Posts by Jellied Eel 6909 publicly visible posts • joined 18 Aug 2008
Has anyone tried opening a can in micro-gravity yet? Shirley someone must've tried it on the vomit comet at the very least!
Yes! And it was the Dutch, because they know the important things in life. I can't find the paper, but they found the CO2 bubbles remained suspended in a beer blob.. Which would then need to be drunk quickly or get a bit messy.
and a momentary 12G if the retro pack fails on ground contact. That requires a seat liner to prevent serious and potentially permanent life changing injuries.
So like I said, not the express elevator to hell. Not sure what you mean by 'sustained 8G' either. Sustained for how long? And yes, lithobraking will hurt. But there's a difference between seat cushioning and some kind of custom fitted cushion for every astronaut or cosmonaut.
Russian capsules have no commonality or interoperability with western ones, for either docking adaptors or spacesuits. Spacesuits are not even compatible between SpaceX and Boeing capsules.
Like I said.. Presumably there's compatibility/interoperability between suits & capsules for contingency or emergency situations
Which implied I didn't know, and I find a lack of compatibility rather suprising given NASA's normal resiliency and redundancy requirements. Seems strange that this would imply having to carry a lot of additional spares rather than standardising or having more commonality.
Russia couldn't easily rescue the Boeing crew.
I wonder if NASA dared to ask?
Smaller errors will make a suit uncomfortable, but you could end up with an awful lot of bruising from using a badly moulded seat-liner at high g forces.
Ah! It's slava-man! So.. first I guess you'd have to define 'high g' given most of that would be experienced entering atmosphere, and then it's not exactly an express elevator to hell, baby. So 1g until the stop at the bottom. From a quick google, I found it to be around 3-4g, so roller coaster ride territory.
I'm also a bit dubious about any need to match seats to crew given the crew that goes up in any given capsule isn't the same as the crew that returns in it. Presumably there's compatibility/interoperability between suits & capsules for contingency or emergency situations. Then again, trying to make a seat liner using spray foam whilst onboard the ISS could be entertaining, and possibly rather messy.
Jellied Eel, is that you?
Yes. No. Maybe. But the comment came from a registered account rather than an AC, so puzzled why you would think this.
But the politics are probably amusing The Putin, and probably also being used to poke fun at NASA, Boing, SpacX etc. The US could probably ask Russia to launch a Soyuz and Soyuz MS-26 already transferred crew to the ISS whilst the Boing crew remained stranded. One passenger on that flight being Don Pettit, who's added yet another mission patch and is someone I'd love to share a beer or 3 with.
But the optics of having Russia 'rescue' the Boing crew obviously wouldn't look good, and would undoubtedly be exploited by Russia. The geopolitics are kinda fun, eg if Russia, China, India all offered a lift home, whilst sitting back and laughing at the fiasco around the current US manned spaceflight program.
The only thing here is that computers are doing it faster, putting hard-working editors out of work.
This is the problem with the MSM, and the challenges they face from alternative media. 'AI' editors can grammar and spell check articles, but can't reliably 'fact check' them. 'AI' journalists can ingest stories from wire services and massage them into stories, but can't 'fact check' them either. And 'AI' can't do one of the important things journalists should be doing, ie investigative journalism. But that takes time and money, so human journalists struggle to do that anyway. Governments are probably just fine with this, and journalists not being able to hold their feet to the fire.. And if they do, their stories can just be dismissed as 'fake news' if they contradict the official misinformation.
I do and it's pretty much the same as you describe. The "shelves" (not sure that's a good word but I can't think of a better one) are often full of fairly recent things or popular things and some of the more niche things only turn up if searched for or by accident.
I think 'shelves' is the official term, and is meant to describe the chaos that Netflix and other streaming services use to describe their content organisation. I have real shelves bracketing this desk, with books and DVDs on them. Difference is they're organised the way I want, not how Neflix thinks I want them.. Which is my gripe. I want the power to organise 'shelves'. So as an example, the first 'shelf' in my current view is-
"Because you watched Cold Pursuit.."
And then 9 videos that seem very vaguely related, and have metadata like 'visually striking', and 3 of the recommendations I've already watched. And then other 'shelves' are full of genres I probably don't want to watch, and an odd mix of videos that it knows I've watched, watched a bit of and abandoned, or watched but Netflix seems to have forgotten.
Perhaps, but given that it is an always-changing thing it's not entirely useful as a metric. unogs.com is your friend.
But it's useful to me. So I want to have some control over the impersonal personalisation, and organise content the way I want. Netflix and other services collect a lot of user data in an attempt to profile us, but the results generally suggest they don't know me at all. I shouldn't have to rely on 3rd party services to try and find something to watch, and I shouldn't have to rely on wiki to find out what a video is about. And apparently Netflix currently only has 40 horror movies or shows, which is probably a limit imposed by Netflix rather than the reality.
But it's also probably indicative of the chaos behind the scenes. AWS is quite content to charge Netflix for all the queries generated by users like me, desperately trying to find something to watch, or just generating shelves full of stuff I don't want. So I'm not suprised Netflix is struggling to understand AWS, and curious how much it could reduce their bills by just giving me some kind of control.
I'm sure this might provide some sort of valuable "insights" about video consumption but, for the love of god, just stick me in a box labelled ADHD and give up.
Netflix does videos? Not sure about valuable insights given the latest exciting new videos are a 'shelf' titled "Popular mobile games for you".
This.. puzzles me as I've never watched Netflix on a mobile, mostly via PC browser and PS5. And in typical scream.. I mean streaming service, doesn't give me the ability to hide 'shelves' or re-organise content in any way that I might want. So there are 'shelves' for horror, scarey and a bazillion more 'curating' content into overlapping categories, often featuring the same movie.. That I may already have watched. Oh, and of course there's a 'shelf' for watch again.
Meanwhile, potentially useful stuff like a plot synopsis got squeezed down to a 1-liner in most cases.
I suspect this is a cunning plan to make it appear that Netflix (and Prime) have more content than they actually do, especially as relevant 'shelves' like new stuff usually gets buried. I think both are trying to meet the definition of doom-scrolling, along with the old adage of 'down, not across. But if the way they manage UIs and categorise content is anything to go by, it's no great suprise they struggle to understand their own data or AWS costs.
Ah the good old days when the real iron was sitting out on islands between the boring rows of pedestrian gear (yeah they had mainframes too but they were in a separate section of the datacenter and I didn't deal with them)
Yep. It's strange the way technology goes in circles. I started my career in the days of big iron, wrangling the newtorks of an Amdahl 5990-1400 (probably less compute than my phone has now), VAX8850 cluster and a genuine IBM AT with both VYT and 3270 emulation. Then ended up at an ISP and attempting to argue that an IBM AS/400 was a better webserver solution than racks full of Sun boxen. And then leaning nonchalantly on a 'cloud' while amusing myself at weekends freefalling through real ones.
It always puzzled me why clients would convince themselves that renting space on someone else's HPE servers was better/safer than using their own. Especially when the rental model would often replace client's HPE tin with a 'solution' that charged them back per Mbit, byte, flop and anything else that marketing could figure out a way to meter & rate. But I guess when regulators started cracking down on dodgy timeshare rentals, those sales types had to end up somewhere.. And pretend computing hasn't gone from mainframe-> peer-peer -> thin client and back to mainframe again.
I'm just glad I became independent and can try and convince clients that 'cloud' isn't always the best solution, and the 'cloud' just hides multiple sins that their shareholders & customers might not thank them for when the 'cloud' has a bad day. Again.
So, while not cheaper than on prem, it will be competitively priced.
It would have to be, for now at least.. I'm no server expert, but..
Installing the HPE servers solves both problems – it's well and truly ready for SAP and is the same hardware HPE offers on-prem
I was expecting this beast to be at least a 9' rack with lots of blinking lights.. But it's kinda small, and says it'll scale up to 4 chassis, probably in a single rack. May need a sparky and plumber to keep it fed and cooled though. But if you're the kind of business that needs this kind of grunt.. why would you want to trust it to AWS instead of buying a chassis scaled to your business requirements and upgrade as needed?
I'm sure by 'competitively priced' will mean priced to look like it'll be cheaper than running it on-prem. For now. But then AWS will have you locked into a 3yr deal, and probably with an option to relentlessly jack up the prices, or charge for additional services? I have no idea how much these beasts cost, but if you need one, I'd suggest it's a good time to be looking very carefully about migrating stuff out of the 'cloud'.
Congress has the power of the purse, not the president, so they can't cut legitimately allocated spending.
I'm not suggesting the GAO's budget is cut, I'm suggesting it should perhaps have more funding and resources so it can hold Federal government to account. DoD hasn't been able to reconcile their budget for nearly a decade, yet somehow manages to find billions to give to Ukraine.. I mean US defence contractors. Or just the billions that have been poured into Ukraine with no accountability.
But republicans have consistently stood against giving the IRS more resources to go after tax cheats, even though they return over $3 for every $1 they spend.
But why bother when Biden can just give tax cheats a blanket immunity from prosecution, along with a get out of jail free card for any crimes committed since 2014? Perhaps a more efficient solution would be to simplify the tax code so there are fewer ways to cheat? Wouldn't that be more.. efficient? But that's just right-thinking, ie wanting a smaller, more efficient and less expensive government.
Then there could be other things to investigate. So the DoJ's Inspector General just released another report into Jan 6th. It found that the FBI had 23 CI's inside and outside the Capitol that somehow managed to evade prosecution, despite being involved in the 'insurrection'. Which also means FBI Director Wray lied to Congress, or was.. flexible with the truth when he claimed there were no FBI agents at the protests. That may explain the mysterious Mr Epps, who was on video inciting protestors, but escaped prosecution. It doesn't explain why, if the CI's were providing actionable intelligence, the FBI, Pelosi, the Capitol Police failed to act. Or why Trump's offer of NG resources was approved. Wray has tendered his resignation, but not sure if Kesh Patel can reject that and fire him instead, or just prosecute him for perjury and maybe offences under the Hatch Act. But then Biden has floated the idea that his helpers might also get Hunter-style get out of jail free cards.
Or the Fed just announced another set of revised employment figures that basically reversed Biden's claim of increases in employment. Funny how that happened in an election year.
SpaceX might be able to spin off Starlink if it can be said to make a profit
I think that unlikely, especially as Starlink's already launching replacements for the older birds that have fallen from the sky, and so far, all Starship has managed to launch is a banana.
There have been official statements that the fines were for non-disclosure of Twitter stock purchases prior to the buyout.
Where? This is the problem with fake news. An official statement would be something on the SEC's website. Otherwise all we still have is speculation, hearsay and anonymous sources say.. Which aren't official statements. I (well, someone with deeper pockets) could say that an anonymous FWS source said that unless Gensler donated $10m to the FWS's home for wayward goats, he'd face 34 counts of animal molestation.
But as El Reg put it-
"Yesterday the commission staff issued a settlement demand that required Mr Musk agree within 48 hours to either accept a monetary payment or face charges on numerous counts,"
Charges and counts. Not fines. Plea deals and plea bargaining is normal (or abnormal, if you're a Biden), but aren't necessarily justice. Spiro's a lawyer, they're generally specific with language, so if they were fines, he could/should have said 'face numerous fines'.
The number of Cat 5 storms FLA has experienced in the last 20 years is just a "Statistical anomaly"
So.. Do you actually have any evidence for any increase in either frequency or intensity that could be linked to CO2? No? Didn't think so. And by evidence, I mean actual data? Not stuff like the media (or other idiots) claiming the 'FOCF' is a 'convicted felon' or 'rapist'? That bit of fake news just cost ABC $15m.
(And in another astounding example of fake news, CNN found a Syrian 'prisoner' allegedly locked in a cell who had almost as good a manicure as CNN's chief correspondent. I hadn't realised CNN was where Mark 'Biter' Thompson had ended up, but perhaps explains a lot.)
There's nothing wrong with a legal process offering a settlement before going to a full trial. We do it all the time with fixed penalty notices in the UK and other such fines.
You, along with most of the downvoters are missing the point.
So the claim is essentially pay up, or face charges. Let my try an analogy. You bring me the head of the SEC. I then say I won't prosecute you for murder if you pay, say, $100m So a 2-tier justice system where the rich and shameless can settle to make crimes go away, and the less wealthy can't. Then there's the claim that there was only 48hrs notice to make a decision. FPNs are rather different given legislation permits that as a disposal route and specifies it as a penalty option. I also think they're equally unfair given they're priced in such a way to tempt people to pay the penalty rather than challenge the decisions.
You are also taking what Musk has said as gospel, well, let's just say "stretched the truth"
Not me, because I've repeatedly said 'we don't know', and that if the SEC believes Musk is guilty of something, then they should charge and argue the case(s) in court. Maybe they're not very confident, hence the pressure to decide in only 48hrs. But others have suggested they're fines, in which case SEC just issues the fine(s) and then Musk has the right to appeal those, but again we just don't know. But people are happily allowing their own prejudices to shape their opinions, ie Musk has 'stretched the truth' in the past, therefore he must be guilty of something.. But that's up to the courts to decide. But it's been >48hrrs, and doesn't seem to be any new news, which can also be a problem with settlements given they're often confidential.
I still think that there's a sort of Pauli exclusion principle for overinflated egos, and the two can't stay in the same close orbit for very long before things fall apart.
Yep. But Trump has never been shy about firing people. Also the ThunderF00t video got me thinking about egos with the 'DOGE' poster. Robert Downey Jnr modeled Tony Stark on Musk. The DOGE poster looks like Musk is trying to model himself on RDJ. Plus it made the point that DOGE kinda duplicates the US Government Accounting Office, so maybe Trump should dodge DOGE and just give the GAO more resources and powers to hold other Federal agencies to account.
Nah it's because Elon isn't on the verge of bankruptcy unlike capt tangerine, has a social network that *some* people inexplicably continue to use and he who pays the piper calls the tune.....
Musk might be.. But it's hard to tell given the X web is mostly private, apart from TSLA. So X has accumulated an unknown amount of debt, and most of the businesses probably aren't profitable. So take Starlink for example. It's spent an enormous amount of money on satellite launches and ground infrastructure, and a relatively small amount of revenue from subscriptions. But a lot of that debt (and Musk's personal net worth) is based on TSLA stock, and a lot of that would have been pledged as security against loans.
That could then lead to the dreaded margin calls, if TSLA's stock price swings the wrong way. Or possibly if Musk can't get his ludicrous pay/bonus deal approved & doesn't get new stock. Musk is weird like that given his X's can & do move the market and change his fortunes by a few billion either way.. But if that's intentional, risks the wrath of the SEC, courts and the kind of stuff that got Ebbers and Enron into a lot of trouble. But there's also the rumored SpacX IPO which would give Musk and other investors the chance to cash out. And reveal more info about SpacX's current and projected financials.
ThunderF00t just dropped a video sorta about this-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0uFO6BjWSs
Making much about the $3bn in taxpayer's money that's been spent on HLS, and boots on the Mun are long overdue. Which is kind of interesting when put into context. So progress on Starship and HLS has so far cost less than one year's tax payer funding of the Bbc. Which is one of those spending priority things for goverments to ponder, ie the UK could scrap the Bbc and start a space race with Musk. Are stories like "Robbie Williams on why he's played by a chimp in new film" more important than say, planting the Union flag on the Moon, along with figuring out how to make a decent cup of tea in space?
If he had appeared, he would have a chance to make an argument for not receiving fines for non-disclosure of material information regarding his stock purchases before he purchased Twitter.
This is just more speculation and we have no idea what the SEC's beef might be, other than it might be related to Neuralink. Plus there's potential lawfare, ie demanding Musk respond to subpoenas could just be a timewasting exercise. Sure, deposing Musk at a time and place of the SEC's choosing might have some legal weight, but if the SEC has questions, fire them off to Musk's lawyers to deal with. People can take the 5th (hic) and refuse to attend, and then the SEC can charge based on what they have, or go forth and multiply. Much the same with fining for non-disclosure. If the SEC thinks there's a penalty, then they can just issue the fine, Musk could appeal it, El Reg can write another article about Musk, and the rest of us can sit back and eat more popcorn.
Because I'm starting to think it is the other way around. Trump publicly lowers himself to Musk the way he does to Putin, so either he sees Musk as his boss or Musk has some sort of dirt on him (again just like Putin) that gives him no choice
I've seen conspiracy theories that it's the other way around and Musk sucking up to Trump, because Trump will have the power to pardon. Which could be related to the SEC investigations, and the prospect of the Empire of X imploding in a way that could make Enron & Theranos look like a bounced cheque. Or Musk having to deconflict himself in the same way Dick Cheney didn't might give Musk some plausible deniability as he'd stepped aside before the implosion, so it wasn't his fault.
These sorts of fines don't go through a court anymore than if you didn't pay your property tax on time and were assessed a late fee wouldn't.
We don't know what the alleged charges are, but they're probably more serious than say, late filing penalties. If they're allegations around stuff like securities fraud, then they would end up in court. Plus there's stuff like having to state litigation risks in company reports, if they might have a material impact on the company. But those get fun given privately held companies are a lot more opaque than publicly traded ones.
There is nothing for SEC to deny, it's for SEC's lawyers to respond to the letter from Musk's lawyer.
Sure there is. They could deny the demand for money. Which they kinda have with their NCND response.
Musk's lawyers letter was dated the 12th Dec, so don't expect SEC or their lawyers to reply the next day, within 24 hours.
Why not? If the lawyer's letter is true, then the SEC expected Musk to pay up or face multiple charges, and only gave Musk 48hrs to respond. If true, that isn't a lot of time. Then again, the investigation(s) probably aren't entirely a suprise given the statement that they'd refused to co-operate with subpoenas from the SEC. And then there's possible leaks-
CNBC, on the other hand, claims to have had more success and cites an unnamed source with knowledge of the investigation who contradicted some of Spiro's claims.
But the 48hrs is up, so if SEC hasn't been paid, they can now file charges and we might learn more. And for avoidance of doubt, I'm not defending Musk, simply questioning whether this is justice, or not. Again if SEC has evidence of crimes, they should charge. If they only gave 48hrs to settle, that doesn't seem entirely reasonable given the complexities around securities law. And it doesn't seem fair if the world's 2nd richest man can buy his way out from those charges.
You appear to be basing your comment entirely on Musks lawyers take on the situation.
If it were untrue, then surely the SEC would just deny it? Then potential fun going after the lawyer for making a false allegation. I still suggest it stinks, because it demonstrates the 2-tier justice system. Pay the demand, and all your troubles go away. Can't pay? Face the full weight of the law. See also the US and their asset forfeiture scams..
We're missing a whole bunch of important information.I would not be surprised if the SEC has indeed charged Musk with something, his lawyer failed to handle it, and now they want the settlement the lawyer agreed on.
If they had charged Musk, then there would be records like court documents. If there had been an agreed settlement, then the claim that Musk had been given 48hrs to pay up or else would be false, and his lawyer could get in trouble for that.
It's like the old days of file sharing cases where sharp lawyers would buy lists of illegal downloaders, get John Doe court orders to match IP addresses to physical ones, then fire off a bulk mailer telling people they'd been very naughty, but could settle for only $1,000 (or more). Which works because if a percentage do settle, lawyers make money and if people are innocent, they know it'd cost them a lot more than $1,000. Might be legal, but still borders on extortion.
But if Musk is guilty of.. something, then he should be charged. The shakedown in this case is probably going to be for a lot more than $1,000 though.
"Yesterday the commission staff issued a settlement demand that required Mr Musk agree within 48 hours to either accept a monetary payment or face charges on numerous counts," Spiro wrote, presumably meaning Musk could have accepted making a payment rather than receiving one.
Sounds like the SEC might be copying their ideas about law enforcement from the Bbc. Pay up, or we'll prosecute you. Maybe.
If Musk broke the law, then he should be facing the charges the SEC claim they could prosecute him for. Then, being how law is supposed to work, Musk would have the right to defend himself and might win. The SEC may be trying to circumvent the traditional due process and if Musk believes he's innocent, he could quite rightly tell the SEC to go forth and multiply. Or just 'See you in court'.
It sounds a bit.. dubious. On the one hand, the SEC might be trying to save themselves the cost of what would likely be an expensive trial. On the other, Musk has the right to a fair trial. But it has eau de fish about it, ie only giving Musk 48hrs to seek counsel on 'numerous' and unspecified counts, in what is usually a pretty complex area of law.
Then again, it's also how the US 'justice' system works. So settle now, or be taken to court, which can be unjust given defendents might not want to waste money on lawyers to fight a claim that could often have little merit.
BTW what happened to that Brexit GPS system that didn't depend on those untrustworthy EU satellites?
OneWeb's satellites have clocks..
I haven't heard anything about it for ages?
And then there's SkyNet. Or there's just enough assorted satellites already broadcasting from orbit, and cheap chips that can pick up signals from most of them to get a decent enough fix. I suspect it's only a problem if a bunch of those satellites have stopped beeping, but then that's a situation where the ability to aim a missile up either the left or right nostril becomes a bit moot.
Well, Musk lets you use Starlink until he doesn't.
And the EU lets Starlink operate Earth stations in EU countries, until they don't. So scope for some mutually assured destruction, sanctions etc if Starlink doesn't play nicely with others. Then as for security, laser brooms probably aren't the solution to space junk, that's more likely plasma or gamma ray brooms.
Personally, I think it would be an excellent idea if EUrocrats like von der Liar or Rutte were lobbed into MEO, and left there. Especially after Rutte's comments that we should be spending less on health, education and social spending and more on weapons. If we increased spending on education, we might need less bombs because we'd have more intelligent politicians.
The goal of net neutrality, that ISP don't favour a given company, is not key here as it comes down to the question of priority for emergency calls and that should not depend upon who is paying for bandwidth (consumer or big tech).
Yep, but then that's the main point of the show. It's unsuprising that the divisions are pretty clearly defined by content providers who don't want to pay more for bandwidth, and network engineers who know that not all traffic is created equal, and some is more important than others. Plus regulators also understand the importance, hence incumbents can and do allow non-neutral services, when they make sense and aren't being abused for competitive advantage. The cost of bandwidth will always be an issue though for as long as there are asymettric traffic and cash flows.
But the problem is one of how do you actually reserve bandwidth for this? The obvious technical one is for such traffic to use a QoS marker,
You don't, but then CoS/QoS tends to confuse people who think it does. All it does is tell devices on the network the traffic priority, so TC5 or EF traffic is generally the 'special case' that gets expedited and skips the queues. Control packets or frames get the highest priority because if that traffic drops, everything has an annoying habit of collapsing into a steaming pile of bits. But an important principle of regulation is equality, ie everyone gets the same treatment whether they're wholesale, retail or the SP's own services.
So it's a combination of the 128kbps not really being 'reserved' as such, just there'll be a policy alllowing 128kbps of TC5 traffic. If there's no traffic needing that priority, the whole circuit can be used. If a customer wants to prioritise 128kbps of CoD traffic, they can. But generally that's implemented at Layer 2, ie on the terminating NID and often a VLAN. Then SP customers can configure that on the routers they supply to prioritise their VoIP implementation. It gets trickier at the NNI/Peering level, but then that's generally not extended and the idea is to prioritise traffic to their own VoIP/E.911 gateways.
TL;DR you should never depend on consumer-grade IP traffic meeting any given service level.
Yep, which is why I was glad when I stopped doing business network design and focused on backbones. Yes, your Internet is down. Yes, I understand that your factory can't do anything because you decided to connect your business critical site to your SAP system with the cheapest xDSL service you could find..
Does anyone other than me remember MS-DOS setting the ToS/DCP fields to make their applications more performant?
Yep, but Windows (NT?) rather than DOS. And then hapless MS types getting flamed because if all MS packets give themselves the highest priority, then in an MS environment, they'll all have the same priority. Plus unless CoS/QoS is implemented on the network, those bits would just ignored anyway. Or when it started to get implemented, out-of-contract traffic would get set to best-efforts, because all traffic must be treated equally. On the Internet anyway.
I don't think IP broadcasts played nicely with IP over ATM networks which could have been a problem for some legacy networking a protocols.
ATM supported broadcast and multicast traffic, arguably more reliably than IP.. But the problem isn't just 'legacy' protocols, it's mostly the way broadcasts are overused. So I developed L2VPNs and Ethernet over MPLS. Yey! Now broadcast storms can go global! And Microsoft of course has a lot to answer for, ie new patch, and Win11 is still merrily spewing out traffic, trying to find XBoxes, printers or 'My Phone' that don't exist. Would it be so hard to let those announce their presence if/when I connected them to my network(s)?
But Pink Floyd described bad broadcast implementations.. and I was at that concert!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vi7cuAjArRs
Then again, looking at Wireshark on a typical Win11 implementation, there's a LOT of traffic going 'Hello, Hello, is there anybody out there?' and I'm probably uncomfortable numbed to it. Luckily a decent switch should let you drop that junk.
In any case I think the netheads won. I believe most telephony, or at least LTE, is now carried over IP.
Ish.. Although ideally it's carried over MPLS. Which then gets into some politics, like 'net neutrality. Like I was involved in designing a new broadband network for a country with a very strict regulator. The network was EoMPLS/L2VPN and every access circuit had 128Kbps reserved with a TC of 5. Customers could use that, or not, but the regulator gave some heavy hints that that should be used for voice, given voice is a safety-of-life service and they'd be fined A LOT if end-users couldn't make emergency phone calls. Luckily that country wasn't the US, so could implement this, without falling foul of the 'net neutrality holy war. In the US, VoIP customers have died because they couldn't call and the FCC is still trying to sort out that mess..
Great article. However in defence of ATM, it was designed to allow highly efficient hardware switching and therefore high throughput. It was designed around the limitations of the day, but as general purpose processors became more powerful and more of the stack could be done in software that need waned
Not really. I still argue that MPLS is kinda ATM's revenge. ATM was designed to replace circuit switched networks, support Multiple Protocols (hint, hint) and perhaps most importantly, provide some deterministic behaviour. But ATM was complicated, scarey, and a lot of the net-heads didn't understand it. So then as the article says, it often came down to cell tax..
Saying that the TCP/IP protocol has a lot to be blamed for. The fixed header, poorly defined elements etc has meant over the years it has been abused that has led to a spaghetti of work arounds.
Such is the nature of network engineering. Like the cell tax argument was mostly true, but the fault of the IP headers being so damn fat.. And mostly unused, and became even more bloated with IPv6. Plus curiosities inherited from the DoD days, where sender was more important than recipient, so source address came first. Then stuff like this-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differentiated_services
DiffServ uses a 6-bit differentiated services code point (DSCP) in the 6-bit differentiated services field (DS field) in the IP header for packet classification purposes. The DS field, together with the ECN field, replaces the outdated IPv4 TOS field
Which then allowed marketing types to look at... 64 classes of service! Make it so! This differentiates our service compared to our competitors who only offer 5! And then generally ignoring boring details like explaining how CoS really works, configuring it, training support to handle calls about packets ending up in the bit-bucket or why 64 classes don't really matter when there's only maybe 4 hardware queues.
And at the same time-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_of_service
Prior to the redefinition, the ToS field could specify a datagram's priority and request a route for low-latency, high-throughput, or highly-reliable service. Based on these ToS values, a packet would be placed in a prioritized outgoing queue, or take a route with appropriate latency, throughput, or reliability.
So ToS was actually rather useful, at least within a service provider's domain, but rarely got implemented. Despite my best <cough> efforts. And it was much the same with ECN. A rather handy thing to know, but became 'obsoleted' with the introduction of DSCP.. Just as VoIP was coming along and a firehose of UDP traffic aimed in the general direction of the bit bucket, even if that was given EF. And then there were VPNs, so FUN! with more headers, and trying to cram those down other L2VPNs. And then having to explain to customers that a 1500byte packet ain't going to fit down an xDSL circuit with a 1492byte MTU, and if you've set the DF bit, it's going to end up in the bit bucket..
So luckily, and thanks to our dear author, MPLS came along so network engineers could sleep easier. F'it and forward it, along the most appropriate LSP, and all those IP annoyances (mostly) became an edge problem. Gimme a compact & bijou lable with the relevant information and I can forward/switch that faster than routing it. And then for additional FUN!, the Internet became just another VRF.
Which is also getting back to the traceroute thing. As the author says, you can traceroute across LSPs, assuming you know how to drive traceroute. And it's implemented in the MPLS domain, which I'd argue it shouldn't be.. Because a) it gives the switch/routers more work to do and b) as an end-user, what can you do with the output anyway given actionable stuff like IP ToS and ECN have been 'obsoleted'? If a switch (router) or circuit is having a bad day, then floods of ICMP traffic needing to be processed might just make that worse. And in a well-behaved (mostly) SP, we already know about the problem(s) and are working on fixing them.
But as an unashamed Bell-head. I love MPLS because I can switch Tbps of traffic, and most of the IP stuff became a software problem. It's still FUN! sometimes because in the kinds of networks I tend to deal with, there's no longer 'The' Internet, but potentially multiple Internets, all happily pretending not to be best-efforts in their own VRFs. But the late, great Jon Postel described the Internet best-
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc791
The internet protocol does not provide a reliable communication facility. There are no acknowledgments either end-to-end or hop-by-hop. There is no error control for data, only a header checksum. There are no retransmissions. There is no flow control.
But at least MPLS gives us network engineers a fighting chance of managing some of that stuff..
The trouble with bots is any idiot can create one, and they often do*. Whether that's 'analytics', scraping content, performing DoS attacks, or just rendering analytics & social-credit type apps essentially useless. Plus they end up consuming an awful lot of bandwidth that the bot creators don't pay for, and I guess for large sites, consuming resources on proxies, firewalls and servers in general.
Potential solutions like good'ol robots.txt don't work, so perhaps it's time for regulators (and moderators) to step in, and do something about the abuse of systems, and the waste of resources.
(I predict that in <15mins, I'll have another demonstration of this.)
Australia had the choice to get submarines from France, learning how to build and to operate them and be independant.
Except in typical French fashion the Attack class subs were overdue and over budget. Partly due to wanting to try and convert France's nuclear Barracudas to diesel-electric.
Instead, they went the AUKUS way, won't get any submarines in our lifetimes (and probably never), and will have to beg UK and USA to see theirs patrol Australian waters...
Maybe you're old, but they're due in a decade or so. Also if I were Captain of an Astute, I don't think I'd need much begging to go visit Garden Island instead of operating out of cold, grey UK ports. Then again, submariners have much less opportunity to sunbathe on patrol compared to crews of surface ships. But Australia gets to contribute to the design of the Astute replacement, build the new boats, plus a lot of technology transfer under the deal. Which includes fun stuff like quantum technology, so Aussies can have quark soup to go with their pies. Or perhaps more importantly, it'll create a lot of new skilled jobs at the Osborne shipyard. It could create more, if only Australia would drop its non-nuclear policy, then it could perhaps do a deal with RR to build, operate and maybe export SMRs.
Australia's kinda weird that way. Despite being very rich in uranium, it doesn't really exploit it by working up the value chain and producing fuel. Which is a shame given there's a bit of a nuclear renaissance at the moment, an insatiable demand for energy and a distinct lack of fuel processing & reprocessing facilities in friendly countries. But Australia's also been discovering the cost & reliability problems with their current 'Green' energy policy, so might hopefully change its attitude to reliable, affordable zero carbon energy.
...we would have a glorious future of < rising strains of Elgar >
Instead, we have the rising strains of energy costs. The subsidies are around £500 per household per annum. The 'renewables' scumbags tell us their tech is so cheap, yet demand ever more subsidies and go price cap in hand to morons like Millibrain, who throw them even more of our money. Then we get news like this-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq5lw84w1yeo
The UK economy shrank for the second month in a row in October as concerns about the Budget continued to weigh on confidence.
...Sir Keir has said he wants the UK to secure the highest sustained economic growth of the G7 group of rich nations.
Last week, he set out additional "milestones" to allow people to measure the government's progress. On the economy, he has pledged to increase real household disposable income per person.
He could do that by removing subsidies, cutting energy costs and wouldn't need an 'AI' to explain this to him. But then free gear Kier isn't exactly short of disposable income.
I just wish we could actually build them, and micro units as well...
We can. Rolls Royce has been building SMRs to power our nuclear submarines for decades. The problem is that we still have incompetent sh*theads like Ed Millibrain in charge of energy policy, and he is probably one of the most dishonest men in politics-
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2024/12/13/milibands-300-energy-saving-is-smoke-mirrors/#more-82928
“Don’t take my word for it. The national energy system operator said that not only was clean power achievable, but it will lead to lower costs of electricity and indeed it can leads to lower bills.”
But Robinson hit back: “I’m puzzled by this, Mr Miliband. You’re quoting this independent national energy system operator. Let me quote them: ‘Overall costs to consumers would not increase from the shift to a clean power system’.
And we know this because ever since Millibrain's 'Climate Change Act' and regulatory capture by the 'renewables' lobby, our energy costs have rocketed to the most expensive in Europe, if not the world. If he'd spend a fraction of what he's expecting us to spend to dump CO2 in a hole in the ground, RR would be a lot closer to getting civil SMRs into production, and we could probably make money exporting them.
They should only run datacenters on the true-blue 'Murican fossil fuels with natural gas, oil, and coal..
A lot of datacentres already do, and the coal states are popular locations. But xkcd summarises the issue-
https://xkcd.com/1162/
If you want lots of energy, eat uranium. 1J=1W/s, solar is roughly 1kW/m^2 maximum potential energy based on insolation at surface, but maybe 20% efficent, so 200J/m^2 vs coal's 24MJ/kg. Uranium is kinda off the charts, at 76,000GJ/Kg, which is the point xkcd makes.
Then there's the small matter of night time, or just variable insolation during the day with clouds affecting solar output. So the usual problem with 'renewables' claiming stuff like having '2.2GW' of installed capacity, which is usually based on nameplate or theoretical capacity rather than actual deliverable energy. Which then means having to add cost installing massive battery arrays to act as large capacitors and smooth out the power. SMR's like Royals Royce can deliver 300MW 24x7x365 far more reliably and in a far smaller footprint that solar (or wind) could ever manage.
Oh, and location is also rather important, ie-
https://stopthesethings.com/2024/10/21/hurricane-havoc-twisters-wipeout-thousands-of-solar-panels-across-us/
The footage, shared by North Carolina-based power and gas company Duke Energy, showed the damage left behind in a field of Florida solar panels. In the video, taken Oct. 10 at the Lake Placid Solar Power Plant in Sylvan Shores, a clear path of destruction can be seen snaking through the middle of the field where the twister passed over.
But even this will be a hard sell to an incoming administration who believes all regulation is bad and will be appointing incompetent sycophants to lead everything, all the better to prove their core belief that "government is incompetent so we should let the private sector be responsible for everything and also self regulate".
Given that members of the incoming administration appear to have been victims of unlawful intercepts, the opposite might be true. And some of them are competent and should understand some of the technology risks. And I think the problem might be that the private sector has been given too much control, and not enough oversight. But having been on the telco side most of my career, lawful intercept is one of those necessary evils. It is a licence condition, so has to be supported, but I neither need, nor want to know who is accessing probes or mediation devices. I can secure access to a degree, but would have no real way of determining if requests are lawful given they're effectively proxied.
But it's one of those risks that was pointed out during CALEA development that seems to have come true, and isn't necessarily the telco's problem. Industry can advise, but can't necessarily resolve a problem that has been forced on them. Much of that is related to this-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybersecurity_Information_Sharing_Act#Indemnification
Unfortunately, congressional refusal to offer indemnification remains an impediment to real collaboration. At least qualified immunity should be accorded. This is immunity of individuals performing tasks as part of the government's actions.
Especially if this proposal places even more risk on telcos for a service that really should be under state control. Maybe the US should set up a Social Network Operational Oversight Panel comprised of industry and LEA representatives to enhance security, but there's a lot of politics around giving states more powers regarding lawful intercepts.
My understanding of TFA is that he's compelling the FCC to do its job. Presumably CALEA enabled FCC to do it but made it voluntary.
Kind of.. But as usual, it's the problem with legislation. So the general purpose of CALEA is-
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_for_Law_Enforcement_Act#
To amend title 18, United States Code, to make clear a telecommunications carrier's duty to cooperate in the interception of communications for Law Enforcement purposes, and for other purposes.
Which has a rather vague obligation, like what 'other purposes'? Plus then some of the definitions, eg who is a 'telecommunications carrie', which then gets defined-
(A) means a person or entity engaged in the transmission or switching of wire or electronic communications as a common carrier for hire; and...
(C) does not include—
(i) persons or entities insofar as they are engaged in providing information services; and
(ii) any class or category of telecommunications carriers that the Commission exempts by rule after consultation with the Attorney General.
So if you're deemed a 'common carrier', then you have to implement it. If you provide a telephony service, you probably have to implement it. If you're a mobile operator who's customers use WhatsApp, you have to comply with CALEA, but can't comply with a Title III warrant because FaceMelta controls WhatsApp and lobbys hard against having to comply with CALEA, and other national legislation wrt lawful intercept.
And then there's the general policy issues, ie balancing the right to privacy with the need to enforce (some) laws because there are very bad people doing very bad things online. But then there are also very dumb politicians, especially here in the UK-
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/digital-identity
The Data (Use and Access) Bill includes measures to establish a statutory footing for digital verification services without creating a mandatory digital ID system or introducing ID cards.
If you believe this isn't an enabler for mandatory digital or physical ID cards, I've got a Tower Bridge to sell you. Labour just can't let ID cards die in peace.
Wyden has been consistent during his entire time in Congress as being against all these backdoors, PATRIOT Act, all that stuff.
But his proposal doesn't seem to be suggesting a repeal of CALEA, but enforcing it further. It's already the law for telcos, but might also be expanding the remit to include CSPs and apps like Facetime, Signal, WhatsApp etc. It does also seem to suggest that CALEA is the culprit and was compromised, as I suspected. But-
The legislation doesn't specify what these safety measures should include, other than they must "prevent the interception of communications or access to call-identifying information without lawful authorization by any person or entity, including by an advanced persistent threat."
That's nice, but.. how? This describes some of the challenges-
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/sec_usr_cfg/configuration/xe-16/sec-usr-cfg-xe-16-book/sec-lawful-intercept.html
The mediation device uses SNMPv3 to instruct the call connect (CC) IAP to replicate the CC and send the content to the mediation device. The CC IAP can be either an edge router or a trunking gateway for voice, and either an edge router or an access server for data.
To increase the security and to mitigate any SNMPv3 vulnerability, the following tasks are required:
Restricting Access to Trusted Hosts (without Encryption)
Encrypting Lawful Intercept Traffic and Restricting Access to Trusted Hosts
And also one of the possible (probable) vulnerabilities, ie the security of the mediation device, which may not be under the telco's control. One problem with CALEA is the US has many LEAs that could lawfully request metadata or a Title III warrant. So configuring and managing trusted hosts & encrypted VPNs is non-trivial, hence why that's generally outsourced to the mediation device and service.
Plus the telco/SP has no real way of knowing if the intercept request is lawful. An SPs counsel might see a valid Title III warrant, but that doesn't mean the warrant is lawful, ie an LEO may be abusing their powers. And you probably don't want the SP to know the target of an intercept request because if the SP's staff are compromised, maybe they tell the target that Big Brother really is watching you.
So the problem is probably one for the LEAs and security services to solve, ie creating and maintaining a secure mediation layer that can vett and validate requests, then pass that to the mediation gateways to act on. Then it's just the small matter of ensuring that vendors like Cisco etc don't have bugs in their SNMPv3, RADIUS etc implementations that compromise whatever CALEA2.0 turns out to be. Other countries have already kinda solved this problem by restricting the audience, then again they're also complicating it by legislation requiring lawful intercept for additional classes of data, like 'social' media apps. Telcos and SPs might be able to intercept that data, but can't decode or decrypt it.
And then there's the small matter of whether the providers of the mediation gateways can really be trusted, given they have a lot of power.
Maybe they were using long-range drones to scout ahead or Google Maps satellite pictures to navigate.
GPS only tells you how precisely lost you are. A lot of boats use chart plotters to navigate that that might be downloading chart data, weather info etc. Given the Indians have seized the vessel, they'll have a pretty good idea what the connection was being used for.
Does not sound like the type of driver I'd like to be around on the road, with or without Autopilot.
It's not a bug, it's a feature. Soon, Full Self-Darwin will be perfected and safely euthanise Tesla and other EV drivers. It's no suprise that the UK government is currently promoting assisted suicide and AI. Soon, FSD will be able to implement this, with the AI writing 'Goodbye, cruel world' messages to all the drivers 'social' media accounts, and navigating the driver off the nearest cliff. Snag at the moment seems to be an order-of-operation issue where contacting emergency services is occuring before the FSD routine.
(Yes, this is sarcasm, although also a danger that's been demonstrated in books, movies and DefCon events. The rush to flog 'driver aids' where the driver is no longer in control of their vehicle is rather premature.)
The article lists several diseases: "acute pneumonia, influenza, COVID-19, measles, and malaria", and there are vaccines for many of those.
Not really. Measles, influenza and Covid are the only ones with regular vaccines, and flu & Covid rely on having a vaccine to match the strain. Malaria vaccines have only just cleared trials and entering mass production and distribution. Plus there are the reported symptoms-
Those afflicted with the unidentified illness suffered from several flu-like symptoms, including severe headache, cough, high fever, and nausea, with the addition of anemia.
Which don't match some of those diseases, and could even conceivably be a toxin, ie the region is starving, so it's possible it's food contamination. Some molds and fungi can cause the same symptoms. The wiki article also mentions someone from the region was hospitalised in Italy-
A man who worked 500 kilometers from the documented outbreak area was hospitalized at the San Luca Hospital in Lucca, Italy, from 22 November to 3 December 2024. He was discharged upon recovery. Samples were collected and will be sent to the Istituto Superiore di Sanità for analysis
So the results should be known by now. It could be 'Disease X', it could just be e.coli.
...although from what I can see online this may be a known disease as the deaths seem to be linked to severe malnutrition in children.
This is the stuff that helps fuel conspiracy theories. The hype around 'Disease X' has already started to spread, starting a possible new Panicdemic. But as the Bbc put it-
At least 79 people have died from an unknown disease that is causing flu-like symptoms in south-western Democratic Republic of Congo, the health ministry says.
That was on the 4th, saying that the WHO had despatched field investigators. The CDC has similar field teams so by now, 'Disease X' should have been identified or sequenced and be known. Maybe it's a Covid mutation, maybe it's something new, but as wiki puts it-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Kwango_province_disease_outbreak
These areas have suffered food shortages in preceding months and have low vaccination coverage.
So as you say, severe malnutrition + disease = higher CFR even from common, easily treated diseases. Plus the comment about 'low vaccination coverage'.. Vaccinations against what?
..then at least the pandemic deniers and anti-vaxxers will be a self limiting problem
At least in this case, it's not a pandemic, yet. Drug dealers may be salivating over the prospects of rushing another new vaccine into production, and selling that to an unsuspecting market. Or it might be quickly quashed with existing vaccines and sending some emergency food aid. Conspiracy theories are already spreading faster than 'Disease X' though.
And you keep defending anything that comes from dictators. You really should stop idolising dictators.
I'm not, and don't. We, however keep promoting people we don't like as 'dictators', and then running regime change operations. Those often leave the countries previously run by 'dictators' in a far worse state than they were. Syria wasn't perfect, but it was pretty secular. Women could drive, wear jeans, there were bars. After the civil war started, women lost those rights. It was very much a sectarian conflict, complete with very brutal ethnic cleansing by the radical Islamists head choppers who are now in charge.
And Biden's boasting about his 'success' in giving HTS control of Syria, even if they're a proscribed terrorist organisation, or as Obama once put it, 'moderate terrorists'. And now that those reformed AQ and ISIL are being cheered as 'diversity friendly', the US and Israel have been heavily bombing Syria, with Israel grabbing more land. But one aspect of the Syrian civil war is factions have often collapsed, new warlords have grabbed power and this may continue and Syria may turn into another Libya. This won't be Biden's problem because that will be passed on to Trump to deal with, along with the EU. But on the very slight plus side, the Turkstream pipeline might get extended, and gas prices fall.
But Russia interfering with elections bad, the West interfering with and destroying countries good.. Right?
But the thing is we already had to talk to the Syrian government, despite them having used chemical weapons on their own citizens - as well as having notorious jails where they regularly tortured and murdered politifcal prisoners in the tens of thousands.
Oh, it's you again. Much of the 'evidence' came from 'opposition' groups like Rami the Rag Man who-
The New York Times described him as being on the phone all day everyday with contacts in Syria, relying on four individuals inside the country who collate information from more than 230 activists, while cross-checking all information with sources himself
Busy guy. Of course if the NYT is correct, and if Assad's security services was as brutal and effecitive as the Rag Man claimed, then it wouldn't have been difficult to detect someone from the UK spending all day on the phone to Syria, and eliminating his four contacts. Then there were the statments that use of chemical weapons would be a 'red line' in Syria. And guess what! 'chemical weapons' were used. The White Helmets said so, so it must have been true. There were videos of 'barrel bombs' that had landed gently on beds. Kids being dramatically carried into a makeshift field hospital, given a quick squirt of water and making a rapid and miraculous recovery from sarin exposure, without needing any of that newfangled stuff like atropine. Oh, and of course the heroic crisis actors managed to carry the kid to the waiting cameras without being exposed to sarin themselves. And then there was the hexamine claim. Meanwhile, there was evidence of AQ using chlorine in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria, along with burning people to death in metal cages.
Whether al-Jolani really has reformed, or whether he's just seen how much money his dress-alike has made out of Ukraine remains to be seen. The US refused to send aid to Syria after their big quake, now perhaps the troughs will open and billions will pour in. Or perhaps the US will just allow Syrians access to their own oilfields now
But I guess you, along with the Bbc also believe this 'news'?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yv75nydy3o
Some 43,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed since Russia's full-scale invasion began, Volodymyr Zelensky has said in a rare admission of the extent of the nation's casualties
Ah, propaganda just ain't what it used to be.
...and people like Mike Johnson do have some impressive PACs with some rather shy donors.
This is true on both sides, and probably shouldn't be. So this lot-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Forward_PAC
The Future Forward PAC was the largest single-candidate Super PAC in the 2024 United States presidential election
Raising over $700m, dwarfing Musk's election spending by a considerable margin. And-
It is notable for its secrecy, and its deeply analytical approach
along with abject failure to show value for money, or ROI.. Well, for the donors anyway. Or there's this mob, currently under investigation-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ActBlue
It is focused on mobilizing small-dollar donors and, as of June 2024, has raised $13.7 billion for left-leaning and Democratic candidates and causes since it was established.
because allegedly a lot of their 'small-dollar donors' didn't realise they'd made donations...
ActBlue lobbied against a Republican-backed bill introduced in September 2024 that would require CVV codes for political donations and prohibit contributions via gift cards or prepaid cards.
Can't think why an upright and security conscious org like them would lobby against accepting anonymous donations.
Sure, they hold their voters in utter contempt.
Whereas & the Demorats only hold at least 51% of the voters in utter contempt. Ah, Popper again. I guess the education system really needs to explain how democracy works. There are winners, and losers, and little in the way of participation awards. There are really only two times a politcian cares about voters. When they want your money, and when they want your vote.
...even missing Bidens administration escalating war that is bad for everyone.
There's much backslapping probably going on now that Assad's 'regime' has been overthrown. The US has saved $10m on the bounty for al-Jawlani though, because they know where he is now. But slightly awkward given Syria's now under the control of a proscribed terrorist organisation, and the EU is probably going to have to deal with a fresh influx of Syrian refugees. As usual, it seems to be very bad news for the Kurds however.
Also ejector seats - thief gets into driver's seat and upon the vehicle determining the person in the driving seat shouldn't be there, gives them a quick blast from the flamethrower (Musk has prior experience in designing such a device) before activating the ejector seat
I approve! However, it might turn out that BMW's determine the person in the driving seat hasn't paid the monthly sub for theft prevention seats and ejects the owner. Pay up, or else. But the possibilities are endless, unfortunately also for regulatory capture. So maybe Telsa's are less prone to thefts, and those principles could be applied to all vehicles. Or all new cars in US & EU are now fitted with 'black box' trackers ready to implement road charging. Perhaps that could be extended to doing something useful, like immobilising stolen vehicles. Possibly a chance for Musk to make money via Starlink though, and OnStar might object.
Or thieves can break into vehicles in seconds using a variation on the spark plug trick, so maybe tougher glass could be mandated. Which could also save US motorists millions from having to replace windshields due in part to the US's crumbling road infrastructure. And then with car thieves safely incarcerated in stolen vehicles, the NHTSA could borrow from Death Race, and thieves could make money for the NHTSA via PPV and save the DoJ money on prison costs. So there's some potential quick wins from a benevolent dictatorship, and some enterainment possibilities if they're not so benevolent.
Or there are things like mandating a right to repair, or reforming/ending EaaS* to stop people being milked.
*Extortion as a Service. That hardware or software you thought you 'owned'? Now pay monthly if you want to keep using it..
hilarious from a musk dick rider.you deep throating trump and musk everyday, tells us everything we need to know!
Uhuh. Another Anonymous Coward projecting their own subconscious desires. Perhaps this is why you're too embarrassed to put a name to your fantasies? There's nothing to be ashamed of.. is there?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
