Re: [oldboys] HAL appetizers to 'socialize'

[Amy Alexander <plagiari@plagiarist.org>]

On Mon, 16 Jul 2001, Mathilde muPe wrote:

>
> About a week ago I dropped some keywords as appetizer for HAL.
> Some of you would do be better then me in explaining these terms.
> But some of you might like to have a post HAL clue before getting into
> tech talk (and maybe even socialize with a genuine geek male/female).
>

thanks for the post, mathilde - good info. i have a few additions to some
of your definitions, which i'll tag on here:

> -UTP is nowadays the most common used network cable. Very  important at
> HAL. There are two flavours; Twisted pair and Straight  As far as I know
> (tell me if i'm wrong), most hubs (little network box with blinking lights
> wired  between computers) like the straight UTP cable to connect to
> computers. See also http://www.addtron.com/test1/thisted.htm
>

afaik, UTP cable (also known as the cable you usually use for ethernet,
sometimes referred to as 10BaseT and/or 100BaseT) is *always* twisted
pair. that's just to differentiate it from "coaxial" ethernet cable - which is
more like the cable used to hook up your VCR or cable TV (but not identical.)
coaxial ethernet cable was popular about 5-10 years ago, but you don't see
much of it now.

however, there are straight and *crossover* UTP cables. the cable is
twisted pair in either case, but it connects differently to the pins.
(http://www.imel1.kuis.kyoto-u.ac.jp/members/kameda/lecture/utp/index-e.html#ten_s)
in general, you use straight ethernet cable to connect a computer to a
hub (or your DSL or cable modem) and crossover to connect two
computers directly to each other or two hubs directly to each other.
(however, many hubs have an "uplink" or "crossover" port, so you can just
connect them with a straight cable.)
so most users only need to deal with the straight cables; whereas
sysadmins sometimes have to use crossover cables.

i'm not sure why they'd be talking about this at HAL; is it because
of the ever-changing standards? i.e. the faster your ethernet goes, the
better your cable needs to be (cat 5, cat 5e, cat 6, etc.)

> -  nfs =Network File System. Using TCP communication to share partitions
> of computers like their were at the machine itself. See also
> http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/NFS-HOWTO/intro.html
>
tech note: as i remember it, NFS actually uses UDP, not TCP communication.

but to the non-geek reader, the distinction i've just made isn't very
important. i'd add to your description that NFS is to unix systems what
File Sharing is to Macs and PCs. except that typically with NFS, the
shared drives stay mounted (i.e. "on the desktop" so to speak.) whereas on
Macs and PCs users generally mount and unmount networked drives as needed,
with NFS, the sysadmin generally sets the system to mount
networked drives at boot time. (there are ways around that though, when
desired.)

btw, why is NFS a hot topic for HAL? it's been around for awhile...
another standards thing? (NFS3 finally crawling its way into linux, e.g.?)

>
> - port scanning= Is roaming a computers TCP (communication) ports to
> find an open door (and using it).

well, not necessarily using it though. this is the big bone of contention
these days. hackers (meaning inquisitive geeks, not attackers) often
portscan for curiosity, to learn, to evaluate a service before signing up,
and most importantly: sysadmins need to portscan their own systems to find
out what doors and windows are actually open so they can close any that
shouldn't be - in order to secure their own system. but, various legal
issues have cropped up, including the inevitable ones by lawyers without
quite the necessary technical grasp - and thereby the inevitable threats
of making distribution or use of portscanning tools entirely illegal. and
thus the controversy:

1) it seems ludicrous to outlaw scanning ports on ones own system
2) more touchy: should this act - checking to see if the door (port) is
open, be outlawed, if it is just a scan? (as opposed to an actual
break-in.) while it's true that portscanning often precedes a break-in,
there are also non-destructive reasons for portscanning, and most geeks
see illegalizing portscanning as an unnecessary restriction of their
freedom to be inquisitive.

(also i think both UDP and TCP ports can be included in the definition,
but again, that's a technical detail.)

> Again some of you might have a far better indept tech topic to pre-crunch
> before HAL. My 5c is just a general pick of topics.
>

i imagine they'll be talking also about issues like restrictions on
reverse engineering and breaking encryption (such as were spawned in the
US by the DMCA and made famous by the DeCSS cases which started last year
- and it seems to spread
internationally through the power of corporate-controlled law
enforcement.) the freedom-to-hack is freedom-of-expression issues are a
real powderkeg these days, so hopefully there'll be some good discussion
of those.

a brief intro to the DeCSS controversy:
http://www.fool.com/portfolios/rulemaker/2000/rulemaker000127.htm

shameless plug for "Naughty Bits: The DeCSS Uncensored Art Show"
available at http://plagiarist.org

more DeCSS "art" can be found at:
http://web.lemuria.org/DeArt/

ciao4now,
-@

--
plagiarist.org
Recontextualizing script-kiddyism as net-art for over 1/20 of a century.




**  distributed via <oldboys list>: no commercial use without permission
**  <oldboys list> is an unmoderated mailing list for global cyberfeminism
**  to remove your address from the list, send a message to:
    <oldboys-unsubscribe-xy=domain.topleveldomain@lists.ccc.de>
**  more info: send mail to: oldboys-info@lists.ccc.de and/or <oldboys-faq@lists.ccc.de>
**  archive: http://www.nettime.org/oldboys
**  contact: oldboys-owner@lists.ccc.de
**  www.obn.org