Day: April 3, 2007

(Every thime I read/hear “Do you want to take a survey?” I think of the Animainiacs. Great cartoons.)

Nah, this isn’t a survey about anything important or even significant. Heck, it’s not even a survey about anything all that interesting to most of my readers, for that matter, so if you have no real interest in compgeeky stuff, just toddle right along to another post, ‘K?

How Long Did It Take to Install Your Home Network?

My answer (because it was the shortest time allowed) was “Less than an Hour”–though of course I didn’t include my first peer-to-peer network between two computers using just a crossover cable (the time for that was essentially just the time it took to plug the cable into both computers and tell ’em they were on the same workgroup. What? 5 mins max?).

My first home network using some sort of switch/hub and two separate segments of cable between two computers in different rooms took about 20 minutes, because I had to run cabling in the attic, down walls, etc.

Real hard. *yawn*

Other computers added on usually take about the same amount of time, unless using wireless access. Running the cable’s the time sink. Well, that and building the cables from a bulk roll.

Nowadays, using a wireless router and wireless cards, one could easily set up a buncha computers on a home network in 15-20 minutes, assuming familiarity with the hardware and different operating systems (if using different OSes). Heck, just assuming the ability to read directions. What really flabbergasted me was the percentage of folks who answered that it took more than an hour: 43%. Heck, 18% (part of the 43%–25% took between 1 hour and 1 day) took longer than a day to get their home network up and running. If it takes that long, someone ought to think to have a literate person read a manual and explain the process using small words, spoken s l o w l y. *heh*

And then there are the folks not dealt with in the survey who are like my (bad) neighbors. They set up their wireless network wrong. But I’m not telling them that their unsecured network leaves them wide open. Nuh-uh. *heh*

Charles Brumbelow, in an email published in Jerry Pournelle’s Chaos Maor Mail points to an Opinion Journal (WSJ) snippet listed under, “The Religion That Dare Not Speak Its Name,” that touches on a subject that’s too difficult for “nuanced” thinkers to resolve easily, but which seems pretty darned simple to me:

There is a genuine problem here of choosing language that distinguishes between Muslim terrorists and plain old Muslims. But circumlocutions designed to avoid acknowledging the former’s Islamic nature cannot possibly help clarify matters.

Let me help “clarify matters” a bit.

“Plain old Muslims” claim the Koran (choose your own trendy spelling) is their literal guide to a holy life.

Islamic terrorists claim the Koran (choose your own trendy spelling) is their literal guide to a holy life.

“Plain old Muslims” revere Mohammed and view his life and teachings (of which the Koran, Hadith, etc,) as worthy of emulation in all of life.

Islamic terrorists revere Mohammed and view his life and teachings (of which the Koran, Hadith, etc,) as worthy of emulation in all of life.

Now, THE distinction: Islamic terrorists honestly, forthrightly and openly seek to actually emulate the bloody Butcher of Medina, while “Plain old Muslims” are either just not all that serious about actually following Mohammed or are living lives of lies, decieving the Dar al Harb.

There. Now you know the single most significant differential between “Plain old Muslims” and Islamic terrorists.

---

THIS is an open trackbacks post. Link to THIS post and track back. 🙂

If you have a linkfest/open trackback post to promote OR if you simply want to promote a post via the linkfests/open trackback posts others are offering, GO TO LINKFEST HAVEN DELUXE! Just CLICK the link above or the graphic immediately below.

If you want to host your own linkfests but have not yet done so, check out the Open Trackbacks Alliance. The FAQ there is very helpful in understanding linkfests/open trackbacks.