And I thought we were rid of this fucking idiot. Clinton: Find ‘Common Humanity’. America better help economically depressed countries, or it faces a never-ending war on terrorism, says former President Clinton. But Bubba wasn’t all doom and gloom during a speech at UC-Berkeley. He’s happy Dubya is the center of political controversy. Brad King reports from Berkeley, California. [Wired News]
I like my iPAQ. For Mail, a Palm That Gets It. The Palm i705 is a small, light, self-contained organizer that can process e-mail and surf the Web, wirelessly and inexpensively. [The New York Times: Technology]
I am inspired to get out my legos. http://www.thereverend.com/brick_testament/
Ugh. Can you imagine? Good morning from Amsterdam, where once again I awake happy I am not an accountant that must adhere to something as vague as ‘Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. [Adam Curry: CurryDotCom]
Gimme a break - we’re not all that stupid. Not NATty at AT&T Broadband: in the latest move to demonstrate their lack of technical understanding, AT&T Broadband is offering full-price networking gear from Linksys for their customers with NAT disabled. If you want to buy it at full list from AT&T, you have to pay $4.95 per additional machine on your network. The upside: these machines get real, routable IPs. The downside: very, very few consumer machines require static IPs and, in fact, would be better served with nonroutable addresses as the first stage in firewalling themselves. (The second stage would be a personal firewall package like ZoneAlarm for Windows or Intego NetBarrier for Mac.) The AT&T guy quoted in the link above said they typically track problems back to NAT, and they can’t access machines for troubleshooting that are NAT’d. I’d agree with the first point; misconfigured NAT is probably a good reason why machines couldn’t see the Net, but it’s more likely DHCP configuration on the client machine that’s the problem. As for the second, if I were an ISP of any variety, I’d have a simple program for Mac, Windows, and Linux that a user could run at their discretion that would diagnose network ills and, if it could reach a Net (via NAT or not), send some diagnostic information to me. That makes sense. No NAT? Not.
[80211b News]