| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317438 is a reply to message #317422] |
Wed, 04 May 2016 16:13   |
|
|
Originally posted by: Lawrence Statton NK1G
mausg@mail.com writes:
> On 2016-05-04, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>> JimP wrote:
>>> On 3 May 2016 11:50:48 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>> sleep).
>>
>> The Cuban broadcasts seem to have disappeared, too. That happened
>> after the relaxation of US-Cuba relations.
>
> Probaly part of the agreement. I think that there was a Cuban-Cuban
> station which called itself something like "Radio Marti", which really
> irritated the Florida-Cuban community.
>
>>
>>
>> /BAH
Radio Marti was the US Funded propoganda station targeting Cuba.
That Radio Havana (their outward facing propoganda station) irritated
the Florida-Cuban community would not surprise me. Pretty much
*everything* irritates the Florida-Cuban community.
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317441 is a reply to message #317411] |
Wed, 04 May 2016 16:28 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8402
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 May 2016, jmfbahciv wrote:
>
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On 3 May 2016 11:50:50 GMT
>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The US is repeating the mid-1960s again.
>>>
>>> So we can expect some decent music and a space program in the near
>>> future then, along with a number of less pleasant things.
>>>
>> PBS had a show on last night about Janis Joplin.
>>
> And the shocking thing there is that in October it will be 46 years since
> she died. It seems like only yesterday. I didn't know who she was, but I
> remember the newspaper that reported her death. A small photo with a
> caption like "rock star dies at 27" and then a pointer to inside the
> paper. But the big news that day was that James Cross had been kidnapped
> by the FLQ here. It was only four years later, reading a New York Times
> review of Myra Friedman's "Buried Alive" about Janis that I realized that
> was the rock star that died that day.
That was my reaction to Buddy Holly then too, but he only gets better as
time goes by.
>
> But 46 years before 1970, it wsa 1924, which is the distant past. If you
> think about Janis's interest in Bessie Smith, she died in 1937, much
> closer to Janis's time than Janis's death is to now. I had the impression
> Bessie Smith had faded, except in relatively small circles, while Janis
> Joplin has stayed on the record racks all this time, even if she's faded a
> bit from view.
>
Some of it is sound quality. A lot of the old jazz greats would be more
popular today if the recordings had better quality (AFAIK).
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317442 is a reply to message #317419] |
Wed, 04 May 2016 16:28 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8402
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
<mausg@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2016-05-04, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 May 2016, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>
>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> On 3 May 2016 11:50:50 GMT
>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > The US is repeating the mid-1960s again.
>>>>
>>>> So we can expect some decent music and a space program in the near
>>>> future then, along with a number of less pleasant things.
>>>>
>>> PBS had a show on last night about Janis Joplin.
>>>
>> And the shocking thing there is that in October it will be 46 years since
>> she died. It seems like only yesterday. I didn't know who she was, but I
>> remember the newspaper that reported her death. A small photo with a
>> caption like "rock star dies at 27" and then a pointer to inside the
>> paper. But the big news that day was that James Cross had been kidnapped
>> by the FLQ here. It was only four years later, reading a New York Times
>> review of Myra Friedman's "Buried Alive" about Janis that I realized that
>> was the rock star that died that day.
>>
>> But 46 years before 1970, it wsa 1924, which is the distant past. If you
>> think about Janis's interest in Bessie Smith, she died in 1937, much
>> closer to Janis's time than Janis's death is to now. I had the impression
>> Bessie Smith had faded, except in relatively small circles, while Janis
>> Joplin has stayed on the record racks all this time, even if she's faded a
>> bit from view.
>>
>> Michael
>>
>
> From memory of the Wikipedia aarticle, she had a major drug problem
>
>
Drugs and booze, I think she liked Jack Daniels.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317444 is a reply to message #317436] |
Wed, 04 May 2016 17:08 |
Andrew Swallow
Messages: 1705
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 04/05/2016 21:13, Peter Flass wrote:
> Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>> On 03/05/2016 13:35, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On 3 May 2016 11:50:50 GMT
>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The US is repeating the mid-1960s again.
>>>
>>> So we can expect some decent music and a space program in the near
>>> future then, along with a number of less pleasant things.
>>>
>>
>> NASA is not going back to the Moon but its children are. Moon Express
>> plans to land on the Moon next year.
>>
>
> NASA are idiots.
>
NASA has to obey politicians.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317448 is a reply to message #317447] |
Wed, 04 May 2016 19:41 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Simo
"Morten Reistad" <first@last.name.invalid> wrote in message
news:ocbqvc-3oi.ln1@sambook.reistad.name...
> In article <dov0njFt557U1@mid.individual.net>, Simo <dhy287@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Morten Reistad" <first@last.name.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:rnqovc-n8h.ln1@sambook.reistad.name...
>>> In article <dotn62Fkla1U1@mid.individual.net>, Simo <dhy287@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:j7ydneSj9LLCGrTKnZ2dnUU78VmdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>> > On 03/05/2016 13:37, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> >> On 3 May 2016 11:50:51 GMT
>>>> >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> Note that this is a single-point failure in communications.
>>>> >>> It is worrisome.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Not really between the main feed and the cellphones in the house we
>>>> >> have three independent routes to the internet, this is not unusual.
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > It is the internet that is the single point of failure.
>>>>
>>>> Like hell it is. It was designed from the start to be able to survive
>>>> anything.
>>>>
>>>> > Countries can restrict it to a single entry point.
>>>>
>>>> Nope.
>>>
>>> In practice; yes.
>>
>> Nope, even China hasn’t managed to do that.
>>
>> And I know that because a mate of mine worked there for years
>> and never had any trouble doing an end run around what China
>> tried to do to limit what anyone in China could do comms wise.
>
> This is becoming increasingly difficult to do.
No its not, he still does it online from here, teaching english.
> Yes, with a great deal of sophistication
> you can always bypass such a firewall.
You don’t need any sophistication at all, just a vpn.
> I would imagine steganography will be needed soon.
Not a chance, all you need is a vpn.
He does it every day quite literally.
>>> In telco speak there are references to the "open 38" and the "closed 50"
>>> among countries. There re 38 countries where telecom is open,
>>> unrestricted,
>>> and there are a number of ISPs. (more than 10 in each). These have
>>> no problems whatsoever regarding multi-ISP redundancy.
>>>
>>> They are US+CA+MX+EU25+NO+CH+IS+JP+KR+AU+NZ+IL+CL+AG.
>>>
>>> All other countries have stuff that limits the internet freedom, where
>>> you cannot set up an ISP with a minimum of fuzz. Like 2GV, "two
>>> guys and a vax" style.
>>>
>>> If you look at the AS numbers there are currently around 45k active
>>> ISPs in the world. US+CA+EU25 gets to the 80% mark.
>>
>> That is all quite different to a single point of entry.
>
> It is a single point in terms of policy.
No its not.
> This is not about technology. I am sure China has build n levels of
> redundancy around their firewalls and duplicated stuff quite well.
And completely trivial to do an end run around it.
> (Not like Saudi Arabia, which actually ran a single firewall cluster
> for the whole country for a number of years).
>
> But the policy is one. Single point. If your url is blocked, byebye.
Not when you use a vpn.
> Finding a different site could be a workaround.
Don’t need to do that, just use a vpn.
> The cogniscenti could have external cooperating servers on a wide
> fanout of addresses, and could use something like steganography with
> some benign photos with the real signal in the lower bits. You could
> probably make gif and pngs with the signal in the lower 2 of 8 bits
> without it becoming very appearant.
>
> Then run a VPN over that. 20% payload.
>
> But this couldn't work in scale, becayse THEY would find out.
Don’t need to do anything like that.
>>>> > China is working on this.
>>>>
>>>> Like hell they are and even if they did manage that,
>>>> there are plenty of other ways to communicate.
>>>
>>> China, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan are among the really bad countries on the
>>> Internet, because they have national firewalls. And block lists that
>>> have huge personell to update.
>>
>> But its always been completely trivial to do an end run around that.
>>
>> Same with Iran.
>>
>>> who have had the "what do you do when you are the biggest ISP in two
>>> countries that go to war" on the corporate agenda.
>>
>> No one has ever come up with a fix for that. Essentially
>> because the net has always been designed to survive
>> anything, even a full nuclear holocaust.
>
> We fixed that. It was when Serbia and Bosnia fell out. We had
> the main uplink to both countries. This hit some very high office,
> and Serbia was offloaded to some friendly country. We didn't
> lose more than a few hundred packets transferring them, bgp
> is really nice. If you were surfing from there you wouldn't
> have noticed more than a very brief hang. (~1 second)
That's what I meant, there is no single point of failure.
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317452 is a reply to message #317442] |
Wed, 04 May 2016 23:06 |
Michael Black
Messages: 2799
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 4 May 2016, Peter Flass wrote:
> <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>> On 2016-05-04, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 4 May 2016, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> > On 3 May 2016 11:50:50 GMT
>>>> > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> The US is repeating the mid-1960s again.
>>>> >
>>>> > So we can expect some decent music and a space program in the near
>>>> > future then, along with a number of less pleasant things.
>>>> >
>>>> PBS had a show on last night about Janis Joplin.
>>>>
>>> And the shocking thing there is that in October it will be 46 years since
>>> she died. It seems like only yesterday. I didn't know who she was, but I
>>> remember the newspaper that reported her death. A small photo with a
>>> caption like "rock star dies at 27" and then a pointer to inside the
>>> paper. But the big news that day was that James Cross had been kidnapped
>>> by the FLQ here. It was only four years later, reading a New York Times
>>> review of Myra Friedman's "Buried Alive" about Janis that I realized that
>>> was the rock star that died that day.
>>>
>>> But 46 years before 1970, it wsa 1924, which is the distant past. If you
>>> think about Janis's interest in Bessie Smith, she died in 1937, much
>>> closer to Janis's time than Janis's death is to now. I had the impression
>>> Bessie Smith had faded, except in relatively small circles, while Janis
>>> Joplin has stayed on the record racks all this time, even if she's faded a
>>> bit from view.
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>
>> From memory of the Wikipedia aarticle, she had a major drug problem
>>
>>
>
> Drugs and booze, I think she liked Jack Daniels.
>
Southern Comfort.
Michael
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317453 is a reply to message #317441] |
Wed, 04 May 2016 23:15 |
Michael Black
Messages: 2799
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 4 May 2016, Peter Flass wrote:
> Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 May 2016, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>
>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> On 3 May 2016 11:50:50 GMT
>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > The US is repeating the mid-1960s again.
>>>>
>>>> So we can expect some decent music and a space program in the near
>>>> future then, along with a number of less pleasant things.
>>>>
>>> PBS had a show on last night about Janis Joplin.
>>>
>> And the shocking thing there is that in October it will be 46 years since
>> she died. It seems like only yesterday. I didn't know who she was, but I
>> remember the newspaper that reported her death. A small photo with a
>> caption like "rock star dies at 27" and then a pointer to inside the
>> paper. But the big news that day was that James Cross had been kidnapped
>> by the FLQ here. It was only four years later, reading a New York Times
>> review of Myra Friedman's "Buried Alive" about Janis that I realized that
>> was the rock star that died that day.
>
> That was my reaction to Buddy Holly then too, but he only gets better as
> time goes by.
>
>>
>> But 46 years before 1970, it wsa 1924, which is the distant past. If you
>> think about Janis's interest in Bessie Smith, she died in 1937, much
>> closer to Janis's time than Janis's death is to now. I had the impression
>> Bessie Smith had faded, except in relatively small circles, while Janis
>> Joplin has stayed on the record racks all this time, even if she's faded a
>> bit from view.
>>
>
> Some of it is sound quality. A lot of the old jazz greats would be more
> popular today if the recordings had better quality (AFAIK).
>
Yes and no. I once bought a four record blues collection, on actual 33
1/3 RPM records, nice and cheap even new. And I listened to it once, and
gave up. Yes, the recording sounded awful, and I assumed it was all like
that.
But I've bought other things more recently of that vintage, and someone
must have cleaned them up, because none of that scratchiness or noise,
perhaps a diminished frequency response (I'm not sure if that's
processing or the actual sound back then, it sounds like the period).
So I can listen to that collection of Jimmie Rodgers, or that collection
of Robert Johnson, anything I've bought on CD has come out okay (I bought
ligtle jazz or blues when music came out on actual records).
But there was a dead zone, a period when many of these old artists were
"lost". In some cases people actually went looking for them in the
sixties, and brought them back. Some of it is the music business back
then, not only did black people often get fairly limited recording
contracts, but for many, their output was on small labels. So the stuff
went out of print. The artists would then continue with their lives,
doing something else. Or they died. So there was limited material, often
on small lables. The recordings were made to fulfill a need for new
material, for new artists, but it's only later that some got the fame they
deserved.
Once they were resurrected in the sixties, their records got back into
print, or they recorded new ones, and they've remained available, in part
because of those sixties artists who recorded the old songs and made a
fuss about the old artists.
Michael
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317456 is a reply to message #317431] |
Wed, 04 May 2016 23:26 |
Michael Black
Messages: 2799
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 4 May 2016, JimP wrote:
> On 4 May 2016 13:02:27 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>> JimP wrote:
>>> On 3 May 2016 11:50:48 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> JimP wrote:
>>>> > On 2 May 2016 13:13:23 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> mausg@mail.com wrote:
>>>> >>> On 2016-05-01, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>> >>>>> On Friday, April 29, 2016 at 8:20:39 PM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
>>>> >>>>>> AFAIK, AM radio is still being broadcast, and so there must be some
>>>> >> people
>>>> >>>> who
>>>> >>>>>> are listening to it. At least in their cars, since, after all, in the
>>>> >> noisy
>>>> >>>>>> environment of traffic, the extra sound quality of FM radio is
>> wasted.
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> AM radio might still be broadcast, but it seems to be almost all
>>>> >>>>> talk now--religious, call-in, news, and sports. Plenty of talk
>>>> >>>>> on FM, too. I don't know how all that talk manages to keep an
>>>> >>>>> audience to attract sponsors, but apparently it does.
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> I think people these days are listening to satellite radio.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> SW broadccasts are also diminishing rapidly.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> /BAH
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Pity, one could hear all sort of odd stuff there.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Yea. I liked hearing farm reports from Viet Nam, Chinese
>>>> >> language lessons from China, and Cuba's take on USian
>>>> >> business. BBC also had shows which I enjoyed but all of
>>>> >> that went away in the early aught's.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> /BAH
>>>> >
>>>> > My copy of the World RAdio and TV Handbook mentions a big drop off in
>>>> > SW broadcasts. Many have gone to the Internet. Lots of religion
>>>> > broadcasts still left.
>>>>
>>>> I was surprised but those are going away, too. Good riddance.
>>>>
>>>> > I haven't listened in over a year, but in 2014
>>>> > I did hear a travelogue broadcast from Radio Rumania about the
>>>> > Carpathian Mountains.
>>>>
>>>> I was getting Rumania's broadcasts but I haven't found it this year.
>>>>
>>>> /BAH
>>>>
>>>
>>> From what I have figured out, the SW broadcasts are more directed than
>>> even in the past. I heard them for about an hour, then they were gone.
>>
>> That's what I remember. Some other country would show up on the
>> same band but I don't get that either (or I haven't tripped over
>> the correct channel when I'm searching for something to put me to
>> sleep).
>>
>> The Cuban broadcasts seem to have disappeared, too. That happened
>> after the relaxation of US-Cuba relations.
>>
>>
>> /BAH
>
> I get the impression they share the freqs. From 1400-1800 GMT one
> country broadcasts, then from 1815 to 2000 GMT another one does. The
> first one directs their boradcast to the US, the second one to
> Australia.
>
Some of that may be that they rent time on other stations to act as
relays.
International broadcasting gets complicated. In some countries it may be
seen as an internal system, some African countries and I thought here in
Canada for the far north broadcast system. That also may have changed
with time, but this was often instead of AM or FM broadcasting, the higher
frequencies of shortwave being more suitable for the location.
But then if they aim towards other countries, they may do it in their own
language (to reach citizens abroad) and they may aim at other countries.
So they may have multiple languages, and they need different times to
reach the different audiences and different frequencies because they work
better at different times of the day.
If you can't reach out enough, you may rent time on another station's
transmitter. I seem to recall the CBC shortwave transmitters were
sometimes used to relay maybe China? Or they'll set up such relay
stations themselves, I guess that works better if you have a colony
somewhere to plant that transmitter.
SO I guess that accounts for some reuse of frequencies.
As shortwave broadcasting has cut back, sometimes it's been that English
language broadcasting ("they have the internet"), while some other
languages continue. That's also tied in with what they perceive the use
of shortwave as being, propaganda likely keeping it alive longer than
other reasons.
Michael
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317461 is a reply to message #317437] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 03:05 |
Stan Barr
Messages: 598
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 4 May 2016 16:13:18 -0400, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On 3 May 2016 11:50:50 GMT
>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The US is repeating the mid-1960s again.
>>>
>>> So we can expect some decent music and a space program in the near
>>> future then, along with a number of less pleasant things.
>>>
>> PBS had a show on last night about Janis Joplin.
>>
>
> The girl could certainly sing!
>
For someone more current, check out Carolyn Wonderland - she's from
the same neck of the woods (actually Houston, Janis was from Port
Arthur). Sounds remarkably like Janis at times.
--
Stan Barr plan.b@bluesomatic.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317462 is a reply to message #317442] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 04:32 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5354
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2016-05-04, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>
>> From memory of the Wikipedia aarticle, she had a major drug problem
>
> Drugs and booze, I think she liked Jack Daniels.
I saw a photo of her in a fur coat which was apparently given to her
by the Jack Daniels distillery, since she was such a valued customer.
--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317466 is a reply to message #317396] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 07:20 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
In article <20160504143855.5dafa714ffe91e275ec34045@eircom.net>,
steveo@eircom.net says...
>
> On Wed, 4 May 2016 13:20:07 +0200
> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
>
>> In article <20160504102632.c39d7ed7e88c9d91f6b5f858@eircom.net>,
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 4 May 2016 06:24:54 +0100
>>> Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 03/05/2016 13:37, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> > On 3 May 2016 11:50:51 GMT
>>>> > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Note that this is a single-point failure in communications.
>>>> >> It is worrisome.
>>>> >
>>>> > Not really between the main feed and the cellphones in the
>>>> > house we have three independent routes to the internet, this is not
>>>> > unusual.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> It is the internet that is the single point of failure. Countries can
>>>> restrict it to a single entry point. China is working on this.
>>>
>>> That's rather a large single point - one with considerable built
>>> in
>>> redundancy.
>>
>> The problem here is not one of technology. It is about freedom.
>>
>> The freedom issue has two angles; first it is about freedom of expression.
>> Second it is the freedom of doing business.
>>
>> China is dead rotten on the first one, and only barely adequate
>> on the second one.
>>
>> Any ISP can impose, technically, all the censorship they like on
>> their customers.
>
> Only if they block or visibly intercept end-to-end encrypted
> connections, otherwise VPN is a possible bypass.
And why would they not block such connections?
>> In the "open 38" they will shoot themselves in the
>> foot and be bankrupt pretty fast if they did that. Or be directly
>> against net neutrality legislation, making it directly illegal.
>
> All it takes is a satellite connection to completely bypass a
> national or ISP firewall, getting the hardware and an account would likely
> take considerable finesse in some regimes though.
If there is a convenient satellite and if the satellite operator will
accept connections from a country that has proven satellite-intercept
capability and doesn't want them to accept the connection. And once the
government finds you they are likely to take your toys away and make
your life miserable if you are allowed to keep it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317468 is a reply to message #317397] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 08:25 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On 4 May 2016 13:02:19 GMT
> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On 3 May 2016 11:50:51 GMT
>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Note that this is a single-point failure in communications.
>>>> It is worrisome.
>>>
>>> Not really between the main feed and the cellphones in the house we
>>> have three independent routes to the internet, this is not unusual.
>>>
>> You are assuming governments will not try to control network data.
>
> I'm hoping that governments I live under will not succeed in doing
> so. If end-to-end encryption is taken away it is past time to have an
> alternative. Fortunately there is the hardware for a pervasive, wireless
> mesh network already in place - all it needs is software and participants.
>
US Congress keeps trying. I think it's inevitable.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317469 is a reply to message #317417] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 08:25 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
mausg@mail.com wrote:
> On 2016-05-03, Charles Richmond <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:PM000531EEA73C6958@aca2d696.ipt.aol.com...
>>>
>>> [snip...] [snip...]
>>> [snip...]
>>>
>>> I don't have quotes; I simply gave you an example of radio
>>> show which is unendurable.
>>>
>>
>> Speaking of unenurable: Those "reality" TV shows are unendurable!!! And
>> I've been in the hospital enough that I really do *not* need to see any
>> medical or trauma TV shows!!! On broadcast TV in the US, it seems many of
>> the commercials are for prescription drugs and people who have devastating
>> diseases!!!
>>
>> When I watch TV, I'd like it to be a pleasant experience. I'm in for a
>> mystery or a comedy show (except the "off the wall" type of comedy, which
>> seems to be common.) I'd like to see some pleasant commercials for dish
>> soap or diapers or soda pop. Get all those sickness commercials away from
>> me!!!
>>
>
> Likewise, I hate the reality shows, except the "Great British Bakeoff",
> which is kind to the entrants. Otherwise, sport (as a man), or some comedys.
I did watch the bakeoff on PBS. The show didn't pretend there were no cameras
and production staff.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317470 is a reply to message #317422] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 08:25 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
mausg@mail.com wrote:
> On 2016-05-04, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>> JimP wrote:
>>> On 3 May 2016 11:50:48 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>> sleep).
>>
>> The Cuban broadcasts seem to have disappeared, too. That happened
>> after the relaxation of US-Cuba relations.
>
> Probaly part of the agreement. I think that there was a Cuban-Cuban
> station which called itself something like "Radio Marti", which really
> irritated the Florida-Cuban community.
They seem to get irritated easily. IIRC, the station would identify
itself as Radio Havana.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317471 is a reply to message #317403] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 08:25 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2016-05-04, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>
>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>> news:PM000531EEA73C6958@aca2d696.ipt.aol.com...
>>>>
>>>> [snip...] [snip...]
>>>> [snip...]
>>>>
>>>> I don't have quotes; I simply gave you an example of radio
>>>> show which is unendurable.
>>>
>>> Speaking of unenurable: Those "reality" TV shows are unendurable!!!
>>
>> I never understood them; they confused me as much as People magazine did.
>
> What bothers me about them is that they're one more example of our
> language being twisted into meaninglessness. If that's "reality",
> give me fantasy any day - you know, the ones where people aren't
> constantly trying to stab each other in the back.
>
Well, the stabbing parts seem scripted to me. I agree with you
about the misuse of the word. Another word which seems to be
misused is factoid. And I hate the PR people who have been
trained to begin the answer to any question with the word
absolutely.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317473 is a reply to message #317452] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 08:25 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Michael Black wrote:
> On Wed, 4 May 2016, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>> <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>>> On 2016-05-04, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 4 May 2016, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> >> On 3 May 2016 11:50:50 GMT
>>>> >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> The US is repeating the mid-1960s again.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> So we can expect some decent music and a space program in the near
>>>> >> future then, along with a number of less pleasant things.
>>>> >>
>>>> > PBS had a show on last night about Janis Joplin.
>>>> >
>>>> And the shocking thing there is that in October it will be 46 years since
>>>> she died. It seems like only yesterday. I didn't know who she was, but
I
>>>> remember the newspaper that reported her death. A small photo with a
>>>> caption like "rock star dies at 27" and then a pointer to inside the
>>>> paper. But the big news that day was that James Cross had been kidnapped
>>>> by the FLQ here. It was only four years later, reading a New York Times
>>>> review of Myra Friedman's "Buried Alive" about Janis that I realized that
>>>> was the rock star that died that day.
>>>>
>>>> But 46 years before 1970, it wsa 1924, which is the distant past. If you
>>>> think about Janis's interest in Bessie Smith, she died in 1937, much
>>>> closer to Janis's time than Janis's death is to now. I had the impression
>>>> Bessie Smith had faded, except in relatively small circles, while Janis
>>>> Joplin has stayed on the record racks all this time, even if she's faded
a
>>>> bit from view.
>>>>
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>
>>> From memory of the Wikipedia aarticle, she had a major drug problem
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Drugs and booze, I think she liked Jack Daniels.
>>
> Southern Comfort.
Oh, yucko. JD is much better.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317474 is a reply to message #317408] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 08:25 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Roger Blake wrote:
> On 2016-05-04, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>> He's syndicated so you might be able stream his shows. Hatred is supposed
>> to be the result of herding people into dispsrate groups.
>
> Actually that sounds like the modus operandi of the political class
> in general. Race warfare, class warfare, etc. (Louis Farrakhan being
> an example, for which I provided a specific example.)
>
> In any event, I believe that if a person is going to be accused of
> "spouting hate" it is up to the accuser(s) to provide specific evidence
> to back up that assertion. (There are a lot of people who are quick
> on the trigger with the "H" word when dealing with those who disagree
> with them.)
>
If the rhetoric has language which divides people into two groups,
there will be hate. If there are more than two, tolerance is invoked
and rational debate and thinking is employed.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317475 is a reply to message #317377] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 09:14 |
Andreas Eder
Messages: 134
Registered: October 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Morten Reistad @ 2016-05-04 13:20 +02:
> Thailand is run by generals. Viet Nam, Laos, Burma, China, North Korea
> are communist dictatorships. Cambodia is in the same situation as
> India, as is Indonesia. Malaysia and Singapore are closer, but
> both are strong nanny states.
Burma has never been a communist dictatorship.
Dictatorship yes, but I don#t think that you could call the generals
communists, though they were on friendly terms with China.
We will have to wait and see how it works out now.
'Andreas
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317477 is a reply to message #317474] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 09:38 |
Roger Blake
Messages: 167
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2016-05-05, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
> If the rhetoric has language which divides people into two groups,
> there will be hate. If there are more than two, tolerance is invoked
> and rational debate and thinking is employed.
Nonsense. If that were the case then anyone expressing a controversial
opinion that angers someone or some group would be "spouting hate."
(Of course that is the position take by the PC crowd.)
You have still provided no evidence whatsoever for your assertion
that Mark Levin is "spouting hate."
--
------------------------------------------------------------ -----------------
Roger Blake (Posts from Google Groups killfiled due to excess spam.)
NSA sedition and treason -- http://www.DeathToNSAthugs.com
------------------------------------------------------------ -----------------
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317478 is a reply to message #317468] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 10:35 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4946
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 5 May 2016 12:25:49 GMT
jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On 4 May 2016 13:02:19 GMT
>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> On 3 May 2016 11:50:51 GMT
>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Note that this is a single-point failure in communications.
>>>> > It is worrisome.
>>>>
>>>> Not really between the main feed and the cellphones in the house
>>>> we have three independent routes to the internet, this is not
>>>> unusual.
>>>>
>>> You are assuming governments will not try to control network data.
>>
>> I'm hoping that governments I live under will not succeed in doing
>> so. If end-to-end encryption is taken away it is past time to have an
>> alternative. Fortunately there is the hardware for a pervasive, wireless
>> mesh network already in place - all it needs is software and
>> participants.
>>
> US Congress keeps trying. I think it's inevitable.
Oddly enough that's one government I don't want to live under.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317479 is a reply to message #317462] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 12:35 |
Michael Black
Messages: 2799
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thu, 5 May 2016, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2016-05-04, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> From memory of the Wikipedia aarticle, she had a major drug problem
>>
>> Drugs and booze, I think she liked Jack Daniels.
>
> I saw a photo of her in a fur coat which was apparently given to her
> by the Jack Daniels distillery, since she was such a valued customer.
>
Again, I'm pretty sure it was Southern Comfort.
And I don't think it was that she kept the company going by her drinking,
but that she was vocal about it, so the bottle was prominent and thus she
became a valuable "spokesman" for the company.
Michael
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317481 is a reply to message #317471] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 12:42 |
Michael Black
Messages: 2799
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thu, 5 May 2016, jmfbahciv wrote:
> Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> On 2016-05-04, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>>
>>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:PM000531EEA73C6958@aca2d696.ipt.aol.com...
>>>> >
>>>> > [snip...] [snip...]
>>>> > [snip...]
>>>> >
>>>> > I don't have quotes; I simply gave you an example of radio
>>>> > show which is unendurable.
>>>>
>>>> Speaking of unenurable: Those "reality" TV shows are unendurable!!!
>>>
>>> I never understood them; they confused me as much as People magazine did.
>>
>> What bothers me about them is that they're one more example of our
>> language being twisted into meaninglessness. If that's "reality",
>> give me fantasy any day - you know, the ones where people aren't
>> constantly trying to stab each other in the back.
>>
> Well, the stabbing parts seem scripted to me. I agree with you
> about the misuse of the word. Another word which seems to be
> misused is factoid. And I hate the PR people who have been
> trained to begin the answer to any question with the word
> absolutely.
>
Absolutely.
Michael
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317482 is a reply to message #317475] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 12:34 |
Morten Reistad
Messages: 2108
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <87mvo4sl46.fsf@eder.anydns.info>,
Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> wrote:
> Morten Reistad @ 2016-05-04 13:20 +02:
>
>> Thailand is run by generals. Viet Nam, Laos, Burma, China, North Korea
>> are communist dictatorships. Cambodia is in the same situation as
>> India, as is Indonesia. Malaysia and Singapore are closer, but
>> both are strong nanny states.
>
> Burma has never been a communist dictatorship.
> Dictatorship yes, but I don#t think that you could call the generals
> communists, though they were on friendly terms with China.
> We will have to wait and see how it works out now.
Communist, socialist, whatever.
They used the standard communist habe-habe and made the
communist international alliances, which is why I included them.
And, yes, they were a dictatorship all right, pretty much
a totalitarian one.
But they have/had weird internal ideology, organisation etc
that only superficially match a communist state. But there have
been weirder. Like Romania, Or Egypt. Or Sudan. All called
themselves communist or some form of socialist that were
pretty synonymous. And were more or less personal empires
of their leaders. (OK, Nasser was complex; but that only
reinforces the argument for this one).
When it comes to personal freedom. freedom of expression and
freedom of enterprise the distinction is pretty moot when it
comes to Burma.
This is one of those countries where it wouldn't surprise
me if they did a Saudi Arabia; having one firewall cluster
for the whole country.
Yes, they are opening up. But still not enough to trust by
any means. Stick to the shortwave, for now.
-- mrr
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317483 is a reply to message #317479] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 12:46 |
Morten Reistad
Messages: 2108
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1605051234200.21454@darkstar.example.org>,
Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 May 2016, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2016-05-04, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> From memory of the Wikipedia aarticle, she had a major drug problem
>>>
>>> Drugs and booze, I think she liked Jack Daniels.
>>
>> I saw a photo of her in a fur coat which was apparently given to her
>> by the Jack Daniels distillery, since she was such a valued customer.
>>
> Again, I'm pretty sure it was Southern Comfort.
>
> And I don't think it was that she kept the company going by her drinking,
> but that she was vocal about it, so the bottle was prominent and thus she
> became a valuable "spokesman" for the company.
The Clintons also had a vocal relationship with that liquid until they
ended up in the White House. Connection?
-- mrr
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317485 is a reply to message #317466] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 15:11 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Simo
"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.3194f6a9526707ad98a168@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <20160504143855.5dafa714ffe91e275ec34045@eircom.net>,
> steveo@eircom.net says...
>>
>> On Wed, 4 May 2016 13:20:07 +0200
>> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <20160504102632.c39d7ed7e88c9d91f6b5f858@eircom.net>,
>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 4 May 2016 06:24:54 +0100
>>>> Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On 03/05/2016 13:37, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> > > On 3 May 2016 11:50:51 GMT
>>>> > > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > >> Note that this is a single-point failure in communications.
>>>> > >> It is worrisome.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Not really between the main feed and the cellphones in the
>>>> > > house we have three independent routes to the internet, this is
>>>> > > not
>>>> > > unusual.
>>>> > >
>>>> >
>>>> > It is the internet that is the single point of failure. Countries
>>>> > can
>>>> > restrict it to a single entry point. China is working on this.
>>>>
>>>> That's rather a large single point - one with considerable built
>>>> in
>>>> redundancy.
>>>
>>> The problem here is not one of technology. It is about freedom.
>>>
>>> The freedom issue has two angles; first it is about freedom of
>>> expression.
>>> Second it is the freedom of doing business.
>>>
>>> China is dead rotten on the first one, and only barely adequate
>>> on the second one.
>>>
>>> Any ISP can impose, technically, all the censorship they like on
>>> their customers.
>>
>> Only if they block or visibly intercept end-to-end encrypted
>> connections, otherwise VPN is a possible bypass.
>
> And why would they not block such connections?
Easier said than done to do that reliably.
>>> In the "open 38" they will shoot themselves in the
>>> foot and be bankrupt pretty fast if they did that. Or be directly
>>> against net neutrality legislation, making it directly illegal.
>>
>> All it takes is a satellite connection to completely bypass a
>> national or ISP firewall, getting the hardware and an account would
>> likely
>> take considerable finesse in some regimes though.
>
> If there is a convenient satellite
There always is.
> and if the satellite operator will accept connections from
> a country that has proven satellite-intercept capability
> and doesn't want them to accept the connection.
They don't necessarily know which country it is coming from.
> And once the government finds you
Again, easier said than done.
> they are likely to take your toys away and make
> your life miserable if you are allowed to keep it.
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317486 is a reply to message #317467] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 15:20 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Simo
"Morten Reistad" <first@last.name.invalid> wrote in message
news:clorvc-5al.ln1@sambook.reistad.name...
> In article <dovflcF1japU1@mid.individual.net>, Simo <dhy287@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Morten Reistad" <first@last.name.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:ocbqvc-3oi.ln1@sambook.reistad.name...
>>> In article <dov0njFt557U1@mid.individual.net>, Simo <dhy287@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Morten Reistad" <first@last.name.invalid> wrote in message
>>>> news:rnqovc-n8h.ln1@sambook.reistad.name...
>>>> > In article <dotn62Fkla1U1@mid.individual.net>, Simo <dhy287@gmail.com>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>"Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
>>>> >>news:j7ydneSj9LLCGrTKnZ2dnUU78VmdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>> >>> On 03/05/2016 13:37, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> >>>> On 3 May 2016 11:50:51 GMT
>>>> >>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>> Note that this is a single-point failure in communications.
>>>> >>>>> It is worrisome.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Not really between the main feed and the cellphones in the house we
>>>> >>>> have three independent routes to the internet, this is not unusual.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> It is the internet that is the single point of failure.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>Like hell it is. It was designed from the start to be able to survive
>>>> >>anything.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> Countries can restrict it to a single entry point.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>Nope.
>>>> >
>>>> > In practice; yes.
>>>>
>>>> Nope, even China hasn’t managed to do that.
>>>>
>>>> And I know that because a mate of mine worked there for years
>>>> and never had any trouble doing an end run around what China
>>>> tried to do to limit what anyone in China could do comms wise.
>>>
>>> This is becoming increasingly difficult to do.
>>
>> No its not, he still does it online from here, teaching english.
> He probably has been OKed for vpn use by the internet keepers.
No he has not. And almost everyone in China uses vpns.
> There are tens of thousands of them, inspecting the nooks
> and crannies of the chinese international web access.
And in practice it’s impossible to do it reliably.
> I know, I have hit this bureocracy more times than I like.
Sure, one downside is that comms with him was quite a bit
less reliable than with others, but that doesn’t stop him using
it now to continue to teach online from outside the country.
> Terminating telephony on IP into China was OK, then they
> clamped down, but less known protocols like iax on non-default
> ports where the session started from inside worked for many
> years. Now you need a vpn, but those addresses where iax/sip
> etc were detected are blocked for any well known vpn.
So you don’t use a well known vpn. Hardly rocket science.
> I wrote a variant that is masqerading as html,
> just superficially; with a payload of around 90%.
So it isnt hard to do an end run around their stupidity.
>>> Yes, with a great deal of sophistication
>>> you can always bypass such a firewall.
>>
>> You don’t need any sophistication at all, just a vpn.
>
> whatever.
>
>>> I would imagine steganography will be needed soon.
>>
>> Not a chance, all you need is a vpn.
>> He does it every day quite literally.
>>
>>>> > In telco speak there are references to the "open 38" and the "closed
>>>> > 50"
>>>> > among countries. There re 38 countries where telecom is open,
>>>> > unrestricted,
>>>> > and there are a number of ISPs. (more than 10 in each). These have
>>>> > no problems whatsoever regarding multi-ISP redundancy.
>>>> >
>>>> > They are US+CA+MX+EU25+NO+CH+IS+JP+KR+AU+NZ+IL+CL+AG.
>>>> >
>>>> > All other countries have stuff that limits the internet freedom, where
>>>> > you cannot set up an ISP with a minimum of fuzz. Like 2GV, "two
>>>> > guys and a vax" style.
>>>> >
>>>> > If you look at the AS numbers there are currently around 45k active
>>>> > ISPs in the world. US+CA+EU25 gets to the 80% mark.
>>>>
>>>> That is all quite different to a single point of entry.
>>>
>>> It is a single point in terms of policy.
>>
>> No its not.
>>
>>> This is not about technology. I am sure China has build n levels of
>>> redundancy around their firewalls and duplicated stuff quite well.
>>
>> And completely trivial to do an end run around it.
>
> The internet keepers in China are very careful not to impinge on business.
He's never had any trouble just ringing me except for it being
rather less reliable than it is now that he is back in this country.
> Therefore vpns that seem to cover just internal communication
> between a few entities are let live. Having such a vpn does not
> mean you outsmarted them. In 2000, maybe. But not now.
No one said anything about outsmarting them, just
that you can do what you want to do regardless
of them without any real tech smarts at all.
>>> (Not like Saudi Arabia, which actually ran a single firewall cluster
>>> for the whole country for a number of years).
>>>
>>> But the policy is one. Single point. If your url is blocked, byebye.
>>
>> Not when you use a vpn.
>>
>>> Finding a different site could be a workaround.
>>
>> Don’t need to do that, just use a vpn.
>>
>>> The cogniscenti could have external cooperating servers on a wide
>>> fanout of addresses, and could use something like steganography with
>>> some benign photos with the real signal in the lower bits. You could
>>> probably make gif and pngs with the signal in the lower 2 of 8 bits
>>> without it becoming very appearant.
>>>
>>> Then run a VPN over that. 20% payload.
>>>
>>> But this couldn't work in scale, becayse THEY would find out.
>>
>> Don’t need to do anything like that.
>>
>>>> >>> China is working on this.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>Like hell they are and even if they did manage that,
>>>> >>there are plenty of other ways to communicate.
>>>> >
>>>> > China, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan are among the really bad countries on
>>>> > the
>>>> > Internet, because they have national firewalls. And block lists that
>>>> > have huge personell to update.
>>>>
>>>> But its always been completely trivial to do an end run around that.
>>>>
>>>> Same with Iran.
>>>>
>>>> > who have had the "what do you do when you are the biggest ISP in two
>>>> > countries that go to war" on the corporate agenda.
>>>>
>>>> No one has ever come up with a fix for that. Essentially
>>>> because the net has always been designed to survive
>>>> anything, even a full nuclear holocaust.
>>>
>>> We fixed that. It was when Serbia and Bosnia fell out. We had
>>> the main uplink to both countries. This hit some very high office,
>>> and Serbia was offloaded to some friendly country. We didn't
>>> lose more than a few hundred packets transferring them, bgp
>>> is really nice. If you were surfing from there you wouldn't
>>> have noticed more than a very brief hang. (~1 second)
>>
>> That's what I meant, there is no single point of failure.
>
> Actually, the links to both Bosnia and Serbia was on the same
> satellite, with only a shoestring of terrestrial capacity as a
> reserve. One hit on the right dish, and the country could not
> open any web pages anymore. This has been fixed a long time ago.
So there is no single point of failure and there never was either.
> But there ARE still a lot of islands where the internet connection
> is literally that. ONE dish. No sea cables as backup.
Sure, but that wasn’t what Barb was talking about.
> Tristan da Cunha and lots of others. Kiribati has 50+ of them.
And they still don’t have JUST an internet connection.
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317487 is a reply to message #317468] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 15:22 |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
news:PM0005321708BD3403@aca40637.ipt.aol.com...
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On 4 May 2016 13:02:19 GMT
>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> On 3 May 2016 11:50:51 GMT
>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Note that this is a single-point failure in communications.
>>>> > It is worrisome.
>>>>
>>>> Not really between the main feed and the cellphones in the house
>>>> we
>>>> have three independent routes to the internet, this is not unusual.
>>>>
>>> You are assuming governments will not try to control network data.
>>
>> I'm hoping that governments I live under will not succeed in doing
>> so. If end-to-end encryption is taken away it is past time to have an
>> alternative. Fortunately there is the hardware for a pervasive, wireless
>> mesh network already in place - all it needs is software and
>> participants.
> US Congress keeps trying. I think it's inevitable.
More fool you. It isn't.
Already the US Congress can't do a damned thing about completely
secure end to end communication between cellphones alone.
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317489 is a reply to message #317474] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 15:25 |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
news:PM00053217192D9198@aca40637.ipt.aol.com...
> Roger Blake wrote:
>> On 2016-05-04, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>> He's syndicated so you might be able stream his shows. Hatred is
>>> supposed
>>> to be the result of herding people into dispsrate groups.
>>
>> Actually that sounds like the modus operandi of the political class
>> in general. Race warfare, class warfare, etc. (Louis Farrakhan being
>> an example, for which I provided a specific example.)
>>
>> In any event, I believe that if a person is going to be accused of
>> "spouting hate" it is up to the accuser(s) to provide specific evidence
>> to back up that assertion. (There are a lot of people who are quick
>> on the trigger with the "H" word when dealing with those who disagree
>> with them.)
>>
> If the rhetoric has language which divides people into two groups,
> there will be hate.
Not necessarily, most obviously with the two groups of men and women.
Or adults and children.
> If there are more than two, tolerance is invoked
> and rational debate and thinking is employed.
Even sillier than you usually manage.
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317491 is a reply to message #317482] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 15:35 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Simo
"Morten Reistad" <first@last.name.invalid> wrote in message
news:aa9svc-1qm.ln1@sambook.reistad.name...
> In article <87mvo4sl46.fsf@eder.anydns.info>,
> Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> wrote:
>> Morten Reistad @ 2016-05-04 13:20 +02:
>>
>>> Thailand is run by generals. Viet Nam, Laos, Burma, China, North Korea
>>> are communist dictatorships. Cambodia is in the same situation as
>>> India, as is Indonesia. Malaysia and Singapore are closer, but
>>> both are strong nanny states.
>>
>> Burma has never been a communist dictatorship.
>> Dictatorship yes, but I don#t think that you could call the generals
>> communists, though they were on friendly terms with China.
>> We will have to wait and see how it works out now.
>
> Communist, socialist, whatever.
You can't do that. If you do that much of western europe,
particularly scandinavia would be communist and it isnt,
its just socialist. Particularly with the way Norway does its
oil and gas and power generation, with the govt doing it.
Its socialist, not communist.
> They used the standard communist habe-habe
What ?
> and made the communist international alliances,
Essentially because most of the rest the world
wouldn’t have anything to do with them.
> which is why I included them.
You shouldn’t have.
> And, yes, they were a dictatorship all
> right, pretty much a totalitarian one.
Sure, but that doesn’t make them communist.
> But they have/had weird internal ideology, organisation
> etc that only superficially match a communist state.
So it is in fact nothing like a real communist state.
> But there have been weirder. Like Romania, Or Egypt. Or Sudan.
> All called themselves communist or some form of socialist
So has most of scandinavia.
> that were pretty synonymous.
No they are not. Nothing even remotely synonymous.
> And were more or less personal empires of their leaders.
But not communist.
> (OK, Nasser was complex; but that only
> reinforces the argument for this one).
No it does not.
> When it comes to personal freedom. freedom of expression and
> freedom of enterprise the distinction is pretty moot when it
> comes to Burma.
Sure, but that doesn’t make them communist, just
a dictatorship with very like personal freedom.
freedom of expression and freedom of enterprise.
That was just as true of Hitler's regime, and Mussolini's.
Neither was anything even remotely communist and
Hitler was in fact always a rabid anti communist.
> This is one of those countries where it wouldn't surprise
> me if they did a Saudi Arabia; having one firewall cluster
> for the whole country.
Doesn’t help with the mobile/cellphone traffic.
> Yes, they are opening up. But still not enough to trust by
> any means. Stick to the shortwave, for now.
No thanks, the mobile/cellphone and satellite systems leave it for dead.
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317492 is a reply to message #317436] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 15:45 |
mausg
Messages: 2483
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2016-05-04, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>> On 03/05/2016 13:35, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On 3 May 2016 11:50:50 GMT
>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The US is repeating the mid-1960s again.
>>>
>>> So we can expect some decent music and a space program in the near
>>> future then, along with a number of less pleasant things.
>>>
>>
>> NASA is not going back to the Moon but its children are. Moon Express
>> plans to land on the Moon next year.
>>
>
> NASA are idiots.
>
because?
--
greymaus
iD|marrA Raa|fLa
Ireland
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317500 is a reply to message #317499] |
Thu, 05 May 2016 18:37 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5354
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2016-05-05, Joe Makowiec <makowiec@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 05 May 2016 in alt.folklore.computers, Michael Black wrote:
>
>> Again, I'm pretty sure it was Southern Comfort.
>
> This may help settle the issue:
>
> http://alldylan.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/janis-joplin2 .jpg
I stand corrected. In fact, if you google for "Janis Joplin Jack Daniels"
the first thing that pops up is an image of her with a bottle of Southern
Comfort.
Silly me. And back in the day, a friend and I used to drink a bottle
of the stuff every Friday night.
--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317512 is a reply to message #317492] |
Fri, 06 May 2016 07:22 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8402
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
<mausg@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2016-05-04, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>>> On 03/05/2016 13:35, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> On 3 May 2016 11:50:50 GMT
>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > The US is repeating the mid-1960s again.
>>>>
>>>> So we can expect some decent music and a space program in the near
>>>> future then, along with a number of less pleasant things.
>>>>
>>>
>>> NASA is not going back to the Moon but its children are. Moon Express
>>> plans to land on the Moon next year.
>>>
>>
>> NASA are idiots.
>>
> because?
>
>
Given all the problems with getting to Mars it would seem to make sense to
start with something a bit closer and then scale up. Fortunately some
private groups want to go to the Moon, otherwise you'd need a Chinese
passport to go there in a few years.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317513 is a reply to message #317481] |
Fri, 06 May 2016 09:28 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Michael Black wrote:
> On Thu, 5 May 2016, jmfbahciv wrote:
>
>> Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> On 2016-05-04, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>> > news:PM000531EEA73C6958@aca2d696.ipt.aol.com...
>>>> >>
>>>> >> [snip...] [snip...]
>>>> >> [snip...]
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I don't have quotes; I simply gave you an example of radio
>>>> >> show which is unendurable.
>>>> >
>>>> > Speaking of unenurable: Those "reality" TV shows are unendurable!!!
>>>>
>>>> I never understood them; they confused me as much as People magazine did.
>>>
>>> What bothers me about them is that they're one more example of our
>>> language being twisted into meaninglessness. If that's "reality",
>>> give me fantasy any day - you know, the ones where people aren't
>>> constantly trying to stab each other in the back.
>>>
>> Well, the stabbing parts seem scripted to me. I agree with you
>> about the misuse of the word. Another word which seems to be
>> misused is factoid. And I hate the PR people who have been
>> trained to begin the answer to any question with the word
>> absolutely.
>>
> Absolutely.
Aaaaarrrgggghhhh!!!!!
/BAH ;-)
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317515 is a reply to message #317477] |
Fri, 06 May 2016 09:28 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Roger Blake wrote:
> On 2016-05-05, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>> If the rhetoric has language which divides people into two groups,
>> there will be hate. If there are more than two, tolerance is invoked
>> and rational debate and thinking is employed.
>
> Nonsense. If that were the case then anyone expressing a controversial
> opinion that angers someone or some group would be "spouting hate."
> (Of course that is the position take by the PC crowd.)
Whenever there is a "They" (note the capitalization) in a sentence,
the topic is promoting fear of the unknown. When the fear is
entrenched, it becomes hate. If you don't like the word hate, then
the reaction of a person is constant adrenalin rushes which produce
the fight/flight response. Since They are epherimal, the engrained
reaction will be fight (there is nowhere to run). Constant anger
towards the same entity is hate.
>
> You have still provided no evidence whatsoever for your assertion
> that Mark Levin is "spouting hate."
>
He does the They patter.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317517 is a reply to message #317478] |
Fri, 06 May 2016 09:28 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On 5 May 2016 12:25:49 GMT
> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On 4 May 2016 13:02:19 GMT
>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> > On 3 May 2016 11:50:51 GMT
>>>> > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Note that this is a single-point failure in communications.
>>>> >> It is worrisome.
>>>> >
>>>> > Not really between the main feed and the cellphones in the house
>>>> > we have three independent routes to the internet, this is not
>>>> > unusual.
>>>> >
>>>> You are assuming governments will not try to control network data.
>>>
>>> I'm hoping that governments I live under will not succeed in doing
>>> so. If end-to-end encryption is taken away it is past time to have an
>>> alternative. Fortunately there is the hardware for a pervasive, wireless
>>> mesh network already in place - all it needs is software and
>>> participants.
>>>
>> US Congress keeps trying. I think it's inevitable.
>
> Oddly enough that's one government I don't want to live under.
>
We live under two: the Fed and the state. The state is supposed to
be the uppermost but the steady erosion of the Constitution is
switching the heirarchy.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317523 is a reply to message #317512] |
Fri, 06 May 2016 11:34 |
mausg
Messages: 2483
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2016-05-06, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>> On 2016-05-04, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>>>> On 03/05/2016 13:35, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> > On 3 May 2016 11:50:50 GMT
>>>> > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> The US is repeating the mid-1960s again.
>>>> >
>>>> > So we can expect some decent music and a space program in the near
>>>> > future then, along with a number of less pleasant things.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> NASA is not going back to the Moon but its children are. Moon Express
>>>> plans to land on the Moon next year.
>>>>
>>>
>>> NASA are idiots.
>>>
>> because?
>>
>>
>
> Given all the problems with getting to Mars it would seem to make sense to
> start with something a bit closer and then scale up. Fortunately some
> private groups want to go to the Moon, otherwise you'd need a Chinese
> passport to go there in a few years.
>
I think that Maars is a handy unattainable goal, you can talk about it
forever without having to actuallly go there. Consider a Soviet gulag on
the Kolmya, it is a veritable paradise compared to Mars, even a capsule
at the botom of the ocean would be. Discovering something useful.. very
unlikely. A base on the Moon, and on to the asteroids, would be a better
goal.
--
greymaus
iD|marrA Raa|fLa
Ireland
|
|
|
|
| Re: AM radio Qbasic [message #317529 is a reply to message #317515] |
Fri, 06 May 2016 12:36 |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote
> Roger Blake wrote
>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote
>>> If the rhetoric has language which divides people into two groups,
>>> there will be hate. If there are more than two, tolerance is invoked
>>> and rational debate and thinking is employed.
>> Nonsense. If that were the case then anyone expressing a controversial
>> opinion that angers someone or some group would be "spouting hate."
>> (Of course that is the position take by the PC crowd.)
> Whenever there is a "They" (note the capitalization) in
> a sentence, the topic is promoting fear of the unknown.
BULLSHIT. Most obviously when you say that They
need most assistance than adults with little kids etc.
> When the fear is entrenched, it becomes hate.
BULLSHIT. Some fear what the NSA can get up
to, doesn’t turn into hate with anyone but eejuts.
> If you don't like the word hate, then the reaction
> of a person is constant adrenalin rushes which
> produce the fight/flight response.
Plenty of us aren't that stupid with individuals like that.
> Since They are epherimal, the engrained
> reaction will be fight (there is nowhere to run).
There is always the alternative to just ignore them.
> Constant anger towards the same entity is hate.
Wrong again with say the anger about flagrant political dishonesty.
>> You have still provided no evidence whatsoever for
>> your assertion> that Mark Levin is "spouting hate."
> He does the They patter.
That's not spouting hate.
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
