I thought it would interest you the people to know how our routers translates and routes Internet traffic to the individual devices on your private network. Here's the link.
My ISP provides net blocks. I currently have a /30 (4 extra addresses). The primary address, not part of these is on my main host, running pppoe, firewall, and external services like email. I have added the net block addresses to my ppp0 interface and confirmed connectivity with the world on thee addresses.
For an upcoming email demo (only) I would like to route one of my netblock addresses on ppp0 via my wifi router on my LAN to a pizero on my LAN. All are Linux machines. I already have connectivity to the pizero on my LAN. This device only has wifi, not ethernet. There is a reason why I am using a pizero for this demo so don't suggest an alternate device. I already have those!
I could use iptables port forwarding for SMTP/25 but I'd rather route all ports to the pi for this demo and connect it as directly to the internet as possible. . I would very much prefer that an interface on the rpi use the real internet address from the netblock, not an internal (LAN) address, to make things more clear during my demo. So no NAT like iptables port forwarding.
Could I do this with a (gre) tunnel and associated route? On my primary host and router would I set up a gre tunnel to the rpi, then set up a route between that and my WAN interface secondary address? I'm not sure how I would set up the tunnel on the rpi though. Can a wlan interface only have one address, or can it have more than one? If not, how else would I open a second wlan interface on the rpi?
I'd like to maintain (ssh) access to the rpi via its existing LAN address if possible, to make ongoing access easier while I config this networking and when I break it. :-)
Can I do something like this? And maybe I am thinking about this the wrong way?
If it makes this much easier, I can attach another wifi card or AP/router to my primary host/router, but I'd prefer not to unless that really simplifies things.
Note: I know this is not an ideal situation but it is for a demo only, not an ongoing operation.
Thanks for your ideas and pointing me in the correct direction.
Recently Evangelos Arvanitakis, aerodynamics leader of Alfa Romeo Sauber and previously Ferrari,Mercedes and Brawn, gave an interview in a Greek media channel about his work and his views of the championship.
When asked by the host if he believes that the differences between teams ,caused by the 2022 regulations, could be bigger than now and if that could be vital for the title fight he replied the following:
"I believe yes. Let me rephrase that. Right now the difference between P1 to P20, in Q1 for example, is 1.6/1.7 and that's maybe too much. I believe next year, we could see that up to 3 seconds in that scale."
He attributes that to the fact that it's a big challenge to design a new car from scratch with new regulations. He also said that we could see this difference in the first 5 races and then teams will probably adapt to the leaders.
Interview in Greek, non annotated. The quote appears at 6:44.
Update: You can't address something that you aren't aware of, but you also can't correct definitions that are already consistent... So it looks like Cantor knew that there could be problems with allowing any collection of objects to be a set, but he certainly was not aware of what those problems could be. Frege, on the other hand (from what I read), stood behind his Basic Law V (naive comprehension), which states (in my own words - correct me if I'm wrong) that, given a property, you can create a set of all sets that each satisfy that property. This means that Frege was incorrect by believing Basic Law V, and Cantor was not inconsistent by being conservative in his definitions and by requiring that collections be well-defined from the get-go. I have no evidence of Cantor believing Basic Law V (I didn't look that hard into this though), and because of that Cantor was never wrong about his set theory - he just wasn't aware of how to formalize it. Neither of them knew what problems existed with Basic Law V nor were they aware of how to address things that had not existed yet. I have more questions that I will be asking on this sub. Thanks everyone for helping me understand this history.
Original question:
I translated one of Cantor's articles, and saw that he defined a set to be ~ a collection of well-defined objects ~ which does not seem to logically imply Russell's paradox, considering the notion well-defined can require ZFC-axioms, and so on, right? Cantor doesn't go on to explain what well-defined really means (at least as far as I read), but that's not really the point. There's a problem when you say that sets are collections of objects, since there are collections of objects that should definitely not be sets. I don't see a problem when you add the requirement that the collection is well-defined, since this removes ambiguity in whatever way you want, depending on how you want to remove ambiguity.
I notice textbooks use universes to try to solve the problem of naive set theory in an attempt to kick the philosophical can down the road into courses that are more suitable for discussion on ZFC-axioms, and Cantor's use of well-defined seems very analogous to that solution. Am I missing something? Was Cantor really the author of naive set theory? Was Russell solving a paradox that was already kind-of solved by Cantor here? Did Cantor know why he needed to use that wording well-defined? This makes me feel like naive set theory was never
... keep reading on reddit β‘
Source: https://ngabbs.com/read.php?tid=26337801 || https://ngabbs.com/read.php?tid=26398246 || https://ngabbs.com/read.php?tid=26340238
This contains certain information that has been posted on Reddit a while back, as well as several new ones.
#1 - Second Anniversary Side Story Event: Under Tides
Two background illustrations for the normal stages:
One background illustration for the EX stage:
There are 1 training stage + 9 normal stages + 2 story stages for the normal stages, while there are 8 normal stages for the EX stages.
The set of normal and EX stages is called "θθ΄₯ηι£" (loose TL: The Salt Winds of the Defeated) and "ζ΅ͺθεε’" (loose TL: The City Corroded by the Waves) respectively
#2 - Operator Sound Effects
These are the sounds that has been previously posted onto the subreddit by /u/hydrarifle. This strongly suggests that there'll be a Skadi Alter operator released somewhere during Anniversary and Under Tides.
Additionally, the rewards for completing Skadi's Alter Missions are 2 Supporter Tokens, suggesting that her class will be a Supporter.
"Skadi Alter full rewards are :
E1: 3 T1 supporter chips, 10 white skill books, 50 yellow XP , 50k LMD
E2: 2 T2 supporter chips, 1 chip catalyst, 10 green skill books, 100 yellow XP, 100k LMD" - thanks /u/TDio for this!
#3 - Other Sound Effects
These are additional sound effects, most likely related to the mechanics of Under Tides.
To make sense of this, please refer to section #12.
e_imp_split (Trigger Condition - battle.ON_BUFF_START.trap_tentac_start_grow[audio])
e_imp_rock_h (Trigger Condition - battle.ON_ABILITY_ON.Rockfall, battle.ON_ABILITY_ON.RockfallG1, battle.ON_ABILITY_ON.RockfallG2)
e_imp_stone (Trigger Condition - battle.ON_ABILITY_HIT.Rockfall, battle.ON_ABILITY_HIT.RockfallG1, battle.ON_A
... keep reading on reddit β‘
So i have come a sort of a dilemma. English is my second language, and as i mostly read books written in English, i read them in English too. But iβve been thinking of reading some stuff, like Murakami and great classic, like Les Mis, and started thinking that language i should read it in. Itβs a translation either way. English is a better language for me (my native tongue is Russian), but i imagine reading think classics will be easier in your native language no matter how good your English is. So what do you do in that situation?
As the title states - I'm wondering if anyone has experienced something similar or know of a scam going around. He also doesn't have PayPal. But its clearly his card and info linked. It's only happening with Etsy. The items he has received are things he has no interest in or use of.
Information or suggestions are helpful and greatly appreciated.
Hello all,
I recently enabled
Reflection for port forwards Reflection for 1:1 Automatic outbound NAT for Reflection
on my firewall running opnsense and I have come accross the problem that when these options are enabled I lose access to the internet. I have tried to figure out why but can't, anyone else has had this issue before?
Hey everyone,
Just curious if it's possible to do port address translation (PAT) without having to put the router in bridge mode. I need to port forward 80/443 to alternative ports.
Thanks in advance
