jaclaz

And there is Australian Rule too:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shepherding_(Australian_rules_...

No idea about severity or frequency of incidents but the (very few) matches I happened to watch were far more "physical" than rugby.

Yes, they are essentially the same:

https://medlineplus.gov/interstitiallungdiseases.html

[2017]

TLDR:

>About 45 million Americans were age 65 and older in 2013, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

>Spreng and his team evaluated 13 older adults who had been robbed by family members or neighbors, or scammed online or by phone. The researchers compared that group to 13 peers who’d been exposed to a potentially exploitative scheme, but recognized and avoided it.

>Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings and perhaps identify markers -- both biological and behavioral -- to identify who’s most at risk of scams, Spreng said.

I understand that studies cost money, but deriving anything from a study on 13+13=26 people seems to me a bit hasty.

What happened after 2017?

Yes, I understand what you are saying, I was highlighting that those (if adopted) would only fix (maybe) part of the problem, they are just (better) tools.

At the end of the day what I want (and I presume any other customer wants) is a correct invoice with the correct net, tax and total, and this will only happen when (if) the programmer understands the base issues and uses the correct library/algorithm/whatever.

The authors of the spec made some provisions, and very likely all of them are useful and correct, the issue is how the programmers will use them, and in some cases there isn't even a "correct" solution that everyone uses.

A classic example in invoicing is an item that is advertised for 60.00 (to the final user) VAT 10% included.

If you try making an invoice for that sum in a few programs you will find three or four way it is implemented.

Some will have 54.54+5.45=59.99, some will have 54.54+5.46=60.00, some will have 54.55+5.46=60.01 (and possibly a "discount" of 0.01), some will have 54.545+5.45=60.00, some will have 54.54545454+5.45=60,00.

Maybe it is because I am getting old, but I cannot see the problem, maybe it is slighty unusual, but there is nothing that can be seen unethical or unappropriate (IMHO).

Companies using surnames or first name+surname are very common but there are already more than a few using first names only.

Moreover it could be also an acronym "cleverly" assembled to a first name.

Personally I am more perplexed by the names that some people give to their sons.

Maybe it is tap code:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tap_code

morse code by tapping fingers is tough.

Somehow answering my own question (though not in a satisfying way, as after all the hypothetical device I was looking for seemingly does not exist).

It seems like Mikrotik routerOS (probably also other routers/OS's but I didn't find any evidence about that) through some "magic" tinkering with prerouting/mangle/connection marks:

https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=187178

allows addressing from a same router more than one device with the same IP address.

So with two routers in cascade it would be possible (maybe) to use the first as the failover engine (recursive) routing from itself (192.168.1.1) to three different IP addresses (on a different subnet, let's say 172.16.0.0) that are managed by the second router that "routes" 172.16.0.10, 172.16.0.20, 172.16.0.30 to the 192.168.1.1 on ports ether2, ether3 and ether4.

If this works, the two routers can be (in case any of the two fails) by-passed by manually reconnecting cables (to only one of the DSL/4G routers, as it is now) without changing any configuration on the network clients.

It seems entirely genuine, and yes, it is possible to be very precise with just eye measure/hand held tools, which does not mean that it is not difficult and a lot of experience is needed (i.e. it is not something that anyone can do).

Source: something very like this was my father second job from the '60's to the '90's, while the largest part was architectural models (buildings) he made also quite a few "mechanical" models (not in PVC, mainly in wood and/or tin/metal, though perspex/plexiglass was also largely used).

Comparably complex/detailed projects were only a few ones that I can remember, because the cost (number of hours needed for this kind of builds) was rarely affordable by the customer.

I remember (in the late 70's or maybe early 80's!) a model of a set of solar panels mounted on a circular rail that could tilt and rotate to follow the sun, fully working (a strong lamp was used to simulate the position of the sun and the model "followed" it).

Still all he had in his workshop were three or four small table saws, a couple alternating ones, three or four electric drills, a small electric router, more files, planers, pliers and manual tools than you can imagine, some soldering irons and little more.

I often helped him after school, I was usually tasked to make "repetitive" (simple) pieces, he would prepare a sort of template and/or show me how to make the specific little component and I would then make them or help him with assembling the more complex ones.

Yep, it is unfair.

There is nothing that is impossible in the building process, only it takes (took) ages.

The linked video is a "final" version, there are smaller videos with more details, this one is about making the tracks, posted on hackaday:

https://hackaday.com/2022/09/16/scratch-built-rc-excavator-i...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKJZhFfZGuE

of course there are also pre-made metal parts (possibly also hand made, but needing a small lathe), but the PVC tracing, cutting and gluing looks entirely real.

The Doctor House's motto:

"Everybody lies."

applies to technical matters and nerds/geeks too, though for some reasons we tend to forget this, it is a type of Gell-Mann Amnesia.

Yes, I thought about this approach, but as said at least one of these dsl routers is very, very slow at booting, more than 1 minute, 2 or more if I recall correctly, in the "three level cascading/rotating" setup the pinging script would need to be timed (either in seconds or in number of failed pings) to allow the booting time for the selected router before deciding that even the router that was just connected has no internet and decide to connect to the third one. I could leave the "other" routers powered on at all times and use three el-cheapo unmanaged switches to connect them and power on/off these switches instead, this would be almost instantaneous.

I have found a device that is nearer, it is a port manual switch that can be commanded via RS232 besides manual buttons.

Not really affordable, 290 US$:

https://www.vpi.us/network-devices/gigabit-ethernet-switch-1...

The usual word of warning, if you are going to put a collar to a cat (or dog) free to roam, make sure that it will break with a force less than the pet's weight.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32660081

Maybe there has been a misunderstanding of sorts.

By "gateway" I meant the IP address set in the various LAN devices for "default gateway" that (for the sake of the question) is set to 192.168.1.1.

Imagine that there is only one device (a PC) on the LAN and one DSL router/modem.

The router/modem (the actual "box") has an address of 192.168.1.1 and the only PC has set as gateway 192.168.1.1.

Now, let's say that there are instead several devices on the lan (all set with default gateway 192.168.1.1) and three DSL routers (that all have address 192.168.1.1 and that cannot be changed) of which only one is connected to the LAN at any given time by physically connecting/disconnecting from the main LAN switch their RJ45 cable (this is the current situation).

Instead of connecting/disconnecting manually the cables, I could put a "switch box" that would allow switching among the three routers cables, that would be something that anyone can be told to do over the phone in case of need.

I was asking if there was something ( a simple device) like that but that could be operated remotely or programmatically.

I presume that almost any router or managed switch (as it has been suggested, probably much better) can put a port in "up" or "down" state, but in the case of a router there would be some IP conflicts.

I could change the IP subnet and default gateway on all devices of LAN to (say) 192.168.0.x and have the "added" router be the default gateway at 192.168.0.1, routing all traffic to 192.168.1.1 (the fixed IP address of the DSL routers) but doing this, in case of failure of the "added" router I would have to change the default gateway on all the connected to LAN devices.

The "managed switch" sounds much better, though still if there was a simpler device it would be preferrable.

The actual "limitation" is that I cannot change the addresses of the DSL/4G routers.

Yes, that would be the solution with a "box" that needs to have at least 4 ethernet ports, to which this or that Linux mini distro is installed and configured, I was looking for something already made and tested/easily configurable.

As you detailed, the way of working of this hypothetical device is simple enough (maybe too simple) and I thought that something like that existed and I was simply unable to find it.

Yes, the managed switch could be a possibility, the "box somewhere" is an added complication, but sounds like easy enough.

Essentially what I was looking for would be an easily programmable managed switch capable of pinging and switching ports on and off, i.e. a self-contained one.

Maybe something like that can be done with an Arduino or a RaspberryPi or similar small boards, but I was hoping there was something similar already made.

These bypass NICs sound interesting, thanks, I'll have a look for them.

Yep, this is how I have the current setup:

1) "main" router connected to a FTTC line

2) "secondary" router connected to an older (and slower) DSL line

3) "tertiary" router connected via 4G SIM

What I do now is simply take the cable out of the "main" router and connect it to the "secondary" one, and if also this one has no connection (cut cable, it happened three or four times in the last couple of years) connect it to the "tertiary" one.

As said, the issue is only if for whatever reasons I am not there, the A/B/C/D rotary selector box would be a simple solution that anyone present could be instructed to use, while connecting and disconnecting cables can be more difficult to explain over the phone.

The hypothetical device I was looking for would be an automated version of that.

How much would one of these specialists take to create a custom solution like this?

I would expect something in the thousands of dollars range, not exactly affordable.

I thank everyone that replied, but most if not all the answers do not take into account the limitations of NOT changing the current (192.168.1.1) address of the gateway and/or are anyway using the "added router in the middle" option where the proposed Microtik hex router is replaced by some other brand/make/model.

I understand (a little) the way multi-WAN routing works, but due to the exposed limitations that cannot work.

The whole problem revolves around the fact that the (hypothetical) device (if it is a sort of router) has an own address of 192.168.1.1 and that it should be able to route/switch to one of the three DSL/4G router/modems each one having the same 192.168.1.1 address.

I am now thinking of a ethernet relay like the ones used in home automation, similar to this one (example):

https://relaypros.com/Relay/Relay/ETHERNET_RELAY_CONTROLLERS

but I read somewhere that it is not a good idea to use the relay contacts on the actual ethernet cable, so I could use one of them to control the power of the three routers/modems, but this would introduce a (bearable, still ...) delay as the routers take some time (tens of seconds, one is particularly slow and takes over a minute) to boot and establish connection.

No, in Europe we have the same problem with ISO norms and likely on some national technical ones, strictly speaking they are not Laws, but they are often cited either in the Laws and/or exposed to the public through labeling.

An example:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17587770

Yesterday's thread on the same record:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37482517

Try googling for "Jaime Maussan hoax" to get an impression on the reliability of his past claims.

Try googling for "Jaime Maussan hoax" to get an impression on the reliability of his past claims.

Increased security declared.

https://www.schengenvisainfo.com/etias/

>The main reason for the approval of the ETIAS authorization is security. With the increased risk of travellers worldwide, the EU wants to ensure safe travel in its countries. The ETIAS will decrease security concerns substantially through its information and data-gathering systems. This means that the ETIAS will detect if a person is a threat in any way to the security of Schengen countries. This will lead to the person being denied entry and avoiding the threat of being present inside EU borders. It will basically deal with a problem before it is even there.

(follows a number of completely bogus "advantages" for the travellers, society and what not).

Only for the record, there is also easyhook:

https://easyhook.github.io/

https://easyhook.github.io/#features

https://github.com/EasyHook/EasyHook

I think you are referring to Sir Mark Sykes (BBC made a documentary on that a few years ago):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Sykes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Sykes#Exhumation_for_biol...

but it seems like the attempt was not successful, the lead coffin was broken and the body was not as well preserved as it was expected.

Basically, clay or any other condition/material that insulates the body from oxigen (ground burials or sealed tombs).

I wouldn't dare to say that weeks or month after death a corpse can still be "fresh", but in some places when/if you open a buried coffin after 5 years or so it is not rare that there has been not enough decomposition to allow the transfer of the body to an ossuary.

There are "aerated" tombs devised to accelerate the decomposition:

https://www.mdpi.com/2673-6756/2/3/37