Just because one can find a counter argument against an argument
doesn't mean the original argument is invalid.
Do you lock your front door when you leave home? Yes.
Can a burglar break in? Yes.
Is the police responsible for maintaining law and order? Yes.
Are car owners responsible for keeping their cars roadworthy? Yes.
Are road authorities responsible for keeping the roads carworthy? Yes.
Are car manufactureres responsible for manufacturing roadworthy cars? Yes.
Do pilots have responsibility? Yes.
Are air traffic controllers responsible for air traffic? Yes.
Are you allowed to shout "FIRE" in a crowded theatre? Yes.
Does paper wrap rock? Yes.
Do scissors cut paper? Yes.
Does rock blunt scissors? Yes.
"Yes to all?" Yes.
Anybody care to mention Hitler and Nazis? Yes? Please? Pretty please?
-- Per
Per Gregers Bilse wrote:
Just because one can find a counter argument against an argument
doesn't mean the original argument is invalid.
Sometimes it does 
disproof by counterexample is a valid technique.
How the H*** did "Hitler and Nazis" relate to the subject ???
Susan ???
How the H*** did "Hitler and Nazis" relate to the subject ???
google for godwin's law
i thought i had invoked it when mentioning ashcroft
randy
Debating techniques belong in debating societies, not NANOG.
Bring back com-priv!
-- Per
only where the "law of excluded middle holds" true - that means if
everything is black & white with no shades of grey.
It is quite clear if nothing else from the circularity of threads
on NANOG about this sort of stuff, the number of iterations
around the circles, and the number of years this has been going on
that there is no silver bullet. So there are two other possibilities:
a) There is at least one (probably more) type of action which mitigates
but does not fully solve the problem [in which case telling us
why solution X doesn't work because it doesn't address example Y
is not much help, as by assumption no solution is perfect], or
b) There are no types of action which mitigate the problem. In which
case go do something more interesting than read/write NANOG on
the subject.
There are a lot of (a)'s that are quite helpful. If anyone thinks,
for example, that installing a decent firewall doesn't help
prevent intrusions (no, it doesn't stop them all), or online access
to OS fixes (ditto), I would suggest some statistics to show this
would be useful.
Alex