Discussion:
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
Add Reply
Lynn McGuire
2018-12-03 21:33:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html

Yup, supervillains.

Lynn
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-12-03 23:28:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
diagram:

You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error


So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Lynn McGuire
2018-12-04 05:25:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
That sucks. She has dropped to one webcomic per week recently due to
releasing her latest book. But last week she was back up to two.

You might get hubby to reboot your home router and your pc to see if
that helps. I doubt it but ...

Lynn
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-12-04 06:06:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
That sucks. She has dropped to one webcomic per week recently due to
releasing her latest book. But last week she was back up to two.
You might get hubby to reboot your home router and your pc to see if
that helps. I doubt it but ...
I doubt it too. I turn my PC off every night and occasionally,
if it hangs, reboot it. I'll ask him to reboot the router
tomorrow.

Cloudfare claims its San Jose thingie is working, but Spengler
Post by Lynn McGuire
The website is not down, it's a Cloudflare error which we can't seem
to fix. If you type in www. before the auto cache agirlandherfed.com,
it will work.
Only I tried that, and it didn't work. I even inserted www.
before the link you posted, and it didn't work.

Lynn, where are you located geographically? Perhaps it is a
San Jose Cloudfare problem and they don't know it or won't admit
it?
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2018-12-04 16:25:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she
was all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
That sucks. She has dropped to one webcomic per week recently
due to releasing her latest book. But last week she was back up
to two.
You might get hubby to reboot your home router and your pc to
see if that helps. I doubt it but ...
I doubt it too. I turn my PC off every night and occasionally,
if it hangs, reboot it. I'll ask him to reboot the router
tomorrow.
Cloudfare claims its San Jose thingie is working, but Spengler
Post by Lynn McGuire
The website is not down, it's a Cloudflare error which we can't
seem to fix. If you type in www. before the auto cache
agirlandherfed.com, it will work.
Only I tried that, and it didn't work. I even inserted www.
before the link you posted, and it didn't work.
Lynn, where are you located geographically? Perhaps it is a
San Jose Cloudfare problem and they don't know it or won't admit
it?
I get the same thing on the link posted, but it works with the www
in front.

Suggests to me there might be something messed up in the DNS
records somewhere.

IsItDown says the site it up, though.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-12-04 22:46:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she
was all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
That sucks. She has dropped to one webcomic per week recently
due to releasing her latest book. But last week she was back up
to two.
You might get hubby to reboot your home router and your pc to
see if that helps. I doubt it but ...
I doubt it too. I turn my PC off every night and occasionally,
if it hangs, reboot it. I'll ask him to reboot the router
tomorrow.
Cloudfare claims its San Jose thingie is working, but Spengler
Post by Lynn McGuire
The website is not down, it's a Cloudflare error which we can't
seem to fix. If you type in www. before the auto cache
agirlandherfed.com, it will work.
Only I tried that, and it didn't work. I even inserted www.
before the link you posted, and it didn't work.
Lynn, where are you located geographically? Perhaps it is a
San Jose Cloudfare problem and they don't know it or won't admit
it?
I get the same thing on the link posted, but it works with the www
in front.
Suggests to me there might be something messed up in the DNS
records somewhere.
IsItDown says the site it up, though.
You may have seen this already: I was sent a variation on the URL
that worked.

And sent Spangler mail about it, and she says she's getting rid
of Cloudfare anyway; too many readers are having trouble with it.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Lynn McGuire
2018-12-04 18:04:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
That sucks. She has dropped to one webcomic per week recently due to
releasing her latest book. But last week she was back up to two.
You might get hubby to reboot your home router and your pc to see if
that helps. I doubt it but ...
I doubt it too. I turn my PC off every night and occasionally,
if it hangs, reboot it. I'll ask him to reboot the router
tomorrow.
Cloudfare claims its San Jose thingie is working, but Spengler
Post by Lynn McGuire
The website is not down, it's a Cloudflare error which we can't seem
to fix. If you type in www. before the auto cache agirlandherfed.com,
it will work.
Only I tried that, and it didn't work. I even inserted www.
before the link you posted, and it didn't work.
Lynn, where are you located geographically? Perhaps it is a
San Jose Cloudfare problem and they don't know it or won't admit
it?
The house is in Sugar Land, Texas, USA as of last December 12.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_Land,_Texas

The office is in Fort Bend County in the Sugar Land ETJ
(extraterritorial jurisdiction) with a Richmond address and zip. Both
get the webcomic just fine but both are using several AT&T DSL lines
multiplexed together.

Lynn
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-12-04 22:49:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
That sucks. She has dropped to one webcomic per week recently due to
releasing her latest book. But last week she was back up to two.
You might get hubby to reboot your home router and your pc to see if
that helps. I doubt it but ...
I doubt it too. I turn my PC off every night and occasionally,
if it hangs, reboot it. I'll ask him to reboot the router
tomorrow.
Cloudfare claims its San Jose thingie is working, but Spengler
Post by Lynn McGuire
The website is not down, it's a Cloudflare error which we can't seem
to fix. If you type in www. before the auto cache agirlandherfed.com,
it will work.
Only I tried that, and it didn't work. I even inserted www.
before the link you posted, and it didn't work.
Lynn, where are you located geographically? Perhaps it is a
San Jose Cloudfare problem and they don't know it or won't admit
it?
The house is in Sugar Land, Texas, USA as of last December 12.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_Land,_Texas
The office is in Fort Bend County in the Sugar Land ETJ
(extraterritorial jurisdiction) with a Richmond address and zip. Both
get the webcomic just fine but both are using several AT&T DSL lines
multiplexed together.
Heh. My daughter used to work for AT&T, doing fairly high-level
tech support for the DSL and other data lines. She occasionally
got calls from Texas, customers complaining that their line was
down, and only casually mentioning (after much talk) that their
power was down too, because they had this hurricane, and when
would the service people be able to get out there and restore
service?

And Meg would explain carefully, Not till the storm was over,
because it wouldn't be safe. And the customer would be annoyed.

Then they moved her whole department to Texas, where life was
cheaper and salaries were lower. I forget where in Texas. If it
had been Austin, she *might* have been tempted.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Mark Jackson
2018-12-05 02:05:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Heh. My daughter used to work for AT&T, doing fairly high-level
tech support for the DSL and other data lines. She occasionally
got calls from Texas, customers complaining that their line was
down, and only casually mentioning (after much talk) that their
power was down too, because they had this hurricane, and when
would the service people be able to get out there and restore
service?
"Well there's floodin' down in Texas
All of the telephone lines are down"
(Stevie Ray Vaughan)
--
Mark Jackson - http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~mjackson
I’m 70. 70 may be the new 50, but "dead" is not
the new "alive." - Bob Mankoff
Dimensional Traveler
2018-12-05 06:21:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
That sucks. She has dropped to one webcomic per week recently due to
releasing her latest book. But last week she was back up to two.
You might get hubby to reboot your home router and your pc to see if
that helps. I doubt it but ...
I doubt it too. I turn my PC off every night and occasionally,
if it hangs, reboot it. I'll ask him to reboot the router
tomorrow.
Cloudfare claims its San Jose thingie is working, but Spengler
Post by Lynn McGuire
The website is not down, it's a Cloudflare error which we can't seem
to fix. If you type in www. before the auto cache agirlandherfed.com,
it will work.
Only I tried that, and it didn't work. I even inserted www.
before the link you posted, and it didn't work.
Lynn, where are you located geographically? Perhaps it is a
San Jose Cloudfare problem and they don't know it or won't admit
it?
The house is in Sugar Land, Texas, USA as of last December 12.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_Land,_Texas
The office is in Fort Bend County in the Sugar Land ETJ
(extraterritorial jurisdiction) with a Richmond address and zip. Both
get the webcomic just fine but both are using several AT&T DSL lines
multiplexed together.
Heh. My daughter used to work for AT&T, doing fairly high-level
tech support for the DSL and other data lines. She occasionally
got calls from Texas, customers complaining that their line was
down, and only casually mentioning (after much talk) that their
power was down too, because they had this hurricane, and when
would the service people be able to get out there and restore
service?
And Meg would explain carefully, Not till the storm was over,
because it wouldn't be safe. And the customer would be annoyed.
I've had those kinds of calls. What's worse is that mine were coming
from people who really, REALLY should have known better.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-12-05 13:53:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
That sucks. She has dropped to one webcomic per week recently due to
releasing her latest book. But last week she was back up to two.
You might get hubby to reboot your home router and your pc to see if
that helps. I doubt it but ...
I doubt it too. I turn my PC off every night and occasionally,
if it hangs, reboot it. I'll ask him to reboot the router
tomorrow.
Cloudfare claims its San Jose thingie is working, but Spengler
Post by Lynn McGuire
The website is not down, it's a Cloudflare error which we can't seem
to fix. If you type in www. before the auto cache agirlandherfed.com,
it will work.
Only I tried that, and it didn't work. I even inserted www.
before the link you posted, and it didn't work.
Lynn, where are you located geographically? Perhaps it is a
San Jose Cloudfare problem and they don't know it or won't admit
it?
The house is in Sugar Land, Texas, USA as of last December 12.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_Land,_Texas
The office is in Fort Bend County in the Sugar Land ETJ
(extraterritorial jurisdiction) with a Richmond address and zip. Both
get the webcomic just fine but both are using several AT&T DSL lines
multiplexed together.
Heh. My daughter used to work for AT&T, doing fairly high-level
tech support for the DSL and other data lines. She occasionally
got calls from Texas, customers complaining that their line was
down, and only casually mentioning (after much talk) that their
power was down too, because they had this hurricane, and when
would the service people be able to get out there and restore
service?
And Meg would explain carefully, Not till the storm was over,
because it wouldn't be safe. And the customer would be annoyed.
I've had those kinds of calls. What's worse is that mine were coming
from people who really, REALLY should have known better.
Meg had those too. On the other hand, she would sometimes get a
call from someone who really knew what he was talking about and
could tell her what was going on in better detail than "it don't
work no more!" whereupon she could say, "Okay, I'm going to do
THIS and THAT and you should be back up in five minutes," and he
would be. But those were few and far between.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Mike Van Pelt
2018-12-05 22:20:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Heh. My daughter used to work for AT&T, doing fairly high-level
tech support for the DSL and other data lines. She occasionally
got calls from Texas, customers complaining that their line was
down, and only casually mentioning (after much talk) that their
power was down too, because they had this hurricane, and when
would the service people be able to get out there and restore
service?
And Meg would explain carefully, Not till the storm was over,
because it wouldn't be safe. And the customer would be annoyed.
I've had those kinds of calls. What's worse is that mine were coming
from people who really, REALLY should have known better.
Which recalls the joke...

Tech Support: "OK, do you have the box your computer came in?"

Customer: "Uh, yeah."

TS: OK, what you need to do is put the computer back in that
box and take it back to the store and return it."

C: "Uh, why?"

TS: "Because you're TOO <redacted> STUPID TO OWN A COMPUTER! <click>"
--
Mike Van Pelt | "I don't advise it unless you're nuts."
mvp at calweb.com | -- Ray Wilkinson, after riding out Hurricane
KE6BVH | Ike on Surfside Beach in Galveston
Robert Carnegie
2018-12-06 00:16:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Mrs. Heydt, I forget if we've discussed the
"Not Always Right" web site, or if you introduced me
to it; my impression of your character and taste
is that you would find it appalling, and depressing,
and I don't wish that on you. But, for the record,
a perennial category of story there - around once a
month - is the call for service or assistance where
the service customer isn't ready to consider that
whatever regional apocalypse happens to be troubling
them also makes it impossible to offer the service
at this time (snowstorm, hurricane, Carrington /
Nicoll Event). [These aren't all tagged categories...]
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-12-06 01:48:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
Mrs. Heydt, I forget if we've discussed the
"Not Always Right" web site, or if you introduced me
to it; my impression of your character and taste
is that you would find it appalling, and depressing,
and I don't wish that on you. But, for the record,
a perennial category of story there - around once a
month - is the call for service or assistance where
the service customer isn't ready to consider that
whatever regional apocalypse happens to be troubling
them also makes it impossible to offer the service
at this time (snowstorm, hurricane, Carrington /
Nicoll Event). [These aren't all tagged categories...]
I don't think I've ever heard of that site, so you can't have
heard of it from me. Most of the dumb-customer jokes (they were
funny AFTER the fact) came from my daughter; some from my
husband, who also worked for Pac Bell back in the date.

There's also these strips. Not stupidity in ignoring danger;
just common or garden stupidity.

http://www.queenofwands.net/d/20051108.html
http://www.queenofwands.net/d/20051109.html
http://www.queenofwands.net/d/20051110.html
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Scott Lurndal
2018-12-04 14:23:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
I'm in san jose. This link:

<http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>

got the error you note. This link:

<http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>

worked for me.
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-12-04 16:27:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
<http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
<http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
worked for me.
Yes! That worked! I shall tell Spangler about this workaround;
maybe it'll help her with the general difficulties she's having
with Cloudfare.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Scott Lurndal
2018-12-04 17:04:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
<http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
<http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
worked for me.
Yes! That worked! I shall tell Spangler about this workaround;
maybe it'll help her with the general difficulties she's having
with Cloudfare.
It's probably a DNS screwup somewhere. agirlandherfed.com
should probably return the same IP as www.agirlandherfed.com.
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2018-12-04 16:30:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she
was all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
<http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
<http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
worked for me.
Yes! That worked! I shall tell Spangler about this workaround;
maybe it'll help her with the general difficulties she's having
with Cloudfare.
It's probably a DNS screwup somewhere. agirlandherfed.com
should probably return the same IP as www.agirlandherfed.com.
And does. The next place to look is in how the virtual domains on
the web server are configured. If it's configured for www. but not
the base URL, or if Cloudflare *thinks* it is, that would produce
the current situation.

The DNS records look good. Both FQDNs are A records, match on both
DNS servers, and point to the same IP. So I'd be looking at web
server configurations. Maybe there's a typo somewhere.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-12-04 22:53:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she
was all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
<http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
<http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
worked for me.
Yes! That worked! I shall tell Spangler about this workaround;
maybe it'll help her with the general difficulties she's having
with Cloudfare.
It's probably a DNS screwup somewhere. agirlandherfed.com
should probably return the same IP as www.agirlandherfed.com.
And does. The next place to look is in how the virtual domains on
the web server are configured. If it's configured for www. but not
the base URL, or if Cloudflare *thinks* it is, that would produce
the current situation.
My working hypothesis, just at present, is that Cloudfare doesn't
think at all. :)
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
The DNS records look good. Both FQDNs are A records, match on both
DNS servers, and point to the same IP. So I'd be looking at web
server configurations. Maybe there's a typo somewhere.
This is all beyond me; I was a Linguistics major.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2018-12-04 23:37:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she
was all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she
said something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it
isn't. Haven't been able to read this strip for a while,
darn it.
<http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
<http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
worked for me.
Yes! That worked! I shall tell Spangler about this
workaround; maybe it'll help her with the general difficulties
she's having with Cloudfare.
It's probably a DNS screwup somewhere. agirlandherfed.com
should probably return the same IP as www.agirlandherfed.com.
And does. The next place to look is in how the virtual domains
on the web server are configured. If it's configured for www.
but not the base URL, or if Cloudflare *thinks* it is, that
would produce the current situation.
My working hypothesis, just at present, is that Cloudfare
doesn't think at all. :)
I suspect you're onto something. Or they're just *on* something.
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
The DNS records look good. Both FQDNs are A records, match on
both DNS servers, and point to the same IP. So I'd be looking at
web server configurations. Maybe there's a typo somewhere.
This is all beyond me; I was a Linguistics major.
There are perhaps surprising parallels between the linguistics of
language and the linguistics of making computers do what you want
them to, instead of what you tell them to.

But mostly, you just have to spell shit right.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-12-05 02:53:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she
was all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she
said something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it
isn't. Haven't been able to read this strip for a while,
darn it.
<http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
<http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
worked for me.
Yes! That worked! I shall tell Spangler about this
workaround; maybe it'll help her with the general difficulties
she's having with Cloudfare.
It's probably a DNS screwup somewhere. agirlandherfed.com
should probably return the same IP as www.agirlandherfed.com.
And does. The next place to look is in how the virtual domains
on the web server are configured. If it's configured for www.
but not the base URL, or if Cloudflare *thinks* it is, that
would produce the current situation.
My working hypothesis, just at present, is that Cloudfare
doesn't think at all. :)
I suspect you're onto something. Or they're just *on* something.
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
The DNS records look good. Both FQDNs are A records, match on
both DNS servers, and point to the same IP. So I'd be looking at
web server configurations. Maybe there's a typo somewhere.
This is all beyond me; I was a Linguistics major.
There are perhaps surprising parallels between the linguistics of
language and the linguistics of making computers do what you want
them to, instead of what you tell them to.
Yeah. I learned the rudiments of set theory from a professor
of linguistics whose goal was to teach us about morphophonemics.

After that he went off to MIT and did computer languages instead.

Tenth Doctor: "You never take me where I want to go!"

TARDIS: "No, I take you where you need to go."
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
But mostly, you just have to spell shit right.
THAT much, I do understand.

After that, it gets ... complicated.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Ninapenda Jibini
2018-12-05 04:16:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure
she was all right; they've already had one hurricane) and
she said something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it
isn't. Haven't been able to read this strip for a while,
darn it.
<http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
<http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
worked for me.
Yes! That worked! I shall tell Spangler about this
workaround; maybe it'll help her with the general
difficulties she's having with Cloudfare.
It's probably a DNS screwup somewhere. agirlandherfed.com
should probably return the same IP as
www.agirlandherfed.com.
And does. The next place to look is in how the virtual domains
on the web server are configured. If it's configured for www.
but not the base URL, or if Cloudflare *thinks* it is, that
would produce the current situation.
My working hypothesis, just at present, is that Cloudfare
doesn't think at all. :)
I suspect you're onto something. Or they're just *on* something.
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
The DNS records look good. Both FQDNs are A records, match on
both DNS servers, and point to the same IP. So I'd be looking
at web server configurations. Maybe there's a typo somewhere.
This is all beyond me; I was a Linguistics major.
There are perhaps surprising parallels between the linguistics
of language and the linguistics of making computers do what you
want them to, instead of what you tell them to.
Yeah. I learned the rudiments of set theory from a professor
of linguistics whose goal was to teach us about morphophonemics.
After that he went off to MIT and did computer languages
instead.
I got an extended lecture from a Professor of Mathematics once
about negative slope neckties.
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Tenth Doctor: "You never take me where I want to go!"
TARDIS: "No, I take you where you need to go."
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
But mostly, you just have to spell shit right.
THAT much, I do understand.
After that, it gets ... complicated.
After that, what you want a computer to do generally gets
complicated. And even if it's not, figuring out that it's not
usually is.
--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Sjouke Burry
2018-12-04 16:52:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
<http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
<http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
worked for me.
Both links work fine here(XP PRO SP3,firefox 45.9.0 ESR)
Quadibloc
2018-12-04 17:21:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sjouke Burry
Both links work fine here(XP PRO SP3,firefox 45.9.0 ESR)
The original link also worked well for me. To me it seems as though there's a
caching problem somewhere in the system.

John Savard
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-12-04 22:54:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Sjouke Burry
Both links work fine here(XP PRO SP3,firefox 45.9.0 ESR)
The original link also worked well for me. To me it seems as though there's a
caching problem somewhere in the system.
Undoubtedly; but as I said upthread, I don't speak Internet. I
have a fix that works for me; I'm going to let that suffice.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Lynn McGuire
2018-12-05 18:31:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that. I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You San Jose agirlandherfed.com
Your browser Cloudfare Host
Working Working Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
<http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
<http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
worked for me.
I am actually continuously surprised that the Internet works as well as
it does.

Lynn
John W Kennedy
2018-12-05 18:41:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
    http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that.  I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You            San Jose    agirlandherfed.com
Your browser        Cloudfare        Host
Working            Working            Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
   <http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
   <http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
worked for me.
I am actually continuously surprised that the Internet works as well as
it does.
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
--
John W. Kennedy
"The blind rulers of Logres
Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
-- Charles Williams. "Taliessin through Logres: Prelude"
Dorothy J Heydt
2018-12-05 18:54:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John W Kennedy
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
    http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that.  I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You            San Jose    agirlandherfed.com
Your browser        Cloudfare        Host
Working            Working            Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
   <http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
   <http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
worked for me.
I am actually continuously surprised that the Internet works as well as
it does.
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
Which has not yet been tested. But it did stay up after the Loma
Prieta earthquake, because the telephone landlines did, and the
bulk of information in and out of the area was carried on USENET.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Lynn McGuire
2018-12-05 20:03:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John W Kennedy
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
    http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that.  I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You            San Jose    agirlandherfed.com
Your browser        Cloudfare        Host
Working            Working            Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
   <http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
   <http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
worked for me.
I am actually continuously surprised that the Internet works as well
as it does.
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
Yes, but at the initial design it was for just a few hundred nodes.
There are now umpteen billion devices connected to the internet and it
still works amazingly well. Of course, there have been several upgrades
over decades.

A recent story I read, set in 3200 AD or so, had the internet killed off
in the 2200s to 2500s, on purpose of course. It took quite a bit of
effort to kill it off though and quite a long time.

Lynn
Scott Lurndal
2018-12-05 20:51:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by John W Kennedy
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
Yes, but at the initial design it was for just a few hundred nodes.
The initial DARPA network covered a few hundred nodes.

The protocols were designed from the start to support
vast numbers of nodes.
Jaimie Vandenbergh
2018-12-06 03:32:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by John W Kennedy
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
Yes, but at the initial design it was for just a few hundred nodes.
The initial DARPA network covered a few hundred nodes.
The protocols were designed from the start to support
vast numbers of nodes.
The organisation that hands out node addresses ran out in April. Yay?

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/04/18/last_ipv4_address/

Cheers - Jaimie
--
I love VoIP. You don't get people phoning up to complain that the
network is down. -- Peter Corlett, ASR
Lynn McGuire
2018-12-06 18:48:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by John W Kennedy
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
Yes, but at the initial design it was for just a few hundred nodes.
The initial DARPA network covered a few hundred nodes.
The protocols were designed from the start to support
vast numbers of nodes.
Didn't the initial addressing use a single sixteen node address that
IPv4 fixed with 32 bit node addressing ?

And of course, IPv6 has 128 node addressing.

Lynn
Scott Lurndal
2018-12-06 19:03:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by John W Kennedy
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
Yes, but at the initial design it was for just a few hundred nodes.
The initial DARPA network covered a few hundred nodes.
The protocols were designed from the start to support
vast numbers of nodes.
Didn't the initial addressing use a single sixteen node address that
IPv4 fixed with 32 bit node addressing ?
And of course, IPv6 has 128 node addressing.
You're missing some 'bits' tags in the above (16-bit, 128-bit)

While IPV1-3 were considered experimental, the protocols haven't
changed. The IP header has a 'version' nibble at the beginning that
selects how the IP header L3 address fields should be interpreted, thus allowing
coexistance of multiple layer 3 implementations to be carried on
the same transport. A feature of the original protocols, which remain
basically unchanged (IP, TCP, UDP) and have allowed progressive
expansion of the Internet Protocol (IP) address space.

There's still plenty of IP versions available for future expansion if
it becomes necessary (although 2^128 is a pretty large number).
Lynn McGuire
2018-12-06 19:10:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by John W Kennedy
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
Yes, but at the initial design it was for just a few hundred nodes.
The initial DARPA network covered a few hundred nodes.
The protocols were designed from the start to support
vast numbers of nodes.
Didn't the initial addressing use a single sixteen node address that
IPv4 fixed with 32 bit node addressing ?
And of course, IPv6 has 128 node addressing.
You're missing some 'bits' tags in the above (16-bit, 128-bit)
While IPV1-3 were considered experimental, the protocols haven't
changed. The IP header has a 'version' nibble at the beginning that
selects how the IP header L3 address fields should be interpreted, thus allowing
coexistance of multiple layer 3 implementations to be carried on
the same transport. A feature of the original protocols, which remain
basically unchanged (IP, TCP, UDP) and have allowed progressive
expansion of the Internet Protocol (IP) address space.
There's still plenty of IP versions available for future expansion if
it becomes necessary (although 2^128 is a pretty large number).
Yup, I am going to have to believe you as I am no expert here. I did
update my website C++ code and databases for IPv6 last summer and am
still fiddling with it.

Lynn
J. Clarke
2018-12-06 01:13:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:41:03 -0500, John W Kennedy
Post by John W Kennedy
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
    http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that.  I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You            San Jose    agirlandherfed.com
Your browser        Cloudfare        Host
Working            Working            Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
   <http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
   <http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
worked for me.
I am actually continuously surprised that the Internet works as well as
it does.
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
That is a very common misconception. The nuclear war had no part in
the design of the Internet. It was never intended to be a military
system and in fact the military has its own communication systems.
D B Davis
2018-12-06 16:03:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:41:03 -0500, John W Kennedy
Post by John W Kennedy
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
??? http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that.? I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You??????????? San Jose??? agirlandherfed.com
Your browser??????? Cloudfare??????? Host
Working??????????? Working??????????? Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
?? <http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
?? <http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
worked for me.
I am actually continuously surprised that the Internet works as well as
it does.
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
That is a very common misconception. The nuclear war had no part in
the design of the Internet. It was never intended to be a military
system and in fact the military has its own communication systems.
Nuclear war survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried.
While at RAND in 1962, Paul Baran conceived and designed packet
switching explicitly to survive a nuclear war. [1] Baran's nuclear war
survivable packet switching is at the heart of today's Internet and
other networks.
The misconception that nuclear war played no part whatsoever in the
conception of today's Internet is also echoed in _Black Tuesday_ (Mayer):

"This isn't a political debate," Keane said. "This is science.
and the future. And the rumor that we're designing a network to
survive a nuclear attack is flat-out wrong.

Note.

1. https://www.rand.org/about/history/baran.html



Thank you,
--
Don
J. Clarke
2018-12-07 04:07:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:41:03 -0500, John W Kennedy
Post by John W Kennedy
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
??? http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that.? I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You??????????? San Jose??? agirlandherfed.com
Your browser??????? Cloudfare??????? Host
Working??????????? Working??????????? Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
?? <http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
?? <http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
worked for me.
I am actually continuously surprised that the Internet works as well as
it does.
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
That is a very common misconception. The nuclear war had no part in
the design of the Internet. It was never intended to be a military
system and in fact the military has its own communication systems.
Nuclear war survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried.
While at RAND in 1962, Paul Baran conceived and designed packet
switching explicitly to survive a nuclear war. [1] Baran's nuclear war
survivable packet switching is at the heart of today's Internet and
other networks.
While he came up with the concept, he isn't the one who designed the
protocol that the Internet uses.
Post by D B Davis
The misconception that nuclear war played no part whatsoever in the
"This isn't a political debate," Keane said. "This is science.
and the future. And the rumor that we're designing a network to
survive a nuclear attack is flat-out wrong.
Note.
1. https://www.rand.org/about/history/baran.html
?
Thank you,
Mark Jackson
2018-12-07 14:30:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:41:03 -0500, John W Kennedy
Post by John W Kennedy
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
That is a very common misconception. The nuclear war had no part in
the design of the Internet. It was never intended to be a military
system and in fact the military has its own communication systems.
Nuclear war survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried.
While at RAND in 1962, Paul Baran conceived and designed packet
switching explicitly to survive a nuclear war. [1] Baran's nuclear war
survivable packet switching is at the heart of today's Internet and
other networks.
While he came up with the concept, he isn't the one who designed the
protocol that the Internet uses.
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching independently (and coined
the term) in pursuit of inter-computer communications efficiency, not
nuclear resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner and Lyon).
--
Mark Jackson - http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~mjackson
I'm 70. 70 may be the new 50, but "dead" is not
the new "alive." - Bob Mankoff
D B Davis
2018-12-07 16:00:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:41:03 -0500, John W Kennedy
Post by John W Kennedy
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
That is a very common misconception. The nuclear war had no part in
the design of the Internet. It was never intended to be a military
system and in fact the military has its own communication systems.
Nuclear war survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried.
While at RAND in 1962, Paul Baran conceived and designed packet
switching explicitly to survive a nuclear war. [1] Baran's nuclear war
survivable packet switching is at the heart of today's Internet and
other networks.
While he came up with the concept, he isn't the one who designed the
protocol that the Internet uses.
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching independently (and coined
the term) in pursuit of inter-computer communications efficiency, not
nuclear resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use Baran's
distributed communications, which was explicitly conceived and designed
to survive a nuclear war.



Thank you,
--
Don
J. Clarke
2018-12-08 03:10:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:41:03 -0500, John W Kennedy
Post by John W Kennedy
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
That is a very common misconception. The nuclear war had no part in
the design of the Internet. It was never intended to be a military
system and in fact the military has its own communication systems.
Nuclear war survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried.
While at RAND in 1962, Paul Baran conceived and designed packet
switching explicitly to survive a nuclear war. [1] Baran's nuclear war
survivable packet switching is at the heart of today's Internet and
other networks.
While he came up with the concept, he isn't the one who designed the
protocol that the Internet uses.
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching independently (and coined
the term) in pursuit of inter-computer communications efficiency, not
nuclear resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use Baran's
distributed communications, which was explicitly conceived and designed
to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf and Kahn
used those sources and also the results of research conducted at PARC,
where another working packet network existed.
D B Davis
2018-12-08 15:35:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:41:03 -0500, John W Kennedy
Post by John W Kennedy
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
That is a very common misconception. The nuclear war had no part in
the design of the Internet. It was never intended to be a military
system and in fact the military has its own communication systems.
Nuclear war survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried.
While at RAND in 1962, Paul Baran conceived and designed packet
switching explicitly to survive a nuclear war. [1] Baran's nuclear war
survivable packet switching is at the heart of today's Internet and
other networks.
While he came up with the concept, he isn't the one who designed the
protocol that the Internet uses.
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching independently (and coined
the term) in pursuit of inter-computer communications efficiency, not
nuclear resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use Baran's
distributed communications, which was explicitly conceived and designed
to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf and Kahn
used those sources and also the results of research conducted at PARC,
where another working packet network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and designed to
survive an nuclear war.



Thank you,
--
Don
J. Clarke
2018-12-08 15:45:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:41:03 -0500, John W Kennedy
Post by John W Kennedy
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
That is a very common misconception. The nuclear war had no part in
the design of the Internet. It was never intended to be a military
system and in fact the military has its own communication systems.
Nuclear war survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried.
While at RAND in 1962, Paul Baran conceived and designed packet
switching explicitly to survive a nuclear war. [1] Baran's nuclear war
survivable packet switching is at the heart of today's Internet and
other networks.
While he came up with the concept, he isn't the one who designed the
protocol that the Internet uses.
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching independently (and coined
the term) in pursuit of inter-computer communications efficiency, not
nuclear resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use Baran's
distributed communications, which was explicitly conceived and designed
to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf and Kahn
used those sources and also the results of research conducted at PARC,
where another working packet network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and designed to
survive an nuclear war.
Your point being?
D B Davis
2018-12-08 16:27:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:41:03 -0500, John W Kennedy
Post by John W Kennedy
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
That is a very common misconception. The nuclear war had no part in
the design of the Internet. It was never intended to be a military
system and in fact the military has its own communication systems.
Nuclear war survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried.
While at RAND in 1962, Paul Baran conceived and designed packet
switching explicitly to survive a nuclear war. [1] Baran's nuclear war
survivable packet switching is at the heart of today's Internet and
other networks.
While he came up with the concept, he isn't the one who designed the
protocol that the Internet uses.
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching independently (and coined
the term) in pursuit of inter-computer communications efficiency, not
nuclear resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use Baran's
distributed communications, which was explicitly conceived and designed
to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf and Kahn
used those sources and also the results of research conducted at PARC,
where another working packet network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and designed to
survive an nuclear war.
Your point being?
My point remains as originally stated above. Nuclear war survivability
as a historical motive is not cut and dried. Your feelings that "nuclear
war had no part in the design of the Internet" is a misconception.



Thank you,
--
Don
Mark Jackson
2018-12-08 16:40:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:41:03 -0500, John W Kennedy
Post by John W Kennedy
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
That is a very common misconception. The nuclear war had no part in
the design of the Internet. It was never intended to be a military
system and in fact the military has its own communication systems.
Nuclear war survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried.
While at RAND in 1962, Paul Baran conceived and designed packet
switching explicitly to survive a nuclear war. [1] Baran's nuclear war
survivable packet switching is at the heart of today's Internet and
other networks.
While he came up with the concept, he isn't the one who designed the
protocol that the Internet uses.
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching independently (and coined
the term) in pursuit of inter-computer communications efficiency, not
nuclear resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use Baran's
distributed communications, which was explicitly conceived and designed
to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf and Kahn
used those sources and also the results of research conducted at PARC,
where another working packet network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and designed to
survive an nuclear war.
Your point being?
My point remains as originally stated above. Nuclear war survivability
as a historical motive is not cut and dried. Your feelings that "nuclear
war had no part in the design of the Internet" is a misconception.
Baran was entirely unsuccessful in convincing AT&T that they should
build a packet-switching system. He did succeed in getting the Air
Force interested, but when the proposed project was assigned to the
Defense Communications Network Baran saw no support there for it and the
project died. That is as far as that initiative went and it has no
ancestral claim on the creation of the ARPAnet, the genesis of which was
a desire to facilitate communication among the many different computers
supporting ARPA-funded research around the country. Nuclear resilience
had nothing to do with it.

Yes, the folks working toward creating the ARPAnet became aware of
Baran's work around the same time they became aware of Davies'. But
Davies had invented the same packet-switching approach as Baran; if the
latter had never existed development of the ARPAnet would have proceeded
unchanged.
--
Mark Jackson - http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~mjackson
I'm 70. 70 may be the new 50, but "dead" is not
the new "alive." - Bob Mankoff
D B Davis
2018-12-08 17:05:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:41:03 -0500, John W Kennedy
Post by John W Kennedy
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
That is a very common misconception. The nuclear war had no part in
the design of the Internet. It was never intended to be a military
system and in fact the military has its own communication systems.
Nuclear war survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried.
While at RAND in 1962, Paul Baran conceived and designed packet
switching explicitly to survive a nuclear war. [1] Baran's nuclear war
survivable packet switching is at the heart of today's Internet and
other networks.
While he came up with the concept, he isn't the one who designed the
protocol that the Internet uses.
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching independently (and coined
the term) in pursuit of inter-computer communications efficiency, not
nuclear resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use Baran's
distributed communications, which was explicitly conceived and designed
to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf and Kahn
used those sources and also the results of research conducted at PARC,
where another working packet network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and designed to
survive an nuclear war.
Your point being?
My point remains as originally stated above. Nuclear war survivability
as a historical motive is not cut and dried. Your feelings that "nuclear
war had no part in the design of the Internet" is a misconception.
Baran was entirely unsuccessful in convincing AT&T that they should
build a packet-switching system. He did succeed in getting the Air
Force interested, but when the proposed project was assigned to the
Defense Communications Network Baran saw no support there for it and the
project died. That is as far as that initiative went and it has no
ancestral claim on the creation of the ARPAnet, the genesis of which was
a desire to facilitate communication among the many different computers
supporting ARPA-funded research around the country. Nuclear resilience
had nothing to do with it.
Yes, the folks working toward creating the ARPAnet became aware of
Baran's work around the same time they became aware of Davies'. But
Davies had invented the same packet-switching approach as Baran; if the
latter had never existed development of the ARPAnet would have proceeded
unchanged.
PKD writes some of my favorite alternate history. Matter of fact, this
morning _The Man in the High Castle_ is being scrutinized to see if it
what it says about "Lao Tzu," which appears in another rasw thread.
In the end, in /this/ reality, Baran's data network, which was
conceived and designed to survive nuclear war, is seminal.



Thank you,
--
Don
Mark Jackson
2018-12-08 18:16:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 15:35:33 -0000 (UTC), D B Davis
Post by D B Davis
On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 16:00:30 -0000 (UTC), D B Davis
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching
independently (and coined the term) in pursuit of
inter-computer communications efficiency, not nuclear
resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner
and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use
Baran's distributed communications, which was explicitly
conceived and designed to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf
and Kahn used those sources and also the results of
research conducted at PARC, where another working packet
network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and
designed to survive an nuclear war.
Your point being?
My point remains as originally stated above. Nuclear war
survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried. Your
feelings that "nuclear war had no part in the design of the
Internet" is a misconception.
Baran was entirely unsuccessful in convincing AT&T that they
should build a packet-switching system. He did succeed in getting
the Air Force interested, but when the proposed project was
assigned to the Defense Communications Network Baran saw no support
there for it and the project died. That is as far as that
initiative went and it has no ancestral claim on the creation of
the ARPAnet, the genesis of which was a desire to facilitate
communication among the many different computers supporting
ARPA-funded research around the country. Nuclear resilience had
nothing to do with it.
Yes, the folks working toward creating the ARPAnet became aware of
Baran's work around the same time they became aware of Davies'.
But Davies had invented the same packet-switching approach as
Baran; if the latter had never existed development of the ARPAnet
would have proceeded unchanged.
PKD writes some of my favorite alternate history. Matter of fact,
this morning _The Man in the High Castle_ is being scrutinized to see
if it what it says about "Lao Tzu," which appears in another rasw
thread. In the end, in /this/ reality, Baran's data network, which
was conceived and designed to survive nuclear war, is seminal.
Seminal - "strongly influencing later developments."

OK, give us some alternate history: how, specifically, would the
ARPAnet have differed if Baran's work had never existed?
--
Mark Jackson - http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~mjackson
I'm 70. 70 may be the new 50, but "dead" is not
the new "alive." - Bob Mankoff
D B Davis
2018-12-09 03:19:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 15:35:33 -0000 (UTC), D B Davis
Post by D B Davis
On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 16:00:30 -0000 (UTC), D B Davis
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching
independently (and coined the term) in pursuit of
inter-computer communications efficiency, not nuclear
resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner
and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use
Baran's distributed communications, which was explicitly
conceived and designed to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf
and Kahn used those sources and also the results of
research conducted at PARC, where another working packet
network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and
designed to survive an nuclear war.
Your point being?
My point remains as originally stated above. Nuclear war
survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried. Your
feelings that "nuclear war had no part in the design of the
Internet" is a misconception.
Baran was entirely unsuccessful in convincing AT&T that they
should build a packet-switching system. He did succeed in getting
the Air Force interested, but when the proposed project was
assigned to the Defense Communications Network Baran saw no support
there for it and the project died. That is as far as that
initiative went and it has no ancestral claim on the creation of
the ARPAnet, the genesis of which was a desire to facilitate
communication among the many different computers supporting
ARPA-funded research around the country. Nuclear resilience had
nothing to do with it.
Yes, the folks working toward creating the ARPAnet became aware of
Baran's work around the same time they became aware of Davies'.
But Davies had invented the same packet-switching approach as
Baran; if the latter had never existed development of the ARPAnet
would have proceeded unchanged.
PKD writes some of my favorite alternate history. Matter of fact,
this morning _The Man in the High Castle_ is being scrutinized to see
if it what it says about "Lao Tzu," which appears in another rasw
thread. In the end, in /this/ reality, Baran's data network, which
was conceived and designed to survive nuclear war, is seminal.
Seminal - "strongly influencing later developments."
OK, give us some alternate history: how, specifically, would the
ARPAnet have differed if Baran's work had never existed?
PKD's a genius with words, you know. It amazes me how he fluently
describes a character's mental processes. Perhaps PKD pretensions can do
me some good.

“We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about
what we pretend to be.” - Vonnegut

The word "seminal" is a good word. It defies binary thinking because
no one knows for certain how, or even if, a seminal work affects those
that follow. Seminal in this context comes from the preface of RAND's
"On Distributed Communications" [1]:

An electrical engineer by training, Paul Baran worked for Hughes
Aircraft Company's systems group before joining RAND in 1959.
While working at RAND on a scheme for U.S. telecommunications
infrastructure to survive a "first strike," Baran conceived of
the Internet and digital packet switching, the Internet's
underlying data communications technology. His concepts are
still employed today; just the terms are different. His seminal
work first appeared in a series of RAND studies published between
1960 and 1962 and then finally in the tome "On Distributed
Communications," published in 1964.

John W Campbell Jr had passed away by the time the Ackermans
released _PR #9: Quest Through Space and Time_. In that MMPB Forrest
Ackerman describes Campbell as seminal figure who /inspired imitators./
See, the thing is, you may dominate, but, unless you /inspire imitators/
you're not seminal.

Note.

1. https://web.archive.org/web/20101228070851/http://www.rand.org:80/about/history/baran-list.html



Thank you,
--
Don
Mark Jackson
2018-12-09 03:41:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
See, the thing is, you may dominate, but, unless you/inspire
imitators/ you're not seminal.
Davies developed the concept of a distributed, packet-switching network
with no knowledge of Baran and his work; the ARPAnet project started
with no concern for nuclear resilience. I rest my case.
--
Mark Jackson - http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~mjackson
I'm 70. 70 may be the new 50, but "dead" is not
the new "alive." - Bob Mankoff
D B Davis
2018-12-09 16:15:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching
independently (and coined the term) in pursuit of
inter-computer communications efficiency, not nuclear
resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner
and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use
Baran's distributed communications, which was explicitly
conceived and designed to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf
and Kahn used those sources and also the results of
research conducted at PARC, where another working packet
network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and
designed to survive an nuclear war.
Your point being?
My point remains as originally stated above. Nuclear war
survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried. Your
feelings that "nuclear war had no part in the design of the
Internet" is a misconception.
Baran was entirely unsuccessful in convincing AT&T that they
should build a packet-switching system. He did succeed in getting
the Air Force interested, but when the proposed project was
assigned to the Defense Communications Network Baran saw no support
there for it and the project died. That is as far as that
initiative went and it has no ancestral claim on the creation of
the ARPAnet, the genesis of which was a desire to facilitate
communication among the many different computers supporting
ARPA-funded research around the country. Nuclear resilience had
nothing to do with it.
Yes, the folks working toward creating the ARPAnet became aware of
Baran's work around the same time they became aware of Davies'.
But Davies had invented the same packet-switching approach as
Baran; if the latter had never existed development of the ARPAnet
would have proceeded unchanged.
PKD writes some of my favorite alternate history. Matter of fact,
this morning _The Man in the High Castle_ is being scrutinized to see
if it what it says about "Lao Tzu," which appears in another rasw
thread. In the end, in /this/ reality, Baran's data network, which
was conceived and designed to survive nuclear war, is seminal.
Seminal - "strongly influencing later developments."
OK, give us some alternate history: how, specifically, would the
ARPAnet have differed if Baran's work had never existed?
PKD's a genius with words, you know. It amazes me how he fluently
describes a character's mental processes. Perhaps PKD pretensions can do
me some good.
“We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about
what we pretend to be.” - Vonnegut
The word "seminal" is a good word. It defies binary thinking because
no one knows for certain how, or even if, a seminal work affects those
that follow. Seminal in this context comes from the preface of RAND's
An electrical engineer by training, Paul Baran worked for Hughes
Aircraft Company's systems group before joining RAND in 1959.
While working at RAND on a scheme for U.S. telecommunications
infrastructure to survive a "first strike," Baran conceived of
the Internet and digital packet switching, the Internet's
underlying data communications technology. His concepts are
still employed today; just the terms are different. His seminal
work first appeared in a series of RAND studies published between
1960 and 1962 and then finally in the tome "On Distributed
Communications," published in 1964.
John W Campbell Jr had passed away by the time the Ackermans
released _PR #9: Quest Through Space and Time_. In that MMPB Forrest
Ackerman describes Campbell as seminal figure who /inspired imitators./
See, the thing is, you may dominate, but, unless you /inspire imitators/
you're not seminal.
Note.
1. https://web.archive.org/web/20101228070851/http://www.rand.org:80/about/history/baran-list.html
Davies developed the concept of a distributed, packet-switching network
with no knowledge of Baran and his work; the ARPAnet project started
with no concern for nuclear resilience. I rest my case.
The spirit that moves coders to implement a software snippet a given way
may be more capricious than the winds in Dante's second circle of hell.
Regardless, it's much more interesting to me to determine if the Inet
/can/ survive a nuclear war; by intention or not.
Some say that 33 Thomas Street, Manhattan [1] is built to survive.
Supposedly similar buildings exist in major metropolitan areas in the
continental USA.

Note.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33_Thomas_Street



Thank you,
--
Don
J. Clarke
2018-12-09 19:16:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching
independently (and coined the term) in pursuit of
inter-computer communications efficiency, not nuclear
resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner
and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use
Baran's distributed communications, which was explicitly
conceived and designed to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf
and Kahn used those sources and also the results of
research conducted at PARC, where another working packet
network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and
designed to survive an nuclear war.
Your point being?
My point remains as originally stated above. Nuclear war
survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried. Your
feelings that "nuclear war had no part in the design of the
Internet" is a misconception.
Baran was entirely unsuccessful in convincing AT&T that they
should build a packet-switching system. He did succeed in getting
the Air Force interested, but when the proposed project was
assigned to the Defense Communications Network Baran saw no support
there for it and the project died. That is as far as that
initiative went and it has no ancestral claim on the creation of
the ARPAnet, the genesis of which was a desire to facilitate
communication among the many different computers supporting
ARPA-funded research around the country. Nuclear resilience had
nothing to do with it.
Yes, the folks working toward creating the ARPAnet became aware of
Baran's work around the same time they became aware of Davies'.
But Davies had invented the same packet-switching approach as
Baran; if the latter had never existed development of the ARPAnet
would have proceeded unchanged.
PKD writes some of my favorite alternate history. Matter of fact,
this morning _The Man in the High Castle_ is being scrutinized to see
if it what it says about "Lao Tzu," which appears in another rasw
thread. In the end, in /this/ reality, Baran's data network, which
was conceived and designed to survive nuclear war, is seminal.
Seminal - "strongly influencing later developments."
OK, give us some alternate history: how, specifically, would the
ARPAnet have differed if Baran's work had never existed?
PKD's a genius with words, you know. It amazes me how he fluently
describes a character's mental processes. Perhaps PKD pretensions can do
me some good.
“We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about
what we pretend to be.” - Vonnegut
The word "seminal" is a good word. It defies binary thinking because
no one knows for certain how, or even if, a seminal work affects those
that follow. Seminal in this context comes from the preface of RAND's
An electrical engineer by training, Paul Baran worked for Hughes
Aircraft Company's systems group before joining RAND in 1959.
While working at RAND on a scheme for U.S. telecommunications
infrastructure to survive a "first strike," Baran conceived of
the Internet and digital packet switching, the Internet's
underlying data communications technology. His concepts are
still employed today; just the terms are different. His seminal
work first appeared in a series of RAND studies published between
1960 and 1962 and then finally in the tome "On Distributed
Communications," published in 1964.
John W Campbell Jr had passed away by the time the Ackermans
released _PR #9: Quest Through Space and Time_. In that MMPB Forrest
Ackerman describes Campbell as seminal figure who /inspired imitators./
See, the thing is, you may dominate, but, unless you /inspire imitators/
you're not seminal.
Note.
1. https://web.archive.org/web/20101228070851/http://www.rand.org:80/about/history/baran-list.html
Davies developed the concept of a distributed, packet-switching network
with no knowledge of Baran and his work; the ARPAnet project started
with no concern for nuclear resilience. I rest my case.
The spirit that moves coders to implement a software snippet a given way
may be more capricious than the winds in Dante's second circle of hell.
Regardless, it's much more interesting to me to determine if the Inet
/can/ survive a nuclear war; by intention or not.
Some say that 33 Thomas Street, Manhattan [1] is built to survive.
Supposedly similar buildings exist in major metropolitan areas in the
continental USA.
Note.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33_Thomas_Street
No 50 story building is designed to survive a nuclear war. Too much
leverage.
Dimensional Traveler
2018-12-09 20:18:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching
independently (and coined the term) in pursuit of
inter-computer communications efficiency, not nuclear
resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner
and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use
Baran's distributed communications, which was explicitly
conceived and designed to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf
and Kahn used those sources and also the results of
research conducted at PARC, where another working packet
network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and
designed to survive an nuclear war.
Your point being?
My point remains as originally stated above. Nuclear war
survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried. Your
feelings that "nuclear war had no part in the design of the
Internet" is a misconception.
Baran was entirely unsuccessful in convincing AT&T that they
should build a packet-switching system. He did succeed in getting
the Air Force interested, but when the proposed project was
assigned to the Defense Communications Network Baran saw no support
there for it and the project died. That is as far as that
initiative went and it has no ancestral claim on the creation of
the ARPAnet, the genesis of which was a desire to facilitate
communication among the many different computers supporting
ARPA-funded research around the country. Nuclear resilience had
nothing to do with it.
Yes, the folks working toward creating the ARPAnet became aware of
Baran's work around the same time they became aware of Davies'.
But Davies had invented the same packet-switching approach as
Baran; if the latter had never existed development of the ARPAnet
would have proceeded unchanged.
PKD writes some of my favorite alternate history. Matter of fact,
this morning _The Man in the High Castle_ is being scrutinized to see
if it what it says about "Lao Tzu," which appears in another rasw
thread. In the end, in /this/ reality, Baran's data network, which
was conceived and designed to survive nuclear war, is seminal.
Seminal - "strongly influencing later developments."
OK, give us some alternate history: how, specifically, would the
ARPAnet have differed if Baran's work had never existed?
PKD's a genius with words, you know. It amazes me how he fluently
describes a character's mental processes. Perhaps PKD pretensions can do
me some good.
“We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about
what we pretend to be.” - Vonnegut
The word "seminal" is a good word. It defies binary thinking because
no one knows for certain how, or even if, a seminal work affects those
that follow. Seminal in this context comes from the preface of RAND's
An electrical engineer by training, Paul Baran worked for Hughes
Aircraft Company's systems group before joining RAND in 1959.
While working at RAND on a scheme for U.S. telecommunications
infrastructure to survive a "first strike," Baran conceived of
the Internet and digital packet switching, the Internet's
underlying data communications technology. His concepts are
still employed today; just the terms are different. His seminal
work first appeared in a series of RAND studies published between
1960 and 1962 and then finally in the tome "On Distributed
Communications," published in 1964.
John W Campbell Jr had passed away by the time the Ackermans
released _PR #9: Quest Through Space and Time_. In that MMPB Forrest
Ackerman describes Campbell as seminal figure who /inspired imitators./
See, the thing is, you may dominate, but, unless you /inspire imitators/
you're not seminal.
Note.
1. https://web.archive.org/web/20101228070851/http://www.rand.org:80/about/history/baran-list.html
Davies developed the concept of a distributed, packet-switching network
with no knowledge of Baran and his work; the ARPAnet project started
with no concern for nuclear resilience. I rest my case.
The spirit that moves coders to implement a software snippet a given way
may be more capricious than the winds in Dante's second circle of hell.
Regardless, it's much more interesting to me to determine if the Inet
/can/ survive a nuclear war; by intention or not.
Some say that 33 Thomas Street, Manhattan [1] is built to survive.
Supposedly similar buildings exist in major metropolitan areas in the
continental USA.
Note.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33_Thomas_Street
No 50 story building is designed to survive a nuclear war. Too much
leverage.
The wiki doesn't even claim that, just that it can protect occupants
from fallout for two weeks.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Robert Carnegie
2018-12-09 20:38:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching
independently (and coined the term) in pursuit of
inter-computer communications efficiency, not nuclear
resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner
and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use
Baran's distributed communications, which was explicitly
conceived and designed to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf
and Kahn used those sources and also the results of
research conducted at PARC, where another working packet
network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and
designed to survive an nuclear war.
Your point being?
My point remains as originally stated above. Nuclear war
survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried. Your
feelings that "nuclear war had no part in the design of the
Internet" is a misconception.
Baran was entirely unsuccessful in convincing AT&T that they
should build a packet-switching system. He did succeed in getting
the Air Force interested, but when the proposed project was
assigned to the Defense Communications Network Baran saw no support
there for it and the project died. That is as far as that
initiative went and it has no ancestral claim on the creation of
the ARPAnet, the genesis of which was a desire to facilitate
communication among the many different computers supporting
ARPA-funded research around the country. Nuclear resilience had
nothing to do with it.
Yes, the folks working toward creating the ARPAnet became aware of
Baran's work around the same time they became aware of Davies'.
But Davies had invented the same packet-switching approach as
Baran; if the latter had never existed development of the ARPAnet
would have proceeded unchanged.
PKD writes some of my favorite alternate history. Matter of fact,
this morning _The Man in the High Castle_ is being scrutinized to see
if it what it says about "Lao Tzu," which appears in another rasw
thread. In the end, in /this/ reality, Baran's data network, which
was conceived and designed to survive nuclear war, is seminal.
Seminal - "strongly influencing later developments."
OK, give us some alternate history: how, specifically, would the
ARPAnet have differed if Baran's work had never existed?
PKD's a genius with words, you know. It amazes me how he fluently
describes a character's mental processes. Perhaps PKD pretensions can do
me some good.
“We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about
what we pretend to be.” - Vonnegut
The word "seminal" is a good word. It defies binary thinking because
no one knows for certain how, or even if, a seminal work affects those
that follow. Seminal in this context comes from the preface of RAND's
An electrical engineer by training, Paul Baran worked for Hughes
Aircraft Company's systems group before joining RAND in 1959.
While working at RAND on a scheme for U.S. telecommunications
infrastructure to survive a "first strike," Baran conceived of
the Internet and digital packet switching, the Internet's
underlying data communications technology. His concepts are
still employed today; just the terms are different. His seminal
work first appeared in a series of RAND studies published between
1960 and 1962 and then finally in the tome "On Distributed
Communications," published in 1964.
John W Campbell Jr had passed away by the time the Ackermans
released _PR #9: Quest Through Space and Time_. In that MMPB Forrest
Ackerman describes Campbell as seminal figure who /inspired imitators./
See, the thing is, you may dominate, but, unless you /inspire imitators/
you're not seminal.
Note.
1. https://web.archive.org/web/20101228070851/http://www.rand.org:80/about/history/baran-list.html
Davies developed the concept of a distributed, packet-switching network
with no knowledge of Baran and his work; the ARPAnet project started
with no concern for nuclear resilience. I rest my case.
The spirit that moves coders to implement a software snippet a given way
may be more capricious than the winds in Dante's second circle of hell.
Regardless, it's much more interesting to me to determine if the Inet
/can/ survive a nuclear war; by intention or not.
Some say that 33 Thomas Street, Manhattan [1] is built to survive.
Supposedly similar buildings exist in major metropolitan areas in the
continental USA.
Note.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33_Thomas_Street
No 50 story building is designed to survive a nuclear war. Too much
leverage.
The wiki doesn't even claim that, just that it can protect occupants
from fallout for two weeks.
I presumed the nuclear war wasn't taking place /in/
the building. Surely there's a clause in the lease.
J. Clarke
2018-12-09 21:06:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 9 Dec 2018 12:38:59 -0800 (PST), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching
independently (and coined the term) in pursuit of
inter-computer communications efficiency, not nuclear
resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner
and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use
Baran's distributed communications, which was explicitly
conceived and designed to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf
and Kahn used those sources and also the results of
research conducted at PARC, where another working packet
network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and
designed to survive an nuclear war.
Your point being?
My point remains as originally stated above. Nuclear war
survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried. Your
feelings that "nuclear war had no part in the design of the
Internet" is a misconception.
Baran was entirely unsuccessful in convincing AT&T that they
should build a packet-switching system. He did succeed in getting
the Air Force interested, but when the proposed project was
assigned to the Defense Communications Network Baran saw no support
there for it and the project died. That is as far as that
initiative went and it has no ancestral claim on the creation of
the ARPAnet, the genesis of which was a desire to facilitate
communication among the many different computers supporting
ARPA-funded research around the country. Nuclear resilience had
nothing to do with it.
Yes, the folks working toward creating the ARPAnet became aware of
Baran's work around the same time they became aware of Davies'.
But Davies had invented the same packet-switching approach as
Baran; if the latter had never existed development of the ARPAnet
would have proceeded unchanged.
PKD writes some of my favorite alternate history. Matter of fact,
this morning _The Man in the High Castle_ is being scrutinized to see
if it what it says about "Lao Tzu," which appears in another rasw
thread. In the end, in /this/ reality, Baran's data network, which
was conceived and designed to survive nuclear war, is seminal.
Seminal - "strongly influencing later developments."
OK, give us some alternate history: how, specifically, would the
ARPAnet have differed if Baran's work had never existed?
PKD's a genius with words, you know. It amazes me how he fluently
describes a character's mental processes. Perhaps PKD pretensions can do
me some good.
“We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about
what we pretend to be.” - Vonnegut
The word "seminal" is a good word. It defies binary thinking because
no one knows for certain how, or even if, a seminal work affects those
that follow. Seminal in this context comes from the preface of RAND's
An electrical engineer by training, Paul Baran worked for Hughes
Aircraft Company's systems group before joining RAND in 1959.
While working at RAND on a scheme for U.S. telecommunications
infrastructure to survive a "first strike," Baran conceived of
the Internet and digital packet switching, the Internet's
underlying data communications technology. His concepts are
still employed today; just the terms are different. His seminal
work first appeared in a series of RAND studies published between
1960 and 1962 and then finally in the tome "On Distributed
Communications," published in 1964.
John W Campbell Jr had passed away by the time the Ackermans
released _PR #9: Quest Through Space and Time_. In that MMPB Forrest
Ackerman describes Campbell as seminal figure who /inspired imitators./
See, the thing is, you may dominate, but, unless you /inspire imitators/
you're not seminal.
Note.
1. https://web.archive.org/web/20101228070851/http://www.rand.org:80/about/history/baran-list.html
Davies developed the concept of a distributed, packet-switching network
with no knowledge of Baran and his work; the ARPAnet project started
with no concern for nuclear resilience. I rest my case.
The spirit that moves coders to implement a software snippet a given way
may be more capricious than the winds in Dante's second circle of hell.
Regardless, it's much more interesting to me to determine if the Inet
/can/ survive a nuclear war; by intention or not.
Some say that 33 Thomas Street, Manhattan [1] is built to survive.
Supposedly similar buildings exist in major metropolitan areas in the
continental USA.
Note.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33_Thomas_Street
No 50 story building is designed to survive a nuclear war. Too much
leverage.
The wiki doesn't even claim that, just that it can protect occupants
from fallout for two weeks.
I presumed the nuclear war wasn't taking place /in/
the building. Surely there's a clause in the lease.
It's in Manhattan. Any countervalue strike is going to wipe out
Manhattan. Late Soviet era ICBMs carried 10 warheads with a total
yield of over 5 megatons. Several of those warheads would likely have
gone into the general area--one would likely target Manhattan as a
whole, and hit about 4 miles away, another the financial district, 1
mile or so away, might have also gone for the shipyard in Brooklyn,
and if the ones they threw at Sikorski, Grumman, Electric Boat, and
Pratt & Whitney went astray there could have been quite a few more.

I have the impression that you, like many others today, don't seem to
grasp the concept of "nuclear weapon".
Robert Carnegie
2018-12-09 21:51:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 9 Dec 2018 12:38:59 -0800 (PST), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching
independently (and coined the term) in pursuit of
inter-computer communications efficiency, not nuclear
resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner
and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use
Baran's distributed communications, which was explicitly
conceived and designed to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf
and Kahn used those sources and also the results of
research conducted at PARC, where another working packet
network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and
designed to survive an nuclear war.
Your point being?
My point remains as originally stated above. Nuclear war
survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried. Your
feelings that "nuclear war had no part in the design of the
Internet" is a misconception.
Baran was entirely unsuccessful in convincing AT&T that they
should build a packet-switching system. He did succeed in getting
the Air Force interested, but when the proposed project was
assigned to the Defense Communications Network Baran saw no support
there for it and the project died. That is as far as that
initiative went and it has no ancestral claim on the creation of
the ARPAnet, the genesis of which was a desire to facilitate
communication among the many different computers supporting
ARPA-funded research around the country. Nuclear resilience had
nothing to do with it.
Yes, the folks working toward creating the ARPAnet became aware of
Baran's work around the same time they became aware of Davies'.
But Davies had invented the same packet-switching approach as
Baran; if the latter had never existed development of the ARPAnet
would have proceeded unchanged.
PKD writes some of my favorite alternate history. Matter of fact,
this morning _The Man in the High Castle_ is being scrutinized to see
if it what it says about "Lao Tzu," which appears in another rasw
thread. In the end, in /this/ reality, Baran's data network, which
was conceived and designed to survive nuclear war, is seminal.
Seminal - "strongly influencing later developments."
OK, give us some alternate history: how, specifically, would the
ARPAnet have differed if Baran's work had never existed?
PKD's a genius with words, you know. It amazes me how he fluently
describes a character's mental processes. Perhaps PKD pretensions can do
me some good.
“We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about
what we pretend to be.” - Vonnegut
The word "seminal" is a good word. It defies binary thinking because
no one knows for certain how, or even if, a seminal work affects those
that follow. Seminal in this context comes from the preface of RAND's
An electrical engineer by training, Paul Baran worked for Hughes
Aircraft Company's systems group before joining RAND in 1959.
While working at RAND on a scheme for U.S. telecommunications
infrastructure to survive a "first strike," Baran conceived of
the Internet and digital packet switching, the Internet's
underlying data communications technology. His concepts are
still employed today; just the terms are different. His seminal
work first appeared in a series of RAND studies published between
1960 and 1962 and then finally in the tome "On Distributed
Communications," published in 1964.
John W Campbell Jr had passed away by the time the Ackermans
released _PR #9: Quest Through Space and Time_. In that MMPB Forrest
Ackerman describes Campbell as seminal figure who /inspired imitators./
See, the thing is, you may dominate, but, unless you /inspire imitators/
you're not seminal.
Note.
1. https://web.archive.org/web/20101228070851/http://www.rand.org:80/about/history/baran-list.html
Davies developed the concept of a distributed, packet-switching network
with no knowledge of Baran and his work; the ARPAnet project started
with no concern for nuclear resilience. I rest my case.
The spirit that moves coders to implement a software snippet a given way
may be more capricious than the winds in Dante's second circle of hell.
Regardless, it's much more interesting to me to determine if the Inet
/can/ survive a nuclear war; by intention or not.
Some say that 33 Thomas Street, Manhattan [1] is built to survive.
Supposedly similar buildings exist in major metropolitan areas in the
continental USA.
Note.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33_Thomas_Street
No 50 story building is designed to survive a nuclear war. Too much
leverage.
The wiki doesn't even claim that, just that it can protect occupants
from fallout for two weeks.
I presumed the nuclear war wasn't taking place /in/
the building. Surely there's a clause in the lease.
It's in Manhattan. Any countervalue strike is going to wipe out
Manhattan. Late Soviet era ICBMs carried 10 warheads with a total
yield of over 5 megatons. Several of those warheads would likely have
gone into the general area--one would likely target Manhattan as a
whole, and hit about 4 miles away, another the financial district, 1
mile or so away, might have also gone for the shipyard in Brooklyn,
and if the ones they threw at Sikorski, Grumman, Electric Boat, and
Pratt & Whitney went astray there could have been quite a few more.
I have the impression that you, like many others today, don't seem to
grasp the concept of "nuclear weapon".
If my neighbours start a nuclear war, I will go right
round and tell them that you think it's implausible.

Well, I may give it half an hour first... you know.
Greg Goss
2018-12-09 23:32:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
If my neighbours start a nuclear war, I will go right
round and tell them that you think it's implausible.
Well, I may give it half an hour first... you know.
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x30as0g
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
J. Clarke
2018-12-09 20:56:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 9 Dec 2018 12:18:44 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching
independently (and coined the term) in pursuit of
inter-computer communications efficiency, not nuclear
resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner
and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use
Baran's distributed communications, which was explicitly
conceived and designed to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf
and Kahn used those sources and also the results of
research conducted at PARC, where another working packet
network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and
designed to survive an nuclear war.
Your point being?
My point remains as originally stated above. Nuclear war
survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried. Your
feelings that "nuclear war had no part in the design of the
Internet" is a misconception.
Baran was entirely unsuccessful in convincing AT&T that they
should build a packet-switching system. He did succeed in getting
the Air Force interested, but when the proposed project was
assigned to the Defense Communications Network Baran saw no support
there for it and the project died. That is as far as that
initiative went and it has no ancestral claim on the creation of
the ARPAnet, the genesis of which was a desire to facilitate
communication among the many different computers supporting
ARPA-funded research around the country. Nuclear resilience had
nothing to do with it.
Yes, the folks working toward creating the ARPAnet became aware of
Baran's work around the same time they became aware of Davies'.
But Davies had invented the same packet-switching approach as
Baran; if the latter had never existed development of the ARPAnet
would have proceeded unchanged.
PKD writes some of my favorite alternate history. Matter of fact,
this morning _The Man in the High Castle_ is being scrutinized to see
if it what it says about "Lao Tzu," which appears in another rasw
thread. In the end, in /this/ reality, Baran's data network, which
was conceived and designed to survive nuclear war, is seminal.
Seminal - "strongly influencing later developments."
OK, give us some alternate history: how, specifically, would the
ARPAnet have differed if Baran's work had never existed?
PKD's a genius with words, you know. It amazes me how he fluently
describes a character's mental processes. Perhaps PKD pretensions can do
me some good.
“We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about
what we pretend to be.” - Vonnegut
The word "seminal" is a good word. It defies binary thinking because
no one knows for certain how, or even if, a seminal work affects those
that follow. Seminal in this context comes from the preface of RAND's
An electrical engineer by training, Paul Baran worked for Hughes
Aircraft Company's systems group before joining RAND in 1959.
While working at RAND on a scheme for U.S. telecommunications
infrastructure to survive a "first strike," Baran conceived of
the Internet and digital packet switching, the Internet's
underlying data communications technology. His concepts are
still employed today; just the terms are different. His seminal
work first appeared in a series of RAND studies published between
1960 and 1962 and then finally in the tome "On Distributed
Communications," published in 1964.
John W Campbell Jr had passed away by the time the Ackermans
released _PR #9: Quest Through Space and Time_. In that MMPB Forrest
Ackerman describes Campbell as seminal figure who /inspired imitators./
See, the thing is, you may dominate, but, unless you /inspire imitators/
you're not seminal.
Note.
1. https://web.archive.org/web/20101228070851/http://www.rand.org:80/about/history/baran-list.html
Davies developed the concept of a distributed, packet-switching network
with no knowledge of Baran and his work; the ARPAnet project started
with no concern for nuclear resilience. I rest my case.
The spirit that moves coders to implement a software snippet a given way
may be more capricious than the winds in Dante's second circle of hell.
Regardless, it's much more interesting to me to determine if the Inet
/can/ survive a nuclear war; by intention or not.
Some say that 33 Thomas Street, Manhattan [1] is built to survive.
Supposedly similar buildings exist in major metropolitan areas in the
continental USA.
Note.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33_Thomas_Street
No 50 story building is designed to survive a nuclear war. Too much
leverage.
The wiki doesn't even claim that, just that it can protect occupants
from fallout for two weeks.
Which is a long way from "surviving a nuclear war". If it survives
the attack then it might be able to support its occupants for a while.
J. Clarke
2018-12-08 23:41:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:41:03 -0500, John W Kennedy
Post by John W Kennedy
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
That is a very common misconception. The nuclear war had no part in
the design of the Internet. It was never intended to be a military
system and in fact the military has its own communication systems.
Nuclear war survivability as a historical motive is not cut and dried.
While at RAND in 1962, Paul Baran conceived and designed packet
switching explicitly to survive a nuclear war. [1] Baran's nuclear war
survivable packet switching is at the heart of today's Internet and
other networks.
While he came up with the concept, he isn't the one who designed the
protocol that the Internet uses.
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching independently (and coined
the term) in pursuit of inter-computer communications efficiency, not
nuclear resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up Late/ (Hafner and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use Baran's
distributed communications, which was explicitly conceived and designed
to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf and Kahn
used those sources and also the results of research conducted at PARC,
where another working packet network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and designed to
survive an nuclear war.
Your point being?
My point remains as originally stated above. Nuclear war survivability
as a historical motive is not cut and dried. Your feelings that "nuclear
war had no part in the design of the Internet" is a misconception.
OK, show me the damned specification that says that surving a nuclear
war was a design criterion.

CAT scanning was originally developed to find defects in spacecraft
components. Does that mean that the people who designed the CAT
scanner used in the local hospital were planning on finding defects in
spacecraft components?
Cryptoengineer
2018-12-09 02:50:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 16:03:42 -0000 (UTC), D B Davis
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:41:03 -0500, John W Kennedy
Post by John W Kennedy
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
That is a very common misconception. The nuclear war had no
part in the design of the Internet. It was never intended to
be a military system and in fact the military has its own
communication systems.
Nuclear war survivability as a historical motive is not cut
and dried. While at RAND in 1962, Paul Baran conceived and
designed packet switching explicitly to survive a nuclear war.
[1] Baran's nuclear war survivable packet switching is at the
heart of today's Internet and other networks.
While he came up with the concept, he isn't the one who
designed the protocol that the Internet uses.
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching independently (and
coined the term) in pursuit of inter-computer communications
efficiency, not nuclear resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up
Late/ (Hafner and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use Baran's
distributed communications, which was explicitly conceived and
designed to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf and
Kahn used those sources and also the results of research conducted
at PARC, where another working packet network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and designed to
survive an nuclear war.
Your point being?
My point remains as originally stated above. Nuclear war survivability
as a historical motive is not cut and dried. Your feelings that
"nuclear war had no part in the design of the Internet" is a
misconception.
OK, show me the damned specification that says that surving a nuclear
war was a design criterion.
CAT scanning was originally developed to find defects in spacecraft
components. Does that mean that the people who designed the CAT
scanner used in the local hospital were planning on finding defects in
spacecraft components?
Cite?

The first memory I have of CT was a cover article on Nature showing
a cross section of a lemon, with the technology called 'zeugmatrography'
or similar. This was around 1977.

pt
J. Clarke
2018-12-09 03:34:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 08 Dec 2018 20:50:40 -0600, Cryptoengineer
Post by Cryptoengineer
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
Post by D B Davis
Post by Mark Jackson
On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 16:03:42 -0000 (UTC), D B Davis
Post by D B Davis
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:41:03 -0500, John W Kennedy
Post by John W Kennedy
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
That is a very common misconception. The nuclear war had no
part in the design of the Internet. It was never intended to
be a military system and in fact the military has its own
communication systems.
Nuclear war survivability as a historical motive is not cut
and dried. While at RAND in 1962, Paul Baran conceived and
designed packet switching explicitly to survive a nuclear war.
[1] Baran's nuclear war survivable packet switching is at the
heart of today's Internet and other networks.
While he came up with the concept, he isn't the one who
designed the protocol that the Internet uses.
Yes - Donald Davies invented packet switching independently (and
coined the term) in pursuit of inter-computer communications
efficiency, not nuclear resilience. See /Where Wizards Stay Up
Late/ (Hafner and Lyon).
Did ARPA use Davies for reference? ARPA did indeed use Baran's
distributed communications, which was explicitly conceived and
designed to survive a nuclear war.
Davies had a working network, Baran had simulations. Cerf and
Kahn used those sources and also the results of research conducted
at PARC, where another working packet network existed.
Baran's seminal data network is explicitly conceived and designed to
survive an nuclear war.
Your point being?
My point remains as originally stated above. Nuclear war survivability
as a historical motive is not cut and dried. Your feelings that
"nuclear war had no part in the design of the Internet" is a
misconception.
OK, show me the damned specification that says that surving a nuclear
war was a design criterion.
CAT scanning was originally developed to find defects in spacecraft
components. Does that mean that the people who designed the CAT
scanner used in the local hospital were planning on finding defects in
spacecraft components?
Cite?
The first memory I have of CT was a cover article on Nature showing
a cross section of a lemon, with the technology called 'zeugmatrography'
or similar. This was around 1977.
My error, trusting NASA. They claim that they developed digital
signal processing technology that was later used in CAT scanners.
That's a huge stretch IMO.
John W Kennedy
2018-12-06 20:06:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:41:03 -0500, John W Kennedy
Post by John W Kennedy
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
A Girl and Her Fed: Anti Vaxxers
    http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html
Yup, supervillains.
I can't see that.  I sent mail to Spangler (to make sure she was
all right; they've already had one hurricane) and she said
something is wrong with Cloudfare, which gives me nothing but a
You            San Jose    agirlandherfed.com
Your browser        Cloudfare        Host
Working            Working            Error
So Cloudfare thinks it's working, and Spangler says it isn't.
Haven't been able to read this strip for a while, darn it.
   <http://agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
   <http://www.agirlandherfed.com/1.1639.html>
worked for me.
I am actually continuously surprised that the Internet works as well as
it does.
It was designed to survive a nuclear war, after all.
That is a very common misconception. The nuclear war had no part in
the design of the Internet. It was never intended to be a military
system and in fact the military has its own communication systems.
...at least one of which (NIPRNET) is a direct descendant of MILNET,
which was a part of ARPANET until 1984.

And nuclear-war survivability was part of the mid-60s research that led
to packet switching and the ARPANET in the first place.
--
John W. Kennedy
"The blind rulers of Logres
Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
-- Charles Williams. "Taliessin through Logres: Prelude"
Loading...