GREEN CINE Already a member? login
 Your cart
Help
Advanced Search
- Genres
+ Action
+ Adult
+ Adventure
+ Animation
+ Anime
+ Classics
+ Comedies
+ Comic Books
+ Crime
  Criterion Collection
+ Cult
+ Documentary
+ Drama
+ Erotica
+ Espionage
  Experimental/Avant-Garde
+ Fantasy
+ Film Noir
+ Foreign
+ Gay & Lesbian
  HD (High Def)
+ Horror
+ Independent
+ Kids
+ Martial Arts
+ Music
+ Musicals
  Pre-Code
+ Quest
+ Science Fiction
  Serials
+ Silent
+ Sports
+ Suspense/Thriller
  Sword & Sandal
+ Television
+ War
+ Westerns


Public Discussions

topics
GreenCine Movie Talk
Independent
Talk about the world of independent film.
42

Star Wreck - In the Pirkinning
Topic by: Cugat
Posted: October 2, 2005 - 4:02 AM PDT
Last Reply: October 7, 2005 - 1:38 PM PDT

page  1  2  3  4  5  6      prev | next
author topic: Star Wreck - In the Pirkinning
woozy
post #81  on October 4, 2005 - 10:50 AM PDT  
> woozy, has anyone determined this basic aspect of what you're going through? How are you connecting to the internet?
>
It's been mentioned.

> On a Mac, the computer takes you step by step through an initial set-up process when you start it up for the first time. It asks you questions like "How would you like to connect to the Internet?" and "Would you like to use Earthlink (Apple's partner for that) or do you already have an ISP?"
>
Windows does the same thing but I hate ;) it. It spends too long on the trivia questions and somehow mangages to miss my entire set up which was done with my router software. I think I've got it straightened out but I'm a bit annoyed that windows and 2wire (my router) seem to want to refuse to acknowledge each other and neither want to give me a simple command "configure you ports and firewalls". Actually once I gave windows my static IP number via 2wire, 2wire homeportal has completely disappeared and I'm a bit confused just *how* I'm getting through, although how i'm getting through is very insecure as I'm now getting phony system messages every thirty seconds.

> All Macs have a built-in firewall, which I've left pretty much the way it was set. Do you have a firewall? Where is it? Macs have a Networking Control Panel that you can use to change things like port settings. Do you have such a control panel, and if so, have you ever opened it?
>
Windows keeps changing how they do that and I cant seem to find it at all right now (have I mentioned I hate microsoft). I found it on my homeportal configuration and opened the firewall up.


> We have DSL which comes into our house over a regular phone line. My housemate stuck a wirelss router on that. Do you have an account with a phone company or some brand-name ISP? Do you use the router they provided you with (if you're not Wifi, you should have connected the router with an ethernet cable or something...) You just click on "Yes" or "No" and enter info like your e-mail address.
>
I've had SBC/pacbell DSL that worked fine until I wanted to hook up my laptop. They provided the 2wire router with homeportal and built in firewall which was a *bitch* to setup but once set up was *fantastically* stable workhorse.

> All of the above were pretty much a given... a Mac is basically plug'n'play.

Well, the problem isn't plug n' play. It's plug n' play well with others. Windows doesn't.

> When I found out about bittorrent, I intuitively understood how it works... you start sending packets out soon after you receive the first few data packets.
>
I *get* that. What I don't get is why it doesn't like me. THat and I'm begging to get that it *much* slower than I expected it to be. And, apologies to cugat, after experimenting with Bittornado and Azareus Bittornado seems to consistantly download at 45 kb/s and upload at 13 kb/s on average wherease Azareus starts at 20 kb/s down and 2 kb/s up and then peters to 1 kb/s and 0 kb/s up after about an hour. Why they differ makes utterly no sense to me though.

> I think most of the software I've been using to download torrents and watch them are Mac ports of unix software... since OS X is a type of unix with a nice GUI interface, apparently this is not too hard to do. So the programs are pretty stable.
>
There are a few things windows seems to refuse to do. Make a nice interface for non-trivial things that are simply configuration files is one of them. Each upgrade they completely change where to look to configure ports, enable cookies, and set file extension properties. Drives me utterly nuts!


> So, in a nutshell, that has been my experience with it. I think that's pretty typical of Mac users. I mean, I can't take an engine apart and put it back together, but that doesn't keep me from having a satisfying driving experience. I know how to make the car go, I know how to turn on the AC, I know how to play a CD. I look at Windows/PC users and I think, "Those boys all want to build their own hot rods, but half of them end up driving junky jalopies with amateur paint jobs."
>
No, the boys who want to build their own hot rods would use Unix/Linux. I love Unix except I don't *want* to build my own car. The car I *know* how to build in Unix is a go-cart and I don't want a go-cart. I used to dislike Macs because they seemed like Peugots and kept insisting that every human being would like a peugot and all warranties are void if you look under the hood and why would you want to look under the hood anyway don't you trust us we're apple we're you guys macs are mother and father and you are family don't stray. I hate peugots. Dos/Windows at that time was like a ford pinto. Macs and windows have both improved a lot. Macs are now like a line of BMWs and Windows are like ... not sure ... Mitsubishu? ... I really want one of the old (not the new) volvos.


> > but now I think the clients have evolved to a point where they are more usable straight out of the box.
> ---------------------------------

Except when they aren't :(

woozy
post #82  on October 4, 2005 - 10:57 AM PDT  
> On October 4, 2005 - 7:24 AM PDT pooja wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> They'd put something together, THEN they would stop and read the instruction manual when there was a screw or something left over. Is it just laziness or is it bravado?
> ---------------------------------

A little of both. But mostly impatience. Usually manuals are inadequate and, ironically, as products are getting better, manuals get less adequate because now if something *does* go wrong its usually something about incompatibility with the system outside the product. As is my case with my ports. What I'm frustrated with the bittorrent clients and manuals about, is they don't talk about how bittorrent uses my configuration so I don't know what I'm supposed to do to fix it.

woozy
post #83  on October 4, 2005 - 11:21 AM PDT  
Okay. *Now* I'm really confused. My wireless network has stopped working. I have *no* network connections at all.

So how the hell am I connected to the internet?
woozy
post #84  on October 4, 2005 - 1:36 PM PDT  
> woozy, has anyone determined this basic aspect of what you're going through? How are you connecting to the internet?
>
Bugs. effing, effing, effing bugs!

Okay. Finally got it all good. Windows configuration will have nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with configuring my internet connection if I'm using a router so the IP address and port settings through windows should be completely untouched. 2wire rather than having intuitive controls via the control panel uses a web interface where you actually have to go to http://gateway.2wire.net/ which is really a local file on your harddrive (or you network). Now a cute little bug; sometimes (such as when you touch the windows network config files) the application will think you are not connected when you are. When that occurs you will be able to use the internet but you will not be able to configure your router (because it thinks you aren't connected).

Anyhow setting firewall permissions is in what it considers plain language since having a panel saying "Ports: status" would be confusing it has a list of applications allowed to go through (nearly all games) and an option to define an application. Defining an aplication eventually allows you to free a range of ports. Now, maybe this is obvious and straightforward to cugat but to me fumbling around looking to free up a port I wouldn't think to look in allowed applications which I would assume only allow me to run certain programs or only except dat in certain formats. Nor if I were trying to allow certain programs, the function that only frees ports and has nothing to do with the actual applications would throw me off.

Far better to simply say in the client software: "must free a port (default 6831) make sure this is free in you configuration." Duh, okay, I'd say and go to Control Panel in windows as that would be the obvious place to look. In network connections had there been any indication in the TCP/IP config to go to router config. i'd have looked there for Ports. There 2wire could give me a "Ports lists" rather than allow applications (no listing for bittorrent) and I could free it up and at that point there could be a message "configure software to use this port". But no... that be geeky, so in making it natural language it took two days of head scratching.

> All of the above were pretty much a given... a Mac is basically plug'n'play. When I found out about bittorrent, I intuitively understood how it works... you start sending packets out soon after you receive the first few data packets.
>
Did you have any issue with the Mac Firewall and freeing a port.


Using bittorent makes sense and isn't the issue but I think they should be more gentle about explaining how to free ports. In turn I think router configurations (2 wires a primary culprit) should be more straightforward.

See, I've nothing against plug 'n play, but when it doesn't work I want it to say. This is what it actually does and here is where you can adjust them directly.

You're lucky that the mac does. effin windows and effin 2wire doesn't.

And I *hate* system administrating. I like knowing how but I *hate* having to do it.
Cugat
post #85  on October 4, 2005 - 3:02 PM PDT  
On October 4, 2005 - 10:50 AM PDT woozy wrote:
> > On a Mac, the computer takes you step by step through an initial set-up process when you start it up for the first time. It asks you questions like "How would you like to connect to the Internet?" and "Would you like to use Earthlink (Apple's partner for that) or do you already have an ISP?"
>
> Windows does the same thing but I hate ;) it. It spends too long on the trivia questions and somehow mangages to miss my entire set up which was done with my router software.

Umm, your router has software running on the computer?

The only thing I say "just throw a wrench at it" with are those idiots that make that kind of software.

I generally try to avoid using the "Wizards" in windows too, as I might redundantly mention, they cheerfully stomp over all the previous settings.

> I think I've got it straightened out but I'm a bit annoyed that windows and 2wire (my router) seem to want to refuse to acknowledge each other and neither want to give me a simple command "configure you ports and firewalls". Actually once I gave windows my static IP number via 2wire, 2wire homeportal has completely disappeared and I'm a bit confused just *how* I'm getting through, although how i'm getting through is very insecure as I'm now getting phony system messages every thirty seconds.

System messages or some sort of windows messenger thingy? I recall back when I was a W2k user one day I got a pop up (which was ridiculously unusual for me) with a message from "Microsoft" saying something like "come get angry at us". Scary part was that it was coming from a rather core bit of the OS. Turns out that there is at least one service on Windows you CAN turn off without blowing everything to kingdom come. Theres a panel listing a mess of services generally regarding the bowels of the system. You may want to do some research before trying to follow my path though. All the "oooh scary" they say about registry editing really applies here!

> > All Macs have a built-in firewall, which I've left pretty much the way it was set. Do you have a firewall? Where is it? Macs have a Networking Control Panel that you can use to change things like port settings. Do you have such a control panel, and if so, have you ever opened it?

I actually never noticed a firewall on OS X. Then again they have worked to make their system secure-as-in not getting pwned the first ten minutes online without a firewall.

> Windows keeps changing how they do that and I cant seem to find it at all right now (have I mentioned I hate microsoft). I found it on my homeportal configuration and opened the firewall up.

If you want to glance over the fence at linux theres a link for a torrent tracker I dropped a ways back that has Knoppix discs. Its a Linux flavor that boots off of CD to RAM, autoconfigures and generally tries to leave the harddrives alone (or reads only if you click to open the drives, which can be overridden for the right filesystems). If you're using wireless it might not get you online and it very likely wan't play the network-over-USB game.

> > We have DSL which comes into our house over a regular phone line. My housemate stuck a wirelss router on that. Do you have an account with a phone company or some brand-name ISP? Do you use the router they provided you with (if you're not Wifi, you should have connected the router with an ethernet cable or something...) You just click on "Yes" or "No" and enter info like your e-mail address.
>
> I've had SBC/pacbell DSL that worked fine until I wanted to hook up my laptop. They provided the 2wire router with homeportal and built in firewall which was a *bitch* to setup but once set up was *fantastically* stable workhorse.

The PDF manual for tha 2wire homeportal is poo.

> > All of the above were pretty much a given... a Mac is basically plug'n'play.
>
> Well, the problem isn't plug n' play. It's plug n' play well with others. Windows doesn't.

I think the concept it that it takes standards, adds stuff to them to break everything else, and then hopes that'll lock people in.

> > When I found out about bittorrent, I intuitively understood how it works... you start sending packets out soon after you receive the first few data packets.
>
> I *get* that. What I don't get is why it doesn't like me.

Its friendly, I think the main issue is that without the port open it is missing its legs and in alot of pain, so it might get cranky when you ask more of it. :-)

> THat and I'm begging to get that it *much* slower than I expected it to be. And, apologies to cugat, after experimenting with Bittornado and Azareus Bittornado seems to consistantly download at 45 kb/s and upload at 13 kb/s on average wherease Azareus starts at 20 kb/s down and 2 kb/s up and then peters to 1 kb/s and 0 kb/s up after about an hour. Why they differ makes utterly no sense to me though.

The bittorrent engines differ in their tuning. The concept of bumming around for chunks of a file and passing them around again is very simple, but because of the intra-client politics that pop up when you have everyone clamoring for everyone's attention, different methods do have their ups and downs.

Also if you only have one port open and two clients, the second client has to deal with it, which generally means it'll have a bad day.

> > I think most of the software I've been using to download torrents and watch them are Mac ports of unix software... since OS X is a type of unix with a nice GUI interface, apparently this is not too hard to do. So the programs are pretty stable.

Alot of the clients were dosigned to be multiplatform. Azureus is Java, BitTornado is Python, etc. Anywhere there are competent interpreters for those languages, it'll work.

> There are a few things windows seems to refuse to do. Make a nice interface for non-trivial things that are simply configuration files is one of them. Each upgrade they completely change where to look to configure ports, enable cookies, and set file extension properties. Drives me utterly nuts!

Thats one reason I shunned XP. I'm not sure thats an option any more...

> > So, in a nutshell, that has been my experience with it. I think that's pretty typical of Mac users. I mean, I can't take an engine apart and put it back together, but that doesn't keep me from having a satisfying driving experience. I know how to make the car go, I know how to turn on the AC, I know how to play a CD. I look at Windows/PC users and I think, "Those boys all want to build their own hot rods, but half of them end up driving junky jalopies with amateur paint jobs."
>
> No, the boys who want to build their own hot rods would use Unix/Linux. I love Unix except I don't *want* to build my own car.

Then by all means avoid Gentoo Linux. :-)

MEPIS might be your speed. (Ubuntu is ragingly popular it seems too)

> The car I *know* how to build in Unix is a go-cart and I don't want a go-cart.

I started off with a broken plank and three wheels myself. Wow I was desperate to get rid of Windows...

Nowadays you can often just boot off of a Knoppix disc and you get a turbo-prop glider. I don't recommend installing it though, its not meant for the road.

> I used to dislike Macs because they seemed like Peugots and kept insisting that every human being would like a peugot and all warranties are void if you look under the hood and why would you want to look under the hood anyway don't you trust us we're apple we're you guys macs are mother and father and you are family don't stray. I hate peugots. Dos/Windows at that time was like a ford pinto. Macs and windows have both improved a lot. Macs are now like a line of BMWs and Windows are like ... not sure ... Mitsubishu? ... I really want one of the old (not the new) volvos.

I actually see all Windows/DOSes as an AMC Gremlin in various forms of dressing.

> > > but now I think the clients have evolved to a point where they are more usable straight out of the box.
>
> Except when they aren't :(

The internet wasn't designed to be routinely firewalled and NATed. It breaks alot of stuff, QED.


On October 4, 2005 - 10:57 AM PDT woozy wrote:
> On October 4, 2005 - 7:24 AM PDT pooja wrote:
> > They'd put something together, THEN they would stop and read the instruction manual when there was a screw or something left over. Is it just laziness or is it bravado?
>
> A little of both. But mostly impatience. Usually manuals are inadequate and, ironically, as products are getting better, manuals get less adequate because now if something *does* go wrong its usually something about incompatibility with the system outside the product. As is my case with my ports. What I'm frustrated with the bittorrent clients and manuals about, is they don't talk about how bittorrent uses my configuration so I don't know what I'm supposed to do to fix it.

Really, all it needs is to be on a network (optionally with a port available) and some disc space to put files. The port management is not something it can help with outside of casually mentioning "hmmm, the sky is yellew, that could be a problem". Outside of uber clients like Azureus, its pretty simple, and I'm still a freak.

And I think manuals are falling by the way-side because printing a 300 page manual is too expensive for the otherwise cheap hardware that is out now. I loved having motherboard schematics for my system back in the day. Never used them though. Reading comprehension skills have fallen in general anyways, I intentionally forgot the grade level newspapers write for now...


On October 4, 2005 - 1:36 PM PDT woozy wrote:
> Okay. Finally got it all good. Windows configuration will have nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with configuring my internet connection if I'm using a router so the IP address and port settings through windows should be completely untouched.

Or at least touched enough that the connection goes through the router, apparently you're already there, so yeah.

> 2wire rather than having intuitive controls via the control panel uses a web interface where you actually have to go to http://gateway.2wire.net/ which is really a local file on your harddrive (or you network).

A web interface is standard, its not a part of your computer, it shouldn't be configured as part of it.

Odd part is them using a domain that would typically mean going out to the net to access the router.

gateway.2wire.net doesn't really exist (not even as 192.168.1.1 or something, which I believe can be done), so it must rely on tampering with Window's view of the world. If its just an edited hosts file I can forgive them for that, mostly.

Hopefully is is not just a locally hosted webpage though. Might as well go the control panel route then. (which would make problem solving on the router very difficult, and be a stupid design decision)

> Now a cute little bug; sometimes (such as when you touch the windows network config files) the application will think you are not connected when you are. When that occurs you will be able to use the internet but you will not be able to configure your router (because it thinks you aren't connected).

Reminds me of an old Internet Explorer bug.

> Anyhow setting firewall permissions is in what it considers plain language since having a panel saying "Ports: status" would be confusing it has a list of applications allowed to go through (nearly all games) and an option to define an application. Defining an aplication eventually allows you to free a range of ports. Now, maybe this is obvious and straightforward to cugat but to me fumbling around looking to free up a port I wouldn't think to look in allowed applications which I would assume only allow me to run certain programs or only except dat in certain formats. Nor if I were trying to allow certain programs, the function that only frees ports and has nothing to do with the actual applications would throw me off.

Its not obvious in the intuitive sense, they dumbed down the interface and tried to hide the meat of its doings. It is however vaguely common and therefore straightforward in the "I've seen this before" sense.

I don't defend them here.

If they taught networking in highschool the computing landscape would be much better off.

> Far better to simply say in the client software: "must free a port (default 6831) make sure this is free in you configuration."

Are you sure its saying 6381 by the way, it used to be 6881.

> > All of the above were pretty much a given... a Mac is basically plug'n'play. When I found out about bittorrent, I intuitively understood how it works... you start sending packets out soon after you receive the first few data packets.
>
> Did you have any issue with the Mac Firewall and freeing a port.

If her computer isn't on an internet addressable static IP. I'm a little surprised she hasn't thrown in something about needing to change her default ports.

> See, I've nothing against plug 'n play, but when it doesn't work I want it to say. This is what it actually does and here is where you can adjust them directly.

Plug 'n play is marketing IMO. Another layer of complexity to diagnose when something breaks at worst.

> And I *hate* system administrating. I like knowing how but I *hate* having to do it.

I don't mind admining, its when everything repeatedly self-destructs that I get really ticked.
pooja
post #86  on October 4, 2005 - 4:19 PM PDT  
Dear tireless geeks:

> > > All Macs have a built-in firewall, which I've left pretty much the way it was set. Do you have a firewall? Where is it? Macs have a Networking Control Panel that you can use to change things like port settings. Do you have such a control panel, and if so, have you ever opened it?
>
> I actually never noticed a firewall on OS X. Then again they have worked to make their system secure-as-in not getting pwned the first ten minutes online without a firewall.

I dunno the details... my housemate does all that complicated stuff. Here's the offical blurb at apple.com.

It's also nice that there aren't a lot of viruses written to attack macs... we leave our link up all the time and we've never had any problems...

> I actually see all Windows/DOSes as an AMC Gremlin in various forms of dressing.

Ooh, and Macs are PACERS! Those were so cool, like driving a flying saucer. My dad had a Pacer for a while.

This much tech talk CAN'T be healthy... why don't you guys scoot over to Battie's thread to talk about ROMANCE?
woozy
post #87  on October 4, 2005 - 5:42 PM PDT  
Okay. 80 messages later here's what happened:

Woozy, basically a smart but independant guy with obssessive/touchy tendancy, saw a link for some interesting looking anime (something about a girl with big boobies of course) and tried to download it but it was bittorrent which was something he had never heard of. He downloaded a client (Azareus) and it did nothing and had a configuration port issue and rather than mucking around his configuration files he figured it wasn't really worth it so the heck with it.

A year and a half passed and he heard more and more about it and he thought he ought to give it a go as lots of things seemed to be out there. So two days ago he thought he'd try what ought to be easy. But it sortof didn't go well. It worked pretty well but his port was behind a firewall and it was really late and he was stressed about a work project deadline and didn't want to futz with network configurations. But he's obsessive so he wanted to figure it out but this really wasn't a good time but he was pissed that it *didn't* go well, when it seemed like it went well for everyone else. So he *bitched*.

Well, his issue was simple. He needed to set the upload speeds and he needed to free his port. But he really didn't want to put that much effort but he was obsessive so he did and then because he hadn't configured his 2wire in many years and he had a general idea but had forgotten the particulars and was annoyed, be bitched and blamed Bittorent for relying too heavily on network configurations and not being straightforward. Then configuring 2wire and windows all the while cursing and hitting a bug completely unigue to 2wire. He goes back to the line to read about his bitching.

The reading says "bittorent's easy; it's your network that's screwed up; don't you know how to configure a network?" Well, it is looking that bittorrent was easy but woozy's a stubborn guy. (He's male after all). So he bitches "well, if it had been clearer, or if I knew what I was expecting, or ...." In the meantime his configuration goes to hell. He takes a deep breath. Starts at the beginning, redoes everything step by step, and gets it done. "Ha," he says to himself, "I concurred it! I'm so smart! Yes, I do know what I'm doing eventually. Let's see in summary.... I freed my port from behind a firewall and ... gee, I guess that was all it was...."

Anyhow... *phooey* it was hard but that was my effin' routers fault! Or the tides! Or cause mercury's in retrograde!


> On October 4, 2005 - 3:02 PM PDT Cugat wrote:
> > Windows does the same thing but I hate ;) it. It spends too long on the trivia questions and somehow mangages to miss my entire set up which was done with my router software.
>
> Umm, your router has software running on the computer?
>
The configuration settings. And the connection tester. And the network configuration files. I meant the configuration utility (*which stinks*).

> I generally try to avoid using the "Wizards" in windows too, as I might redundantly mention, they cheerfully stomp over all the previous settings.
>
Exactly! It's okay when installing the absolute first of something but when adding another or worse, configure something already installed, I find it's too easy to get conflicting configurations.

> System messages or some sort of windows messenger thingy?

Bittorent was very slow when I didn't have any port free. So I wanted to free the ports but I was too tired and frustrated to deal with precision so I simply configured the firewall to let everything in. I started getting popup ads everythirty seconds designed to look like windows error messages saying things such as "Warning: Windows registry corrupt suggest complete scan. Go to http://FixIt.com to scan. Okay" every thirty seconds. Every half hour or so Norton (legit I believe) popped a menu seeing it deleted a virus (and I believe it did) but then it'd pop up again (because I assumed I was reinfected).

Obviously these were getting through my lack of firewall and obviously some damn site I went to ran some damn script that overwrote some damn setting. Putting the firewall back up they've stopped and I'll run norton and seek it out sometime later.

*Nothing* whatsoever to do with bittorrent but one of the little irrations that illustrate why I don't like to just muck about with settings unless I think there'll be a good payoff.

> All the "oooh scary" they say about registry editing really applies here!
>
Are you saying I should or shouldn't edit the registry.

I've editted registries. I don't mind editing registries but it's a headache and a bitch. If I'm going to do it I'm going to sit down and work it through in a very thourough and linear manner. (i.e. not by the seat of my pants.)


> If you want to glance over the fence at linux theres a link for a torrent tracker I dropped a ways back that has Knoppix discs. Its a Linux flavor that boots off of CD to RAM, autoconfigures and generally tries to leave the harddrives alone (or reads only if you click to open the drives, which can be overridden for the right filesystems). If you're using wireless it might not get you online and it very likely wan't play the network-over-USB game.
>
Well, linux or unix isn't out of the question. But if/when I do I will spend an uninterupted bulk getting it done right the first time.

I'm actually surprised that I'm as happy as I am with XP that it works out of the box, that I don't really want to change anything. Because while I grudingly admit this is one of the most usable and stable of Win operating systems (*cough*, gag, that *hurt* to right) I absolutely do not trust windows at all when it comes to simple customizing... (*sigh* I know how pathetic that sounds)
> The PDF manual for tha 2wire homeportal is poo.
>
Well the manual and the web config are bassically the same thing. Both stink.

> I think the concept it that it takes standards, adds stuff to them to break everything else, and then hopes that'll lock people in.
>
Yeah. Well, it tries so heard to keep you from the geek controls and settings that it'll not tell you how to get there, not tell you what it's changing, not tell you how to go back.

Finding the controls for my ports to free-one should not have been so hard.

> Its friendly, I think the main issue is that without the port open it is missing its legs and in alot of pain, so it might get cranky when you ask more of it. :-)
>
Fair 'nough. But it's a bit like buying a pony from the pet store. The pony asks if you have a yard. You say yes. You walk it home and as it crosses the driveway it twists its ankle. "What's wrong?" you cry. "Concrete..." the horse gasps. "I can't walk on concrete! That's why I asked if you had a yard." "Oh!" you say. "I have a yard it's just on the other side of the driveway. I didn't understand your question. I'll call the vet. I called the vet for my cats three years ago." So you rush to get the yellow pages and look up vet. They say to look under professional services which have their own index. There are promising starts of "animal care" "animal health" and "animal treatment" but none of them are vets. Then you see the front page of the yellow pages that medical, legal, and authoritative services are all done independantly and to use other means. You had known this but you had forgotten. So you get you book of authoritative services and want to look up veteranarians. It asks sort of service you want: service dealing with property, things, people, or information. You decide the the horse ith "things" so then it asks to you want to purchase or have a service done to your thing or do you wish to interact with the thing or do you want to do something to a thing. You decide the first. Then you select that the thing is an animal, then a horse. Then you get a list of horse trainers, horse gelders, knackers, and vets. You call the vet, he fixes your pony. And then you cat starts barfing. So you can the vet. "How big is the horse" he asks. It's my cat this time you say. Oh, you found vetranarians by going through horses. You'll have to go through cats for me to treat that.

> Also if you only have one port open and two clients, the second client has to deal with it, which generally means it'll have a bad day.
>
I freed all ports from 10000 to 80000. Bittorrent said it randomly searched so I thought ....


>
> I actually see all Windows/DOSes as an AMC Gremlin in various forms of dressing.
>

Yeah, I hate to admit they've gotten better. I wish macs weren't so cultishly insistant they let you do things your way-- as long as its their way because their way is best. I wish Windows wasn't so break a few things to keep you from doing it your way when it really matters because well, if we let you do it your way how'd we know you'd keep using us. Linux I like in theory except they figure letting you do it your way means you *want* to do *everything* your way even if you don't have a bloody clue and are waving hands and calling "little help" frantically.

> The internet wasn't designed to be routinely firewalled and NATed. It breaks alot of stuff, QED.
>
Yeah, well....


> Really, all it needs is to be on a network (optionally with a port available) and some disc space to put files. The port management is not something it can help with outside of casually mentioning "hmmm, the sky is yellew, that could be a problem". Outside of uber clients like Azureus, its pretty simple, and I'm still a freak.
>
Yeah, well, I'm bitching because I had some bad luck and 2wire and windows stink.

> Or at least touched enough that the connection goes through the router, apparently you're already there, so yeah.
>
Well, the wierd thing was I always had a static IP. And windows was configured to that IP. Somehow it was set to dynamically assigned. (Which only means dynamically assigned to what my router says it is). Figuring that was a first step I sat it static. *Then* by bad timing 2wire had its bug where it things my computer is disconnected when its not and I can no longer configure it.


> A web interface is standard, its not a part of your computer, it shouldn't be configured as part of it.
>
It's part of my network and ought to be configurable (or at least referenced) from the network controls.

> Odd part is them using a domain that would typically mean going out to the net to access the router.
>
Yeah, isn't it.


> gateway.2wire.net doesn't really exist (not even as 192.168.1.1 or something, which I believe can be done), so it must rely on tampering with Window's view of the world. If its just an edited hosts file I can forgive them for that, mostly.
>
I think its a ... hmmm ... actually I'm not sure. I think it's a modified host file but in an odd directory.

> Hopefully is is not just a locally hosted webpage though.

I think it is.

Might as well go the control panel route then. (which would make problem solving on the router very difficult, and be a stupid design decision)
>

Why do you say that?

> Its not obvious in the intuitive sense, they dumbed down the interface and tried to hide the meat of its doings. It is however vaguely common and therefore straightforward in the "I've seen this before" sense.
>
> I don't defend them here.
>
Right. By hiding the meat of their doings I didn't know what I was doing at all. I can understand their eschewing asking "what port do you want to free" (port? free? duh, I just want fix a problem I'm having) and even "what applications do you want to go through the firewall" makes a bit of sense, but by presenting a list of applications totally befuddles the issue. Then when you chose an application (which isn't an application, just a range of free ports and a nickname) you are asked to choose a port with no explanation at all.
Also so far as I can tell there is no way to tell which ports are free and which aren't.
Wouldn't it be clearer to say "to pass information through a firewall, information must be passed through a free 'port' or range of ports. Select a range of ports for this purpose. (When done configure your software to use the port)"


> > Far better to simply say in the client software: "must free a port (default 6831) make sure this is free in you configuration."
>
> Are you sure its saying 6381 by the way, it used to be 6881.
>
I was typing from memory. As I said I freed 1000 to 8000. Figured one of them was bound to be the right one.

> > Did you have any issue with the Mac Firewall and freeing a port.
>
> If her computer isn't on an internet addressable static IP. I'm a little surprised she hasn't thrown in something about needing to change her default ports.
>

Actually, so am I. Um, If her household network is on a range of IP addresses assigned by the router, does she need a static IP address? Pooja, when did you first do bittorent? If it was in your networked household had your housemates configured the router previously? Did you never have to set up a port?


> > And I *hate* system administrating. I like knowing how but I *hate* having to do it.
>
> I don't mind admining, its when everything repeatedly self-destructs that I get really ticked.
> ---------------------------------

Yes, and when the things to set are all over the place and it won't work if you miss one and they won't share the data.

woozy
post #88  on October 4, 2005 - 5:49 PM PDT  
> This much tech talk CAN'T be healthy... why don't you guys scoot over to Battie's thread to talk about ROMANCE?
> ---------------------------------

Romance! But there'll be *GIRLS* there! I've never talked to a girl!

pooja
post #89  on October 4, 2005 - 5:58 PM PDT  
> On October 4, 2005 - 5:49 PM PDT woozy wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> Romance! But there'll be *GIRLS* there! I've never talked to a girl!

Ha ha... very funny. I don't think I've ever seen you have such a long conversation with a guy EVER! (Um... assuming you're a guy, cugie...)
:-)
woozy
post #90  on October 4, 2005 - 6:06 PM PDT  
> Ha ha... very funny. I don't think I've ever seen you have such a long conversation with a guy EVER! (Um... assuming you're a guy, cugie...)
> :-)
> ---------------------------------

Um... well.... I argued politics with a neocon for several pages once about a year ago. And I talked about anime with mostly guys for awhile more than a year ago.

I'll pretty much talk to whomever will talk back. I'm not going to deny a bias for smart outgoing clever women though.



Cugat
post #91  on October 4, 2005 - 7:29 PM PDT  
On October 4, 2005 - 5:58 PM PDT pooja wrote:
> On October 4, 2005 - 5:49 PM PDT woozy wrote:
> > Romance! But there'll be *GIRLS* there! I've never talked to a girl!

I am lacking there. Dunno which ports to open up though...

> Ha ha... very funny. I don't think I've ever seen you have such a long conversation with a guy EVER! (Um... assuming you're a guy, cugie...)
> :-)

My user icon is a massive pointy object. It's a good guess. :-)
Cugat
post #92  on October 4, 2005 - 8:02 PM PDT  
On October 4, 2005 - 5:42 PM PDT woozy wrote:
> On October 4, 2005 - 3:02 PM PDT Cugat wrote:
> > I generally try to avoid using the "Wizards" in windows too, as I might redundantly mention, they cheerfully stomp over all the previous settings.
>
> Exactly! It's okay when installing the absolute first of something but when adding another or worse, configure something already installed, I find it's too easy to get conflicting configurations.

I just avoid it totally. Keeps me in practice.

> > System messages or some sort of windows messenger thingy?
>
> Bittorent was very slow when I didn't have any port free. So I wanted to free the ports but I was too tired and frustrated to deal with precision so I simply configured the firewall to let everything in.

So you turned off the protection grid and let the keymaster loose?

> *Nothing* whatsoever to do with bittorrent but one of the little irrations that illustrate why I don't like to just muck about with settings unless I think there'll be a good payoff.

I really wish Windows would let the user turn those security hole ports off. Bill Gates needs to meet the 90s.

> > All the "oooh scary" they say about registry editing really applies here!
>
> Are you saying I should or shouldn't edit the registry.

Its actually the services list, which I've blown up windows hard with a few times. Ideally you'll have the wall covering those features so I wouldn't sweat it too much.

(I vas able to blow up my windows alot, because I actually managed a functioning backup, much happiness there)

> > If you want to glance over the fence at linux theres a link for a torrent tracker I dropped a ways back that has Knoppix discs. Its a Linux flavor that boots off of CD to RAM, autoconfigures and generally tries to leave the harddrives alone (or reads only if you click to open the drives, which can be overridden for the right filesystems). If you're using wireless it might not get you online and it very likely wan't play the network-over-USB game.
>
> Well, linux or unix isn't out of the question. But if/when I do I will spend an uninterupted bulk getting it done right the first time.

Umm, it boots, it works or it doesn't, you pull it out, you're back to where you started. Take a vacation or something.

> I'm actually surprised that I'm as happy as I am with XP that it works out of the box, that I don't really want to change anything. Because while I grudingly admit this is one of the most usable and stable of Win operating systems (*cough*, gag, that *hurt* to right) I absolutely do not trust windows at all when it comes to simple customizing... (*sigh* I know how pathetic that sounds)

I stopped at 2k, too many features were added in XP, most of them too annoying for me.

> > I think the concept it that it takes standards, adds stuff to them to break everything else, and then hopes that'll lock people in.
>
> Yeah. Well, it tries so heard to keep you from the geek controls and settings that it'll not tell you how to get there, not tell you what it's changing, not tell you how to go back.
>
> Finding the controls for my ports to free-one should not have been so hard.

I can't find half the important controls in XP when I try.

> > Its friendly, I think the main issue is that without the port open it is missing its legs and in alot of pain, so it might get cranky when you ask more of it. :-)
>
> Fair 'nough. But it's a bit like buying a pony from the pet store. The pony asks if you have a yard. You say yes. You walk it home and as it crosses the driveway it twists its ankle. "What's wrong?" you cry. "Concrete..." the horse gasps. "I can't walk on concrete! That's why I asked if you had a yard."

Dude, it walk on concrete, it just does so slowly and whimpers a bit.

> > Also if you only have one port open and two clients, the second client has to deal with it, which generally means it'll have a bad day.
>
> I freed all ports from 10000 to 80000. Bittorrent said it randomly searched so I thought ....

Umm, I'd keep it to six-eight-eight-one through six-eight-eight-nine.

Though windows does keep it's pants on with the broader range you have set.

> Linux I like in theory except they figure letting you do it your way means you *want* to do *everything* your way even if you don't have a bloody clue and are waving hands and calling "little help" frantically.

Boot up Knoppix once, then complain to me about it in modern terms.


> > A web interface is standard, its not a part of your computer, it shouldn't be configured as part of it.
>
> It's part of my network and ought to be configurable (or at least referenced) from the network controls.

The network controls typically only control network settings that directly affect the one computer. Settings directly affecting the router should be directly accessable through the router (typically through a web browser, SSH would be awesome though).

> > gateway.2wire.net doesn't really exist (not even as 192.168.1.1 or something, which I believe can be done), so it must rely on tampering with Window's view of the world. If its just an edited hosts file I can forgive them for that, mostly.
>
> I think its a ... hmmm ... actually I'm not sure. I think it's a modified host file but in an odd directory.

A host file not in the right place should be ignored.

> > Hopefully is is not just a locally hosted webpage though.
>
> I think it is.
>
> > Might as well go the control panel route then. (which would make problem solving on the router very difficult, and be a stupid design decision)
>
> Why do you say that?

If all the configuration is done locally, might as well do it with an appropriately local interface instead of ending up including a web browser, setting up an HTML interface, etc. Just way more efficient.

> > Its not obvious in the intuitive sense, they dumbed down the interface and tried to hide the meat of its doings. It is however vaguely common and therefore straightforward in the "I've seen this before" sense.
> >
> > I don't defend them here.
>
...
> Also so far as I can tell there is no way to tell which ports are free and which aren't.
> Wouldn't it be clearer to say "to pass information through a firewall, information must be passed through a free 'port' or range of ports. Select a range of ports for this purpose. (When done configure your software to use the port)"

I don't feel like chatting about UI and option presentation etiquette at the moment.

> > > Did you have any issue with the Mac Firewall and freeing a port.
> >
> > If her computer isn't on an internet addressable static IP. I'm a little surprised she hasn't thrown in something about needing to change her default ports.
>
> Actually, so am I. Um, If her household network is on a range of IP addresses assigned by the router, does she need a static IP address?

If its a cool router it could track her MAC (different than Mac) address and forward appropriately.
pooja
post #93  on October 4, 2005 - 8:08 PM PDT  
> On October 4, 2005 - 7:29 PM PDT Cugat wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> But there'll be *GIRLS* there! I've never talked to a girl!
>
> I am lacking there. Dunno which ports to open up though...

Oh, yeah... that won't get you very far. Knowing which ports to open up is essential. And you gotta make sure you got enough throughput to make her happy. You have to give her a really massive download, or there won't be a next time. And woozy, 2kb/s really isn't gonna cut it. That would be like poking her with a wet noodle.

> > (Um... assuming you're a guy, cugie...)
>
> My user icon is a massive pointy object. It's a good guess. :-)

On the other hand, they could be 3 really pointy giant breasts... I want to know what Woozy thought of it.
Cugat
post #94  on October 4, 2005 - 8:17 PM PDT  
On October 4, 2005 - 8:08 PM PDT pooja wrote:
> On October 4, 2005 - 7:29 PM PDT Cugat wrote:
> > But there'll be *GIRLS* there! I've never talked to a girl!
> >
> > I am lacking there. Dunno which ports to open up though...
>
> Oh, yeah... that won't get you very far. Knowing which ports to open up is essential. And you gotta make sure you got enough throughput to make her happy. You have to give her a really massive download, or there won't be a next time. And woozy, 2kb/s really isn't gonna cut it. That would be like poking her with a wet noodle.

Ya know, I have too much trouble holding onto a DHCP lease. CPU maxes out and packets start dropping left and right.

> > > (Um... assuming you're a guy, cugie...)
> >
> > My user icon is a massive pointy object. It's a good guess. :-)
>
> On the other hand, they could be 3 really pointy giant breasts... I want to know what Woozy thought of it.

A man that has a woman's icon, normal in this city.
pooja
post #95  on October 4, 2005 - 8:34 PM PDT  
> On October 4, 2005 - 8:17 PM PDT Cugat wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> Ya know, I have too much trouble holding onto a DHCP lease. CPU maxes out and packets start dropping left and right.

I knew it! You can forget about coming to OUR house, cugie! Our firewall won't let you through.

> A man that has a woman's icon, normal in this city.

Really? You both live in San Francisco?

woozy
post #96  on October 4, 2005 - 9:21 PM PDT  
>And woozy, 2kb/s really isn't gonna cut it. That would be like poking her with a wet noodle.
>

Yeah, but at that pace I can go all night!

Okay, so now I'm up to about 65 Kb/s upload and 20 Kb/s download. So how do you like that? I'm a guy who gives more than I recieve. That's gotta be rare.


> On the other hand, they could be 3 really pointy giant breasts... I want to know what Woozy thought of it.
> ---------------------------------

We had a discussion about it once. I said it looked like my local brewrey's logo. I'm not sure why he did it.

>
> I knew it! You can forget about coming to OUR house, cugie! Our firewall won't let you through.
>
Good taste. But can you keep out a slim wet noodle? Never forget the power of the Speghetti spirit and those who have been touched by his noodley appendage.

> > A man that has a woman's icon, normal in this city.
>

I've had this icon a long time, haven't I? It is probably my favorite so far but it's not very much like a woozy. I should come up with another soon.

> Really? You both live in San Francisco?
>
>
I live in Berkeley.
Cugat
post #97  on October 4, 2005 - 11:13 PM PDT  
On October 4, 2005 - 9:21 PM PDT woozy wrote:
> >And woozy, 2kb/s really isn't gonna cut it. That would be like poking her with a wet noodle.
>
> Yeah, but at that pace I can go all night!

Well, I had a modem that topped out at 232 b/s.

> Okay, so now I'm up to about 65 Kb/s upload and 20 Kb/s download. So how do you like that? I'm a guy who gives more than I recieve. That's gotta be rare.

I've nearly uploaded two knoppix DVDs since I started my good will bittorrent seeding rampage.

> > On the other hand, they could be 3 really pointy giant breasts... I want to know what Woozy thought of it.
>
> We had a discussion about it once. I said it looked like my local brewrey's logo. I'm not sure why he did it.

Me neither, I just had to pull something together to replace the batman bit...

> > I knew it! You can forget about coming to OUR house, cugie! Our firewall won't let you through.
>
> Good taste. But can you keep out a slim wet noodle? Never forget the power of the Speghetti spirit and those who have been touched by his noodley appendage.

Now explain to your son that the Flying Spaghetti Monster we all know and love died for last dinner.

Of course, gulping noodly appendages may be touchy subject matter for the young.

> > > A man that has a woman's icon, normal in this city.
>
> I've had this icon a long time, haven't I? It is probably my favorite so far but it's not very much like a woozy. I should come up with another soon.

Doesn't seem like it, depends on the average lifespan of your icons.

> > Really? You both live in San Francisco?
>
> I live in Berkeley.

Half of us do then.
pooja
post #98  on October 5, 2005 - 6:10 AM PDT  
Good morning, gearheads!

> > > Really? You both live in San Francisco?
> >
> > I live in Berkeley.
>
> Half of us do then.

What, isn't Berkeley like a suburb of San Francisco? From where I'm standing they look like the same town pretty much.

Cugat, you should join the Halloween Costume thread if the Romance thread isn't your cup of tea. I've already made a friend there, and you seem like you could use a friend or two (other than woozy). You could make a pyramid out of cardboard and wear that for Halloween. When I was little, there was this fad (see here) about the pyramid's mysterious powers. You can wear a mp3 player and portable speakers around your waist that plays bellydancing music.

I just better not catch you hanging out in the "Have you met the late Jack Nance?" thread with JLentz... I've got nothing against J or Jack but that sounds kinda sad....
Cugat
post #99  on October 5, 2005 - 1:04 PM PDT  
On October 5, 2005 - 6:10 AM PDT pooja wrote:
> Cugat, you should join the Halloween Costume thread if the Romance thread isn't your cup of tea. I've already made a friend there, and you seem like you could use a friend or two (other than woozy). You could make a pyramid out of cardboard and wear that for Halloween. When I was little, there was this fad (see here) about the pyramid's mysterious powers. You can wear a mp3 player and portable speakers around your waist that plays bellydancing music.

I saw mention of that pyramid power bit once, in a movie I think was called semi-tough. Made a rather appropriate use of it.

Right now I'm waiting on a disc (lit red, meh) that holds up a series about humanity facing an evil alien race that is all about pyramid power.

> I just better not catch you hanging out in the "Have you met the late Jack Nance?" thread with JLentz... I've got nothing against J or Jack but that sounds kinda sad....

Dunno who Jack Nance is. Though a retrospective thread on Jay Miner would be interesting.
woozy
post #100  on October 6, 2005 - 12:22 PM PDT  
So my entire computer got seriously hosed last night.

It may have been a bad torrent (although it doesn't seem to me that would be technically possible) or it may have been a a torrent site with a malicious backdoor code.

Not happy. I'm in my admin safe mode trying to find out whats wrong but looks nasty. (Normal mode I get a message that the window 32 bit system file is not suitable to run windows and nothing works. Hopefully it might just be my personal settings.)

Man, I hate it when stuff like this happens.
page  1  2  3  4  5  6      prev | next

about greencine · donations · refer a friend · support · help · genres
contact us · press room · privacy policy · terms · sitemap · affiliates · advertise

Copyright © 2005 GreenCine LLC. All rights reserved.
© 2006 All Media Guide, LLC. Portions of content provided by All Movie Guide®, a trademark of All Media Guide, LLC.