Steve Shannon ran this ad in the last month of his campaign:
If those IP addresses are an indicator of Steve Shannon’s technical prowess, I don’t think he was going to catch those child pornographers after all. Here’s a screenshot, if you missed it:
This is a bit like tracking Virginia criminals by their phone numbers, and giving the example of 434-555-1212-2029. It’s utterly implausible, and shows a lack of so much as a passing familiarity with telephones (or, in this case, networking). I saw the ad just once, just a few seconds of it over my shoulder last weekend, while eating dinner at a Korean restaurant (Korea House in Charlottesville—recommended highly, BTW). Even that glance was jarring, although it wasn’t until today that I tracked the ad down on YouTube and found that my eyes did not deceive me.
: 0 juphoff@knots.3-1125; ping -W3000 184.13.1.2.9
PING 184.13.1.2.9 (184.13.1.2.9) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 184.13.1.2.9: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=2688 s
64 bytes from 184.13.1.2.9: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=2702 s
64 bytes from 184.13.1.2.9: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=2692 s
^C
CALL SETI–I’VE FOUND LIFE ON MARS!
Why don’t you want to protect the children, Waldo?
Jeff Uphoff wins. :)
Jeff: That’s a bit more latency than I would have expected. Remind me to never sign up with MarsLink for broadband access.
I based that latency on the approximate distance to Mars at conjunction[1], plus a fudge factor to account for the inefficiencies in all known Barsoomian IP stack implementations.
[1] Yes, I was being lazy. Turns out we’re approaching opposition, which means my distance–and thus latency–estimate was far too high. Alas.
While Creigh Deeds gets all of the press, Steve Shannon was a weaker candidate. Apparently, he didn’t get the memo that Virginia’s AG has very few law enforcement duties, a small portion of his total duties.