too grody by comparison to the New Yorker cover. I will be merciful and list the link instead of trying to post the image. Let's just say- The BSD Daemon should have bought Tux flowers and chocolate first. As I said- NSFW and NSFK if you've anything in your mouth when you see the image... -- Oren Beck 816.729.3645

3 2

Nepal and proxies
by Sean Crago 15 Jul '08

15 Jul '08

I'm finally online at home, some 29 days in to my two year tour with State in Kathmandu. Town's nice, when the garbage men are running and the fuel tankers aren't. Otherwise it's hazardous to walk and the traffic's a bit a much, especially near the gas stations with their WW2-style rationing. On a more LUG-relevant note, the new ISP seems to be running some sort of Squid proxy, according to some "that host ain't responding" errors that explicitly stated they were coming from a Squid install. If they are running an HTTPS proxy as well then I am extremely nervous - Would anyone care to share a simple test to determine whether or not they are and, if possible, simple ways to bypass a transparent proxy? Bandwidth is scarce in Nepal, but I'm a touch more concerned about protecting my privacy than limiting my bandwidth consumption. Thanks, Sean

4 4

PCI Dial up Modem Recommendations
by shannon miller 14 Jul '08

14 Jul '08

I was wondering if you guys could recommend a PCI dial up modem. I have a computer that is going to someone who is hundreds of miles away and want something that will not break with kernel updates. The user is exactly that a user and will not be able to fix it if it breaks, and it will be his only way to connect to the Internet so I need something that will just work.

4 4

Wikipedia editors spread Global Warming Propaganda
by Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO 14 Jul '08

14 Jul '08

Whether you believe in Global Warming or not, I disagree with the form of editing/bullying that is going on in this case. If Wikipedia is to survive as a reliable source of information, uncluding scientific info, then they need to folow their own rules. Science should be honest or truth-seeking, no matter where it leads you. Brian P.S. Sorry for the HTML format. ________________________________ Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 3:24 PM <http://e2ma.net/oz/1189762965/1080694/spacer.gif> <http://e2ma.net/oz/1189762965/1080694/spacer.gif> <http://e2ma.net/map/view=Forward/ID=22952.1189762965/rid=b0e84081500bdd 2cf5c231ba9c81a767/send_to_friend> GreenWatchAmerica<http://e2ma.net/userdata/22952/images/e1214872374.jpg> Dear Brian, Today Lawrence Solomon, author of The Deniers <http://e2ma.net/go/1189762965/1080694/39603805/goto:http://e2ma.net/go/ 1189716471/1080616/39601790/goto:http://www.richardvigilantebooks.com> , has a great piece on National Review Online exposing how the editors of Wikipedia (supposedly the "people's encyclopedia") have become part of the global warming propaganda machine. And it's not just on Global Warming that Wikipedia pushes the left-wing line. As Larry says "Wikipedia is the people's encyclopedia only if the people are not conservatives." We reprint Larry's NRO piece in full below. Our petition to urge John McCain not to get sucked into the myth of Global Warming continues to gather steam. Next week we will do our biggest mailing yet in our push to get 100,000 names by mid-July and half a million before the GOP convention. Meanwhile GreenWatchAmerica will continue to update you on what is now clearly the Left's favorite weapon for pushing its agenda: Environmentalism twisted into an excuse for seizing control of more and more of the economy, and forcing Americans to live out the Left's dream of the good life, even if it strikes us as a nightmare. As some of you know, I got motivated on the global warming issue by the experience of editing and publishing Larry Solomon's book, which demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt, not only that "the science is not settled", but that the most eminent climate scientists also tend to be the most skeptical of Global Warming hysteria. As book publishers we can only do so much. GreenWatchAmerica gives us a vehicle to pitch into the fight in a much more timely way. Richard Vigilante Publisher Wikipropaganda By Lawrence Solomon Ever wonder how Al Gore, the United Nations, and company continue to get away with their claim of a "scientific consensus" confirming their doomsday view of global warming? Look no farther than Wikipedia for a stunning example of how the global-warming propaganda machine works. As you (or your kids) probably know, Wikipedia is now the most widely used and influential reference source on the Internet and therefore in the world, with more than 50 million unique visitors a month. In theory Wikipedia is a "people's encyclopedia" written and edited by the people who read it -- anyone with an Internet connection. So on controversial topics, one might expect to see a broad range of opinion. Not on global warming. On global warming we get consensus, Gore-style: a consensus forged by censorship, intimidation, and deceit. I first noticed this when I entered a correction to a Wikipedia page on the work of Naomi Oreskes, author of the now-infamous paper, published in the prestigious journal Science, claiming to have exhaustively reviewed the scientific literature and found not one single article dissenting from the alarmist version of global warming. Of course Oreskes's conclusions were absurd, and have been widely ridiculed. I myself have profiled dozens of truly world-eminent scientists whose work casts doubt on the Gore-U.N. version of global warming. Following the references in my book The Deniers, one can find hundreds of refereed papers that cast doubt on some aspect of the Gore/U.N. case, and that only scratches the surface. Naturally I was surprised to read on Wikipedia that Oreskes's work had been vindicated and that, for instance, one of her most thorough critics, British scientist and publisher Bennie Peiser, not only had been discredited but had grudgingly conceded Oreskes was right. I checked with Peiser, who said he had done no such thing. I then corrected the Wikipedia entry, and advised Peiser that I had done so. Peiser wrote back saying he couldn't see my corrections on the Wikipedia page. I made the changes again, and this time confirmed that the changes had been saved. But then, in a twinkle, they were gone again. I made other changes. And others. They all disappeared shortly after they were made. Turns out that on Wikipedia some folks are more equal than others. Kim Dabelstein Petersen is a Wikipedia "editor" who seems to devote a large part of his life to editing reams and reams of Wikipedia pages to pump the assertions of global-warming alarmists and deprecate or make disappear the arguments of skeptics. I soon found others who had the same experience: They would try to squeeze in any dissent, or even correct an obvious slander against a dissenter, and Petersen or some other censor would immediately snuff them out. Now Petersen is merely a Wikipedia "editor." Holding the far more prestigious and powerful position of "administrator" is William Connolley. Connolley is a software engineer and sometime climatologist (he used to hold a job in the British Antarctic Survey), as well as a serial (but so far unsuccessful) office seeker for England's Green party. And yet by virtue of his power at Wikipedia, Connolley, a ruthless enforcer of the doomsday consensus, may be the world's most influential person in the global warming debate after Al Gore. Connolley routinely uses his editorial clout to tear down scientists of great accomplishment such as Fred Singer, the first director of the U.S. National Weather Satellite Service and a scientist with dazzling achievements. Under Connolley's supervision, Wikipedia relentlessly smears Singer as a kook who believes in Martians and a hack in the pay of the oil industry. Wikipedia is full of rules that editors are supposed to follow, and it has a code of civility. Those rules and codes don't apply to Connolley, or to those he favors. "Peisers crap shouldn't be in here," Connolley wrote several weeks ago, in berating a Wikipedian colleague during an "edit war," as they're called. Trumping Wikipedia's stated rules, Connelly used his authority to ensure Wikipedia readers saw only what he wanted them to see. Any reference, anywhere among Wikipedia's 2.5 million English-language pages, that casts doubt on the consequences of climate change will be bent to Connolley's bidding. Nor are Wikipedia's ideological biases limited to global warming. As an environmentalist I find myself with allies and adversaries on both sides of the aisle, Left and Right. But there is no doubt where Wikipedia stands: firmly on the Left. Try out Wikipedia's entries on say, Roe v. Wade or Intelligent Design, and you will see that Wikipedia is the people's encyclopedia only if those people are not conservatives. -- Lawrence Solomon is executive director of Energy Probe and author of The Deniers. If you are interested in Larry's book, The Deniers is available at RichardVigilanteBooks.com <http://e2ma.net/go/1189762965/1080694/39603806/goto:http://e2ma.net/go/ 1189716471/1080616/39601791/goto:http://www.richardvigilantebooks.com> , or at Amaz <http://e2ma.net/go/1189762965/1080694/39603807/goto:http://e2ma.net/go/ 1189716471/1080616/39601792/goto:http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/ 0980076315/richardvcom-20/> on <http://e2ma.net/go/1189762965/1080694/39603808/goto:http://e2ma.net/go/ 1189716471/1080616/39601793/goto:http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/ 0980076315/richardvcom-20/> or Barnes and Noble <http://e2ma.net/go/1189762965/1080694/39603809/goto:http://e2ma.net/go/ 1189716471/1080616/39601794/goto:http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Denier s/Lawrence-Solomon/e/9780980076318/?itm=1&afsrc=1&lkid=J24537183&pubid=K 158729&byo=1/> online. Eventually we will have it up on the Green Watch America site too. GreenWatchAmerica 3033 Executive Boulevard | Suite G10 | Minneapolis, MN 55416

6 8

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

KCLUG