@scottalanmiller said in Grandstream GWN7660/GWN7664:

I've used Grandsteam in non-AP contexts a bit. And they aren't "bad", but I wouldn't intentionally buy or deploy them.

I have 6+ WP820 WiFi phones and they are great.

Why wouldn't you do GS APs?

Has anyone used the Grandstream GWN7660 or GWN7664 APs yet?

You have the option of using a built in controller (7660 supports 50 APs, 7664 supports 100+) or using Grandstreams online controller.

@scottalanmiller said in Random Thread - Anything Goes:

@nadnerB said in Random Thread - Anything Goes:

Other than the architecture, we have similar in Nicaragua. More traditional, big concrete window ledges that jut out and have this protruding iron cages. I'm sure that they weren't designed FOR dogs intentionally, but they might as well have been. Dogs all sit out in them to be "outside on the street" while still safe inside.

are there no yards there?

@wirestyle22 said in Bathroom etiquette:

@Dashrender I was in the army and I never unlearned this lol

it's one thing to use the urinal next to another - it's whole another thing to carry on/strike up a conversation.. lol

@jclambert said in Miscellaneous Tech News:

@Dashrender
Facts don't matter nearly as much today. It is more about the loudest voice.

as much as social media gives a voice to the little person - it allows the crazy to much of one....

@wirestyle22 said in Bathroom etiquette:

I have always operated under this unspoken rule--when we're in a public restroom we do not acknowledge each others existence. If there is an option you always leave one urinal between both of you. It's been 37 years of me operating under this ruleset. Today I got into the bathroom and I'm washing my hands before I use the restroom...because that makes sense (i will die on this hill) and my coworker I barely know walks in. He says "Hey Ian!" and walks up to me and touches my shoulder. I am basically thrown into chaos because this guy apparently operates on a complete opposing ruleset than me. I walk over to the urinal and he follows. There are five urinals that area empty and he stands directly next to me.

Am I mistaken in my understanding of social norms or is this really fucking weird

I've run into people like this before. Often military men don't have this barrier anymore - they are broken of it during basic training...

@PhlipElder said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

@Dashrender said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

@scottalanmiller said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

And that's really the fundamental issue. At the end of the day, maybe for all the reasons I pointed out, in America while it sounds impossible... a very, very large number (percentage) of the population doesn't support mechanisms to reduce mass violence because they don't think that there is anything to fix in the first place. They don't actively want mass violence, they just don't see it as the big negative that the rest of us do. It's seen as simply an acceptable artifact of getting the things that they want more.

Until we address the fact that half the population is A-ok with the state of things because it gives them what they want more, making an argument for how to fix things will never work because they don't see anything wrong to fix in the first place. You can call it a mental illness epidemic that so many people actually are okay with what is happening, maybe it is. But that they are okay with it, is just how things are. But no one wants to admit that they are okay with it, so instead they say "you can't completely eliminate it, so let's not bother making it better."

Nothing I could ever have written could have made my point as strongly as someone who is actually willing to write how much they were okay with it posting crazy things to try to distract us from noticing that they aren't upset by the state of things at all.

I see your post as it's own slant against those who support gun rights. You've focused on the child killing aspect, but completely ignored the manage the government aspect to citizens owning guns.
I know the 2nd amendment is about the militia, but it's also about the people not being afraid of their own government, having the ability to rise up when it becomes to corrupt.

That's what I see when people don't want to take away guns - they weigh the costs of lives lost against their concerns of the government taking over - and their opinion of keeping the government in check wins.

This is very well said.

There's a pretty solid body of "evidence" from the writings of the Founding Fathers to the Declaration of Independence's clear statement that We the People have the right to throw off tyranny that make it clear the 2nd Amendment had a very specific purpose of keeping Gov in check.

EDIT: And recent SCOTUS and state SC rulings back this up.

SCOTUS is a puppet of their masters - I'm not saying I disagree in the specific instance, but they clearly are voting along political lines - I don't believe they are taking the constitution into mind much anymore.

@scottalanmiller said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

And that's really the fundamental issue. At the end of the day, maybe for all the reasons I pointed out, in America while it sounds impossible... a very, very large number (percentage) of the population doesn't support mechanisms to reduce mass violence because they don't think that there is anything to fix in the first place. They don't actively want mass violence, they just don't see it as the big negative that the rest of us do. It's seen as simply an acceptable artifact of getting the things that they want more.

Until we address the fact that half the population is A-ok with the state of things because it gives them what they want more, making an argument for how to fix things will never work because they don't see anything wrong to fix in the first place. You can call it a mental illness epidemic that so many people actually are okay with what is happening, maybe it is. But that they are okay with it, is just how things are. But no one wants to admit that they are okay with it, so instead they say "you can't completely eliminate it, so let's not bother making it better."

Nothing I could ever have written could have made my point as strongly as someone who is actually willing to write how much they were okay with it posting crazy things to try to distract us from noticing that they aren't upset by the state of things at all.

I see your post as it's own slant against those who support gun rights. You've focused on the child killing aspect, but completely ignored the manage the government aspect to citizens owning guns.
I know the 2nd amendment is about the militia, but it's also about the people not being afraid of their own government, having the ability to rise up when it becomes to corrupt.

That's what I see when people don't want to take away guns - they weigh the costs of lives lost against their concerns of the government taking over - and their opinion of keeping the government in check wins.

@scottalanmiller said in ATA on Skyetel???:

@Dashrender said in ATA on Skyetel???:

@scottalanmiller said in ATA on Skyetel???:

@Dashrender said in ATA on Skyetel???:

@scottalanmiller said in ATA on Skyetel???:

@JasGot said in ATA on Skyetel???:

I have two issues, when the ATA dials out, it is presented with FAX tones. I think Skyetel is doing this.

Try dialing out with a regular SIP phone to test. But Skyetel should never present fax tones outbound.

Well, at least not normally.
with their fax service they will.

Outbound?

if you buy that service from them - yes. They put a piece of equipment on your network that actually accepts the fax locally, removing the internet from the equation. It then sends a data burst to Skyetel, and then Skyetel puts the call from it's own servers onto the PSTN.

What does that have to do with SIP connections, though?

It doesn't - I was only pointing out - if you get fax service from Skyetel - you can get the fax tones provided by skyetel for outbound faxes... you stated something to the effect that skyetel would never do that - and in fact there are cases where they do.

@scottalanmiller said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

Gun control is, I think, a red herring, though. I'm 100% confident that taking away guns takes away guns and that while "bad people can always find a way" global statics show that that's a pointless argument because it makes it effectively true and that's all that matters for safety.

Obviously if there were truly zero guns mass shootings would be impossible. But I think it's also obvious that mass knifings, mass bombings, mass driving into crowds and other forms of horrific destruction would replace them. Taking away guns makes it harder, and reduces the body count. But it doesn't solve the underlying problems.

Mental healthy, high stress, a torn society, a lack of social bonding, horrific education standards, religious hatred, government corruption, a constant stream of "there is no future"... all add into the mass shooting or mass whatever problem, I think. The question here isn't why is it mass SHOOTINGs, that's easy... because guns are the easiest way to MASS do anything. What Dash is asking is why the increase in MASS something or others.

When you put it like that (as I basically already said above - and clearly agree with) - you're right, I put to specific a point on the shooting - my real question - why the mass desire to hurt others has seemingly seemed to have increased?

Perhaps when taken in this context, it hasn't? Humans by their nature I believe are violent.

@scottalanmiller said in ATA on Skyetel???:

@Dashrender said in ATA on Skyetel???:

@scottalanmiller said in ATA on Skyetel???:

@JasGot said in ATA on Skyetel???:

I have two issues, when the ATA dials out, it is presented with FAX tones. I think Skyetel is doing this.

Try dialing out with a regular SIP phone to test. But Skyetel should never present fax tones outbound.

Well, at least not normally.
with their fax service they will.

Outbound?

if you buy that service from them - yes. They put a piece of equipment on your network that actually accepts the fax locally, removing the internet from the equation. It then sends a data burst to Skyetel, and then Skyetel puts the call from it's own servers onto the PSTN.

@scottalanmiller said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

@Dashrender said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

@PhlipElder said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

EDIT 2: Switzerland. Every household has a gun. It's mandatory service there. Where's the mass shootings?

We have one of the highest per capita firearms ownership up here and yet where are the mass shootings?

Why is that? Why would the focus be on disarming the US as a nation? What could the possible motive be for removing over 300M firearms from We the People's hands?

I think another issue we have is that we are looked at as a single country (of course which we are) but really we shouldn't be. At best we should be look regionally or only at the state level. That would put us comparably much closer to the rest of the world. Granted we'll have places like Nebraska/S. Dakota/N. Dakota/Montanna have super low populations compared to our landmasses.. but still.. stop looking at the USA as a single thing - and break it into more closely related parts for your comparisons.

HOw would it make us more comparable? Remember that shootings are done as "rates", not whole numbers. Breaking it up would make some states better and some worse, but the average would still be the worst in the world - it would not change at all because no matter how much you break it up, the percentages stay the same. That's why percentages are what we use so that size has no bearing.

Because if you look at California vs say Nebraska (and I haven't yet) it could show huge problems in cali, but not so much in nebraska - which means NE is a safer place to live.
just an example.

@scottalanmiller said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

@pmoncho said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

@scottalanmiller said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

@pmoncho said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

@Dashrender said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

@pmoncho said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

Another possible reason I thought of was, sheer boredom with "idle hands."

Heck, "They started quarreling out of sheer boredom" is used as the example in the Cambridge dictionary.

So to that end:

I'm wondering if lately, the whole trophy for everyone/entitlement mentality is a driving force for younger people doing this.

It's possible. One would think inclusion would give a sense of pride but maybe it is having the reverse affect.

Participation trophies are a form of mockery, not inclusion.

That I totally understand. It seems that the ones handing them out, don't.

Why doesn't it seem that way? I think that they seem pretty clear on their mockery and not taking the kids seriously in any way end to end. Every witnessed education at play in the US? It's mockery to them, for sure.

So you think it's intentional? if so - why?

@scottalanmiller said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

@Dashrender said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

@PhlipElder said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

Criminals gonna perp. Guns gonna be available to them in perpetuity. That has not changed since perps smuggled spears into "spear free zones" and started slashing.

reminds me of Back to the Future 3 - Tannan with a gun in his hat

Yeah - you're not wrong.

Short of killing all ability to acquire shooting weapons - specific no-shooty weapons zones will always be hit by the criminals.

And even once you make shooty's illegal - it will probably take 30+ years to get enough off the streets before you actually see a decline in violence caused by them.

It's just an impractical battle from the anti-shooty people.

Real world examples say that you can take guns away quickly and effectively. It's been done in large countries before to great effect. You can want or not want gun control of different sorts, that's a different issue. But the ability to take them off of the streets and make them all but impossible to get and easy to identify when rogue (that's the biggest deal) is actually quite easy and the US is anything but an exception to the norm.

Well - sure if you are the gestapo! Though frankly - I think the gov't trying to do that in the USA would lead to large amounts of violence on it's own.

Sure overnight you could remove all store based sales of weapons - likely to get as much resistance - send police to the homes of registered gun owners - likely to meet a lot of resistance.
And yes you'll remove the guns from gang members as the gangs are caught with the guns - but I'm sure there is a huge amount of underground guns that will continue to circulate for a while - several years at least.

But in the end - do you think this will solve the problem? Sure it will reduce mass shootings - but now we'll see IEDs become the replacement, or people just driving into crowded spaces, etc.

The underlying issue will still remain. - which was what the OP was asking about... what is the underlying issue - and is it actually solvable?

@scottalanmiller said in ATA on Skyetel???:

@JasGot said in ATA on Skyetel???:

I have two issues, when the ATA dials out, it is presented with FAX tones. I think Skyetel is doing this.

Try dialing out with a regular SIP phone to test. But Skyetel should never present fax tones outbound.

Well, at least not normally.
with their fax service they will.

@ITivan80 said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

here is some thoughts on the matter:

https://www.jw.org/en/library/series/more-topics/school-shooting-bible-meaning-hope/

Even though it is article is geared towards school shootings. It is also helpful to understand the principle motives behind them.

I feel like I've just been rick rolled or trolled - not sure which one actually applies...

basically you're blaming (or the article is) the end of days - judgement day? to each their own I guess.

@pmoncho said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

@Dashrender said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

@pmoncho said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

Another possible reason I thought of was, sheer boredom with "idle hands."

Heck, "They started quarreling out of sheer boredom" is used as the example in the Cambridge dictionary.

So to that end:

I'm wondering if lately, the whole trophy for everyone/entitlement mentality is a driving force for younger people doing this.

It's possible. One would think inclusion would give a sense of pride but maybe it is having the reverse affect.

Inclusion stops once they are out of school and the real world smacks them upside the head. There is no inclusion in the normal workforce.

That said - all the under 24 year olds - well - I'm not sure school is really that inclusive, children certainly are not. Age is what generally bring pemper to people... You see all kinds of collage age people protesting, etc - but the older folk - not so much. The youth are generally the ones really bucking the system, that "teenage rebellion stage" which lasts well into most of their 20's...

@PhlipElder said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

EDIT: As far as causation goes, no, one could attribute factors across the board. But, and it's a big one, the catch is that all large centers have similar attributes as far as poverty, unemployment, and so on. Once we factor that in, the party demarks become a lot clearer.

Please show me a large, I mean 1 million plus (and that might even be to small) metro that doesn't lean all liberal/democrat.

Nebraska a typically Red state is now a purple state because the single large metro is so liberal/democrat.

@PhlipElder said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

Criminals gonna perp. Guns gonna be available to them in perpetuity. That has not changed since perps smuggled spears into "spear free zones" and started slashing.

reminds me of Back to the Future 3 - Tannan with a gun in his hat

Yeah - you're not wrong.

Short of killing all ability to acquire shooting weapons - specific no-shooty weapons zones will always be hit by the criminals.

And even once you make shooty's illegal - it will probably take 30+ years to get enough off the streets before you actually see a decline in violence caused by them.

It's just an impractical battle from the anti-shooty people.

@PhlipElder said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

@Dashrender said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

@PhlipElder said in Why have mass shootings increased - you thoughts?:

Yup. And there's a distinct/direct correlation between guns and crime and the Democrat Party.

Please expand that thought.

Chicago - Shots, Shots, Shots
DC - Shots, Shots, Shots

Again, look at the FBI statistics. It's not hard to put together what party affiliation the anti-gun powers that be belong to.

We live in an era of "Think this way because experts say so" without anyone taking the time to actually dig in to the statistics. That's all it takes is to put some effort and critical thinking skills into something to figure out who is blowing it out their arse and who is not.

I'm not sure I agree with that specific outlook - you don't have causation there.

What do you have is HUGE population, low wages -
most large metros in the USA are voting democrats.

What you are more likely saying is - those who hate guns for whatever reason are voting them out - but that's also voting gun violence up. the voters aren't looking at the cause of the actual violence. just one thing that's part of the violence.

After 40+ years you'd think they would realize that getting rid of guns (not sure that they really have) hasn't worked - it's time to try something new - but those new things are VERY hard and require even greater sacrifices to accomplish.