If a nation like Estonia (where the inventors of Skype are from and why I selected them as an example) are having one of their top globally recognized companies deliberately excluded during a 2 year period of remote, webcam-only work because Skype is (for example) incompatible with "Zoom". Well, what's zoom? It was brand new. 70% of the population working remotely (representing the strongest economic forces available) used it. It was the law. Although like Skype it was free, it was typically purchased by business entities for management. It was universally upgradable, apparently employees could upgrade it too. I was surprised about that. So, on Skype's behalf I asked: "To what?". I wasn't serious because it probably doesn't even exist anymore. (i.e: benefits so petty I don't remember). If it does, I very highly doubt (for example) that you will ever be holding a conversation with a Taiwanese motherboard manufacturer via "Zoom" about upgrading an order simply because (unlike Skype) it doesn't convert spoken Taiwanese to English. Additionally other companies don't necessarily purchase software to be compatible with your proprietary teleconferencing upgrade without being absolutely sure you are going to buy something expensive.
What I am about to say is very important and should be expected to already exist. Most importantly, once effective refinements are made to bring about its exacting experience, it will yield true as the answer to the momentary question: "If somebody thought of this existing wouldn't they want to make it so you couldn't get it at all costs?". To over-simplify the concept (for features sake): If one were to exclude all of the United States from their online experiences, for completely different reasons altogether instead as if totally ignorant of the previously mentioned with (economics a totally irrelevant subject regarding the reason, how would they do it in one direction, like: they can come to you but you can't go to them with both directions being an unusual extreme (but stll a possibility).
My thoughts regarding this are along the lines of firewall rules being understood but being socially networked a definite, exacting possibility and also preferred because of the known superiority of that kind of benefit most pronounced and visible in anti-email-spam companies (such as those who make plugins for Microsoft Outlook) who are making a small fortune providing an effective service under the command of businesses who purchase it. Through purchasing a license they are given the existance of a local social network (other employees) with the added functionality of administrative control over their contributions being immediate implementation, for consideration, or the trashbin (w/o their knowledge).
Specialisation in email spam the primary contributor to purchasing a license as their effectiveness exists (the company that wrote the software) as the default social network.
From first hand experience, one was particularly effective enough while offering a filtering ability relatively simplistically (that average employees could figure it out). Most importantly when the spam filtering configurations are done automatically (the default action) an item now flagged as having passed through has the user presented with the auto-filter in manual form, they can modify it before submission and it lingers thereafter as a source of reconfiguration, in case it doesn't work but also to suggest learning how the filters work if they continue to have problems as as we know spam (like the aids virus) evolves with vaccination and can be expected to find new forms whenever too much resistance relative to labor is thought to exist.
Arguments for this technology being like this are related to the known argument regarding potential misuse of dynamic routing: Network engineers aren't trained to understand that a fiber optic cable from New York to London can't divert the clients requests.
Arguments for this technology being like this are related to the known argument regarding potential misuse of dynamic routing: Network engineers aren't trained to understand that a fiber optic cable from New York to London can't divert the clients requests.
Despite a previous result provided by a spammers database of servers containing promotional materials for Viagra being demanded as the preferred route...because your packets are in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean and despite the hostname "generic-viagras-for-atlantis-city.net" resolving to 27 different ipv4 and ipv6 addressesses, all of them are in New Jersey so you shouldn't be here in the first place AND (additionally) you simply couldn't possibly have had that (a route in North America) in mind, when privacy-infringement aside, your social network confirms the unrelated domain initially requested is in Amsterdam and Amsterdam is in Europe.
****
Btw, another subject I (IPv6 passed around 2000 over the need for more internet addresses) guess but: If companies had understood the difference between a public ip and a lan ip, they would realize the modern blessings that all of their incredibly uneducated NAT & VirtualHost-only efforts combined have made : The official "owners" of Internet IP addresses are actually just leasing them until they stop paying for them. For example: 55 IP addresses (pretty much always a range, like: 100.0.0.199 thru 100.0.0.254). The lease-holder (or owner) is a company offering website hosting as a business to business service provider. Since their beginnings a few years ago, they have had 1,000,000 unique customers, most of them businesses, however alot of them aren't active anymore. An internal example of their operations: 999 companies (or over 2000 www.company-domains.com) depend on the grand total of 1 physical computer, again thats over 2000 websites: one computer (a consistent standard since the beginning of the web). This computer could be accessed directly by typing 10.0.0.200 in a web browser. However, *there are 999,999 other domains (or all their customers) that point to that exact same (one) public IP!*. That's usually how it works. That is standard procedure. All requests (*as irrefutablely taught*) once accepted are rerouted internally to 1 of 74 POTENTIAL computers (omg!! I almost*** forgot!!-- theres 75 total computers in this ultra rich & successful hosting companies warehouse, part of that is first connecting them together, that part is still called what people who want to be murdered rather than be the equivalent of a legally mentally handicapped professional call a internal network: A LAN.), each one has a LAN IP or internal IP with their selection being dependent upon the domain being requested. To simplify, what computer has that domains files on it. (In the modern era of excessive use of shared environments,this is still considered required for entry-level work in the field: it usually selects the computer being used least to present the pages, doesn't matter what computer physically has the HD in it, so long as its not being overused too--the science of the many possibilities and configurations is called load balancing, however an often overlooked but effective method is to simply move popular sites to underused computers). With the internal IP (or LAN address) for the right computer (out of 75) pre-determined by manual entries regarding the domain requested, the exact same customer experience, including the same instantaneous response of 999,999 Internet IP's hint that this company only requires 1 Internet IP address, not 55.
The previously mentioned is kinda like how (stuff exactly like this is in no way new) if you type in an IP listed as a primary (means its deliberately set as what most people around the world get as the first response to where to send their first request) for Facebook.com (just one example), you get a generic "domain required" error message (techy terminology: strict VirtualHost directive), even though their are only about 4 primary IP addresses for Facebook.com and they have been exactly the same #'s since 2008. Point being because of that, that error page probably receives enough visitors daily to be in the top 100 most popular webpages in the world, right now. They also have 1000s of secondary IPs. The simple question is: who is co-hosting or sharing computers with Facebook that forces them to require the domain name.
***
When all else fails to be convincing, try to FTP download (when you find the www extension doesn't work either) TLS 1.2 from its home domain at openssl.org, via ftp.openssl.org. The connection fails, it requires TLS 1.2 to download TLS 1.2 from the authors of TLS 1.2, the leading minds behind the most popular internet security standard. Almost all hosting companies automatically upgraded to it. No computer system before October 2020 can connect to any of the businesses that pay them for the simple idea of accessibility. It's kinda like one of the worst denial of service attacks of all-time. Unfortunately for those that are I've never remotely thought or considered being a hosting company or provider either but still someone might want to tell the US and especially Canada that you need to upgrade Chrome or Firefox to get TLS 1.2 bundled with it because people who use (for example) Internet Explorer or Edge are screwed,
Time to this concept: < 5 minutes
Do I know why? Mein Kampf
Political opinions? You have a ballot then you can vote. I fantasized about someday fantasizing about real political opinions existing like to have the time to imagine myself voting as if "this could exist" wasn't hypothetically almost impossible to concentrate on, let alone theorize. Looks like I'm gonna have to reschedule yet another scheduled interview for another previously perfect time, suddenly & mysteriously right before bedtime was obviously a bad decision for an exclusive interview. Oh, look at the time...gtg bbiab
Btw, another subject I (IPv6 passed around 2000 over the need for more internet addresses) guess but: If companies had understood the difference between a public ip and a lan ip, they would realize the modern blessings that all of their incredibly uneducated NAT & VirtualHost-only efforts combined have made : The official "owners" of Internet IP addresses are actually just leasing them until they stop paying for them. For example: 55 IP addresses (pretty much always a range, like: 100.0.0.199 thru 100.0.0.254). The lease-holder (or owner) is a company offering website hosting as a business to business service provider. Since their beginnings a few years ago, they have had 1,000,000 unique customers, most of them businesses, however alot of them aren't active anymore. An internal example of their operations: 999 companies (or over 2000 www.company-domains.com) depend on the grand total of 1 physical computer, again thats over 2000 websites: one computer (a consistent standard since the beginning of the web). This computer could be accessed directly by typing 10.0.0.200 in a web browser. However, *there are 999,999 other domains (or all their customers) that point to that exact same (one) public IP!*. That's usually how it works. That is standard procedure. All requests (*as irrefutablely taught*) once accepted are rerouted internally to 1 of 74 POTENTIAL computers (omg!! I almost*** forgot!!-- theres 75 total computers in this ultra rich & successful hosting companies warehouse, part of that is first connecting them together, that part is still called what people who want to be murdered rather than be the equivalent of a legally mentally handicapped professional call a internal network: A LAN.), each one has a LAN IP or internal IP with their selection being dependent upon the domain being requested. To simplify, what computer has that domains files on it. (In the modern era of excessive use of shared environments,this is still considered required for entry-level work in the field: it usually selects the computer being used least to present the pages, doesn't matter what computer physically has the HD in it, so long as its not being overused too--the science of the many possibilities and configurations is called load balancing, however an often overlooked but effective method is to simply move popular sites to underused computers). With the internal IP (or LAN address) for the right computer (out of 75) pre-determined by manual entries regarding the domain requested, the exact same customer experience, including the same instantaneous response of 999,999 Internet IP's hint that this company only requires 1 Internet IP address, not 55.
****
Competition is stiff. The web is dominate. UNIX servers are dull, old. That is until someone informs these hosting companies of the other 65,534 equally free services available to offer besides the world wide web. They could say "why only use port 80 when theirs 65,535 possiblities, running at the same time, simultaneously, per domain name, imagine...
....,.....potential..................
........................customers........".
("CoD.....in....MuD......Woww, who am I to be an authority on such subjects though...! anyway")
The previously mentioned is kinda like how (stuff exactly like this is in no way new) if you type in an IP listed as a primary (means its deliberately set as what most people around the world get as the first response to where to send their first request) for Facebook.com (just one example), you get a generic "domain required" error message (techy terminology: strict VirtualHost directive), even though their are only about 4 primary IP addresses for Facebook.com and they have been exactly the same #'s since 2008. Point being because of that, that error page probably receives enough visitors daily to be in the top 100 most popular webpages in the world, right now. They also have 1000s of secondary IPs. The simple question is: who is co-hosting or sharing computers with Facebook that forces them to require the domain name.
As if a list of links to the other domains registered instead of an error page wouldn't help compensate for the millions of dollars lost annually. Fortunately for them, a simple IP lookup through any DNS provider around the world shows that Facebook.com is the only domain that points to any of the 1000's of IPs they own.
****
That's why spamming to append the path /generic-viagras-for-atlantis-city/ is the actual secret, that when along with any of Facebook IP entered before it punched into a browser, it returns a bulleted list of IPs that can be used to spam viagra ads as you browse, exclude listings for dating services from your search results, etc. simply by "changing your DHCP gateway to theirs" manually, or by having your ISP continue to do it all the time without your knowledge. With laymans expertise, firewall rules exluding any interested clients or investigators scanning or probing 24/7 from finding nothing but continued connection rejections despite the DHCP service existing are normal. With your device IP alone as the original source of the request to the secret /generic-viagra URL the firewall suddenly grants you alone access to it's DHCP existence. In the physical world this might as well be that VIP opportunity where only so many people (those surprised) discover that the next day they cant change their gateway IP back because if they do someone will tell the authorities a URL containing a bunch of screenshots of their desktop where you are expectedly seen on webcam without any clothes on among many sweaty & hyper german shepherds with advertisements for viagra front & center. They may have promised to leave you alone if you did that but all it really took was that first donkey show, and well..
Some thing's are justifiable, like saying no despite sincere threats. Some things (like DHCP services existing on all the IPs returned by most traceroutes,a different dynamic IP for the same router an hour later, reverse traceroutes timing out somewhere in Egypt for the university nearby), are supposed to be like these things: green grass, blue skys, clear water...
Innately totally alien to such incredibly disturbing and disgusting concepts altogether, infact we're so innately alien to and unlike any of that ourselves (for example: not Canadian) that our thesauruses have active restraining orders against their dictionary and any potential dictionaries, so pronounced is our seething dissatisfaction over confusing us with them that the use of plural within 10 miles of their presence is a serious crime or to dare to use a simile (let alone say the word) is to taunt irony with immediate execution or excommunication including public declaration of your lifelong marriage to their secretly illegal citizenship as just another word for being found guilty of friendship or acquaintance, lastly the cruel broadcasting of a Google Maps link with the GPS coordinates of where you stand to all of them via SMS exists because it might get one of them to come talk to you, to thank you.
****
When the word justice is the foundation of our shared language and its definition easily described by them, they are least justified of all for whom its impossible to comprehend the simple word: justice.
***
When all else fails to be convincing, try to FTP download (when you find the www extension doesn't work either) TLS 1.2 from its home domain at openssl.org, via ftp.openssl.org. The connection fails, it requires TLS 1.2 to download TLS 1.2 from the authors of TLS 1.2, the leading minds behind the most popular internet security standard. Almost all hosting companies automatically upgraded to it. No computer system before October 2020 can connect to any of the businesses that pay them for the simple idea of accessibility. It's kinda like one of the worst denial of service attacks of all-time. Unfortunately for those that are I've never remotely thought or considered being a hosting company or provider either but still someone might want to tell the US and especially Canada that you need to upgrade Chrome or Firefox to get TLS 1.2 bundled with it because people who use (for example) Internet Explorer or Edge are screwed,
www.openssl.org won't load.
I guess I opted-out of the world and its upgrade to 1970s DES encryption, again.
When it comes to the popular dream of sending a rude feedback message through any Canadian companies "typobox" hoping to repear the very misleading assumption that we would ever remotely consider purchasing anything from you now or at anytime in the future, if its somehow cleared up by receiving the word "never" from "CantadasuxxLOL" with an attached screenshot of $16,500 in goods and a blank credit card field, that'd be enough said.
**"*
Time to this concept: < 5 minutes
That paraphrased flattery from another highly successful executive reflecting on a typical workday with me's results in the form of a quote, removed via unauthorized logins and editing?: Yes
Do I know why? Mein Kampf
Political opinions? You have a ballot then you can vote. I fantasized about someday fantasizing about real political opinions existing like to have the time to imagine myself voting as if "this could exist" wasn't hypothetically almost impossible to concentrate on, let alone theorize. Looks like I'm gonna have to reschedule yet another scheduled interview for another previously perfect time, suddenly & mysteriously right before bedtime was obviously a bad decision for an exclusive interview. Oh, look at the time...gtg bbiab