先扯远一点，说说下载软件的故事：

国外为什么一般都没人专门用多线程下载软件？因为别人网速好，如果网速不好QoS做得好，不会出现天朝垃圾ISP这种下载无故中断的情况。所以断点续传没有必要。IE，Firefox和Chrome那种默认自带的下载框就足够普通使用了。

什么是多线程下载？多线程下载，用一种早期的说法，叫 leech。比Netants还早的一个下载软件就叫“网络吸血鬼”。

而国内最牛逼的迅雷又做了其他几件事情，之一就是“抢占式下载”。什么叫抢占式？一个机器的带宽和网速是有限的，TCP包本来大家都按照秩序一个一个排队，排不动了就阻塞。直到轮到你收发包为止。

而迅雷不会理你这么多，直接插队。强制用完带宽

所以早期迅雷一般一启动整个LAN的网络就挂了。

回到前面，为什么我看了那则新闻会笑呢？搜狗的这个“网速保护”，是不是又重新发明了一套TCP包排队的秩序呢？

废了这么一大堆劲儿，为什么不从一开始每一个程序都按照TCP默认队列收发包，不去故意抢占网速呢？

就好比一个体育馆的出口，大家都按秩序挨个儿出去，比起了火灾大家都慌忙挤门逃生的速度快得多。最后大家都在挤，以至于还得在门口弄一个交通疏导员的位置出来指挥人流。。。囧。。。。

搜狗的这个所谓的“网速保护”解决方案，彻底放弃了系统原生网络栈的民主分配了，而是搜狗的专制（ 国内最大的垄断独裁是什么东西我就不用说了吧？），搜狗有权利控制各个流量先后顺序的垄断权。短时间内可能解决了局部问题，但是既然有限制，必然有反制，说不定哪一天有更流氓更无耻的软件宣称可以突破“网速保护”进行高速下载呢？这个时候又该从LSP到ring3到ring0的驱动大战了吧？

要问独裁怎么来的？首先就是规则博弈。规则博弈之后必定会有问题投机，问题投机之后肯定有“good guy”解决问题，然后good guy趁用解决问题的机会滥用权利。和后面引爆更多更大的多米诺牌问题相比，这个good guy的作恶甚至微不足道。

又想起来了很久以前看到的一个wikipedia词条：Societal collapse，里面一句话太有趣了

societies that develop great expertise in problem solving become incapable of solving new problems by overdeveloping their structures for solving old ones.

大汉，罗马帝国，玛雅帝国和苏联是怎么崩溃的？一个文明为了解决一个自身问题，会超规模发展一个解决问题的机制，然后这个“解决问题”本身也成为一个问题，最后无法解决，最后自我坍塌。

又想起来了编程里个一句非常经典的话：

Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.
　　　　　　　　　　　　Brian W. Kernighan

PS: 什么是支那精神？支那精神的核心就一个字——贱

最近有两个事情从一些很微妙的地方和政治还真有可类比之处：

1. iPhone OS 4.0 SDK ToS Sec. 3.3.1章节霸王条款问题。
2. reddit新的spam过滤机制

第一个问题，各大社区都吵翻天了。4.0新版SDK的ToS这样说的：

3.3.1 — Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs. Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs (e.g., Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited).

首先咱们给这玩意儿定个性：这是一个完全无视任何技术和发展，纯粹的政治决定。因为Apple大爷有这个权利在ToS里提出这个要求和法律。

在IT工业从PC升级到mobile过程中，Apple可谓处处抢占了先机。Apple作出这个决定其实跟当年微软把user和dev捆绑到 Win32 API 上是同一个性质的决定。但是别人微软至少还是一个基于Wintel松散的open体系，Vista的失败很大一部份原因就是因为微软斗不过DoJ的官司。但是微软跟Apple的垄断相比，真的是小巫见大巫了。Apple是从最上游的硬件到最下游的软件一口气垄断完了。从理论上来说，这个新ToS不仅宣判了Flash, Java, appcelerator, MonoTouch, Unity3D的死刑，甚至宣判了objective-j, GLSL 和 GWT 的死刑。这也是rms和自由软件运动一直批判的proprietary software可恶的地方。

而这一切，都把人们的注意力从技术的进步和发展，拉入了政治斗争的泥潭。

第二个问题，我们不谈reddit本身spam问题是怎么怎么样的。我只是觉得reddit博客里有一点描述很有意思：

• In the earliest days, there was no spam.
• Then, there was some spam, but users would downvote it right away.
• Then, the New queue was so flooded with spam that it became unreadable, which ultimately starved the front page of good submissions. So we (the admins) started removing it manually.
• Then we asked you guys to report spam so we at least didn't have to go looking for it.
• Then, even sorting through the reports got overwhelming, and we had to turn the job over to moderators.
• Then, the moderators were overwhelmed and an automated spam filter had to be set up for each reddit community.
• Then, traffic grew so much that the spam filter's tiny false positive rate started accumulating into a constant stream of stories about poor souls who were unfairly blocked. Most redditors are understandably sympathetic to these stories, and so there have been numerous prominent submissions that inevitably end with us being accused of censorship -- or at best, being a police state. And that makes us feel terrible.

恩。一个社区的发展，不仅有技术上scalabiilty的问题，更大更致命的问题是权利上scalability的问题。看到reddit社区admin和mod之间隐蔽的裂痕，我第一个想到的就是中国古代宫廷里，皇帝和臣子权利拉锯和政治斗争。政治和人类sociology是一门很复杂的学问，地球上最聪明的中国人，花了几千年的时间来探索，也很难找到一个平衡。我觉得这里面最有趣的一点就是，技术人员解决社会问题就像解决软件工程问题一样，如果遇到一个没法解决的事情，就通过增加一个中间层来解决。而其实mod这个中间层就像一个摔断的磁铁，N-S其实是相斥的。mod其实是背着admin向着user的。所以mod其实拉远了admin和user之间的距离。如果遇到素质和觉悟不高的mod，很有可能就造成社区的分崩离析和衰亡。

reddit前一段时间还有个闹得满城风雨的mod。id叫Saydrah。这也是一个社区兴衰史的一个小浪花和小插曲吧。一个网站，社区的死亡比技术的死亡更加致命。

没有AJAX，也就没有不需要安装任何客户端的Omegle；没有Omegle，就没有chatroulette。没有chatroulette就不会发现全球有那么多喜欢撸管子癖好的大叔；哦不对，这不是我想扯谈的。今天贴个视频

演奏者 Ben Folds。是受到这个(reddit)视频的启发。其实我很欣赏美国的一点就是，别人不仅有真正的互联网，还有SXSW这种arts的活动，欧洲有遍地的LANparty。youtube，twitter和各个社区良性互动的东西，而正是五彩缤纷的culture构成了西方自由世界。Hans Rosling在TED上说得好：

                   Means     Goal
Human Rights       +         +++
Environment        +         ++
Governance         ++        +
Economic growth    +++       0
Education          ++        ++
Health             +         ++
Culture            +         +++

TED也是 技术·娱乐·设计 的首字母缩写，这也是TED精神和魅力所在

===========================================

Web的发展现在是流行realtime web。这个视频其实有一个缺陷，那就是对方没有互动。假如一个random stranger恰好也是一位音乐家，他会马上拿出他的乐器来演奏吗？答案是不行。我试过。chatroulette至少有500ms的延迟。而且音质和画质特别的烂。

这里让我想到了人类互联网发展的终极极限。我算了下：

延迟：人类大脑的反映速度大概是0.02秒，所以20ms的延迟足够个人使用了。

其次是带宽。读G Reader的同学可能有体会，那就是 over share 和信息过载。一个正常社会的成年人大概能熟练和深度交往310个人，再多就记不住。所以：

个人互联网终极带宽 = ( 视网膜分辨率 x 2 + 人耳能识别的频谱带宽 x 2 + 其他感官预留带宽 ) * 310

有了这个带宽，那么你几乎就等于生活在Matrix里了。

via HN, reddit

This is interesting because it reminds me a lot of problems in social media

• it shows the complex behavior of how people commenting on popular social media, and how differently it works from conventional plain commenting systems.
• It's getting boring if more people began to realize it consciously or unconsciously, once everyone began to follow this flowchart, the content will suffer homogenization, what makes reddit original, worthy reading and valuable will be gone
• The upvote and downvote button exist because it was designed to replace silly '+1' like comments, but soon people discover other usages, for example downvote would be abused to express disagreement while it originally means mark as spam or inappropriate, people would like to upvote more pun without thinking, there's whole category of karma abusing, like karma whoring, upvote party, a comment may get upvoted by simply saying "beacon!". Use upmod and downmod to simulate a voting system, etc. An ID's corresponding karma is more meaningless if more upvote abuse is conducted. People's behavior is out of design scope. The vote button even acts like a placebo button, people would upvote something simply think they can magically mark it as read.
• Upvote blindness. One is likely to upvote simply because many other people upvoted it, if you don't understand half of the comment and the commenter seems to like know what he is talking, you are likely to upvote it no matter you know the actual truth or not. HN once tried to show points after voting, but it wasn't quite successful.
• Eternal september. Proggit sufferes eternal september every year, because the submission quality downgrades eventually, so old users are more selective to read and reluctant to upvote. But newbies are very enthusiastic to upvote and downvote. So lots of stupid AskProggit are more likely to popup because newbies all have the similar problem, nevertheless the problem itself is rampant and answers can be easily found on other sites like stackoverflow.
• The FAQ won't work. Technology changes fast, newbies are likely to looking for the lastest, interactive and live answers from individuals, FAQ helps, but it often fails because it's not kept updated. And people are likely to select authority advices from multiple places , a question may be asked a millions times but a self-submission may be post because of one most simple motivation: let's ask proggit and see what proggit thinks.
• People hates self posts, because reddit was designed to be a 'social bookmarking tool'. They newbie's stupid question spamming my bookmark is not an good idea. But sometimes a redditor's answer to those stupid questions turned out to be extremely useful and insightful, and fresh. It's a pity to let a wittyful comment buried, it's hard choice but you had to upvote the whole thread anyway.
• Spam filter never works well. Some submission may not interest all but perhaps helpful to a lot of people. But they get downvoted before anyone spots it.
• To design a really effective and predictable system, a equilibrium or fixed point has to be found from social media participants' behavior.

via

One of the fascinating things about the Godel incompleteness results is that infinity itself is not the problem. In some systems of arithmetic you can believe you can count to infinity and still be complete and consistent. Some even include the infinite set of induction axioms

Yet the incompleteness problem is not even due to multiplication alone. A system with all of Peano's axioms apart from addition, but inclusive of multiplication was shown by Thorlaf Skolem to be complete. The completeness problem derives from the combination of addition and multiplication on variables. These operations together provide the ability to construct the Godel numbering by allowing the definition of the unique prime factorisation of every integer and the mechanism by which Godel's unprovable statement can be constructed.
So we have yet more demonstration of how easy it is to skirt Godelian incompleteness. The Godelian incompleteness results are really about carefully choosing the formal language concepts we use to describe systems we wish to use. The real problem faced by humans is not even Godelian-incompleteness, its computational complexity. Even solving relatively small problems of Presburger arithmetic takes impossibly large amounts of time.

视频在这里

http://fury.com/2010/02/jesse-shells-mindblowing-talk-on-the-future-of-games-dice-2010/

Points将最终代替很多东西，比如货币。哎。

应该设想一个Plan B。比如机器不能理解的语言，人肉记忆和处理能力训练，人脑信息下载能力之类的。

这个视频能给人很多很多很多启发和思考。令我万万没想到的是CS，Sociology和psychology的最佳结合点居然是game。哎。失误失误。

via 1, 2, 3

很有意思的一个HN问答楼。如何解决习惯性“半途而废”的情况？

在看众牛回答之前我也自己想了下，也翻阅了一下中文资料。发现中文资料有个特点，都是直接开方子，不给机理和原因的阐述。有一些似是而非的解决方案，最终感觉帮助不大。再看HN的问答，我有个恍然大悟的感觉。。。或许我崇拜HN过于了。但是的确给我启发很大。

提问者的情况：

• reasonably smart (IQ scores have generally kept between 125 to 148)
• a creative asset at the workplace
• character flaw

感觉我也好类似啊，手里面一大堆想做的project，但是由于n种原因废弃了n久。

下面的第一个回复

I don't know enough about the OP to talk directly to your problem, so I can only share a few interesting frames of mind that I have picked up along the way that help push me along.
There is a phenomenon from child psychiatry that has shown that parents that say to a successful child, "Wow, you're so smart" undermine that child's ability to muscle through tougher challenges later on in life. These kids believe they are intrinsically better than their peers, so they don't keep putting effort into themselves. Eventually they encounter a challenge that exceeds their initial abilities and they give up since they don't understand their performance is in their control, not baked into their God-given make-up.
Parents who instead say, "Wow, you put in a lot of effort," teach their children that the success is based on factors that you can control, like how much effort you put in and how prepared you are and what you do. These kids do a lot better in life.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-secret-to-raising-smart-kids
Your problem description (high IQ, creative asset, character flaw) is in the wrong frame. Since we're talking about action, it's not about who you are, but what you do.
Anyway, getting things done is surprisingly simple (not easy). You look at the goal, work backwards thinking of all the things that have to get done to get to that goal, and then start doing them.
Another key part of being successful is to delay gratification. People who need constant positive feedback to keep moving forward don't get very far in real situations since most of life is a slog on the way to a better destination.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/05/18/090518fa_fact_lehrer
The final thing that helps motivate action is to know where you want your life to lead. It helps give each smaller project a sense of purpose: does this move my life forward or not? If it does, it's easy to step through things.
Once you have a vision, it's important to continuously repeat in your head all the positive aspects of success. A lot of people focus on the failure or ever the fear of success. As I mentioned above, most real life projects are a grind on your energy and your emotional state. You have to be your own emotional support system.
I liked Steve Jobs commencement speech at Stanford where he acknowledged how death is a motivator. Life is short. It takes a long time to accomplish anything (5 years or more). So, you only get so many chances (maybe 10) to do something meaningful. You have to always ask yourself, "Am I living this day as if it's my last?"
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2005/june15/jobs-061505.html
I will say none of these approaches to life are intrinsic to a person. I suspect all successful people have to teach themselves these strategies along the way and they struggle with them the whole way along.

这个点中要害了。我们平时完成一个project的时候，人们往往会称赞你聪明，这个project的结果很漂亮。但是问题就出在这里。我们去完成一个project的关键不是聪明，也不是结果，而是过程。如果我们接受了这种赞许，不会对我们造成直接的影响，但是我们着手做下一个project的时候，我们首先会预测这个project的结果是不是漂亮，而且我们潜意识就会想，嘿，又有一次展示我聪明的机会来了。

这样，无意中，我们做project的动机就是完全面向玩弄自己的聪明了。而其实要做完一个project最重要的是你的付出和坚持。当你没有能做到付出和坚持，那么这个project也就很自然fail

就好比说我们的聪明只是办事效率，导数大，初值高而已。但是要达到最终结果还是得靠坚定不移的effort。

里面还提到父母鼓励孩子的方法和技巧，我觉得很重要。

其实做事很简单（但是不容易），确定了目标和方法之后，这个过程就是无聊的grind。就像MMORPG里打怪一样。

其次关键是delay gratification。这一点我觉得可以再深入一下，就是庞加莱和海明威的潜意识思考法。当你做得很high的时候，不妨停一停，让你的各种思绪跟上你最尖峰的节奏，而且有助于你的休息。这个其实是有助于提高你的整体productivity，而不是去追求一个peak performance。

里面提到的positive feedback很有意思。现在很多农村的孩子觉得读书无用，我觉得这就是缺乏一种instant positive feedback的结果。其实城市里的孩子也一样，只是他们多了一个peer competition而已。这也可以很好的解释为什么很多中学里成绩拔尖的人心理都比较变态。

最后的关键就是goal。我觉得这里的goal不仅要在action中间随时提醒自己，在最开始计划一个project的时候也要考虑周全。有的project看似很好玩，其实做下去是个无底洞，或者很容易就过时被抛弃的工具。这些project是不值得做的。在一个project里fail对自己的伤害比懒惰更大。

下面有人继续针对第二条constant positive feedback进行了展开

My way of addressing this, since the real world doesn't often provide it, is to provide it for myself. For instance, I had to read 2 chapters in my Number Theory book today. I told myself that after each chapter I would let myself read HN for 15 minutes. Now there is positive reinforcement.
Another trick that helps me stay focused is to make lists. I find joy in the simple act of crossing an item off a list.
So to finish a project break it down into simple concrete tasks, and come up with some sort of simple reward for each task finished. Make sure though that your definition of success is actually achievable and dependent on factors you control. After this, get to it, and finish that project!

任务的分解和增量小规模激励也是一个很有用的方法。这里分辨了两种project，一个是能够一下子做完的，一个是不能一下子做完的。根据实际情况要多做准备和打算。

There's a reason TDD and agile are approaches programmers generally enjoy more, and it's because you get positive feedback early. The success of these techniques are only partially due to their inherent ability to adapt to change: it's also the fact that the people using them are inherently happier because they get this re-enforcement they are going down the right path and making progress.

说道这里我又想起了船夫们喊号子。。。。。。节奏性的鼓励，甚至直接把工序做成一种艺术过程，这也是提高生生产力的一个方法吧。

继续摘录一些有意思的回复

Edison also had teams of people working for him, to do the laborious tasks, a strategy the OP might want to... employ ;)
hire people... I just had that problem... I couldn't finish any project, but I knwe how to do everything... I hired people, tell them how to work, micro manage them... and all I can say is that I'm quite successful...
Stop trying to do all by yourself... you are too valuable to spend time actually doing things...

很不错很经济实惠的手段

Your IQ is not relevant to your ability to complete projects. It is possible your feelings about your high intelligence is a problem in that it keeps you from being willing to experience failure. These fears should dissipate as you incrementally do complete projects.
Diligence > Intelligence.
Thomas Edison: 1% inspiration, 99% perspiration.
as Tesla said, if Edison had been a bit smarter, he wouldn't have had to sweat so much.

暴笑 lol

stop at a point where you know exactly what you need to do next. It's much easier to come back when you do this.

find something that people can pay you for. Money is a hell of a motivator.
have a targeted customer/user. You will feel you cant let them down.
try to have it be something that you yourself would use. it will force you to finish the project.

这里是feedback的一些具体技巧。大学里找MM一起去上自习就是一个很强大的学习动力。说道这里我应该认识到竞争和游戏的极大促进作用。

有人提到了一种和GTD类似的时间管理技巧，叫Pomodoro Technique

all we really need is someone to talk to

英语中这句表达方式很迷人

The Cult of Done Manifesto

1. There are three states of being. Not knowing, action and completion.
2. Accept that everything is a draft. It helps to get it done.
3. There is no editing stage.
4. Pretending you know what you're doing is almost the same as knowing what you are doing, so just accept that you know what you're doing even if you don't and do it.
5. Banish procrastination. If you wait more than a week to get an idea done, abandon it.
6. The point of being done is not to finish but to get other things done.
7. Once you're done you can throw it away.
8. Laugh at perfection. It's boring and keeps you from being done.
9. People without dirty hands are wrong. Doing something makes you right.
10. Failure counts as done. So do mistakes.
11. Destruction is a variant of done.
12. If you have an idea and publish it on the internet, that counts as a ghost of done.
13. Done is the engine of more.

前面提到了要分辨一个project是否能被一下子搞定。这里有位回复了如何去做一个长达几个月甚至几年超长大型project

1. 不要一开始就被一些障碍和难题搞郁闷了。就像马拉松一样一开始不要去拼命冲刺。
2. 任务的分解。这一条被很多人反复提到。也是很多背单词方法论里重要的一点。我想这为了避免despair这一点是很重要的
3. 每天习惯性在一定时间总结当天成就和所处位置
4. 奖赏和激励的feedback
5. 关掉浏览器。不要为其他可有可无的事情分心

ENTP, ENFP, INFP, INTP等性格不同的人也可以采取各自独特的方法（Temperament Theory）。可以来这里测试。做这个测试我很纠结，因为很多事情都是我曾经没有仔细考虑过的。有的答案我两者兼有，甚至交叉。不好选择。我的结果是NTs - Rationals/ Conceptualizers (INTP, ENTP, INTJ, ENTJ)。很有可能就是INTP

Many INTPs are a lot like the stereotypical absentminded professor -- dawdling, distracted, and forgetful of mundane chores, late for obligations, losing homework or library books, and generally disconnected from the business of life in the external world...A big problem for INTPs is that they are so quickly bored, and once their attention wanders, they will rarely finish the many interesting projects they start.

继续，有人说他的毛病更大，断网都没法治。他说应该做 attention medication

At the risk of being accused of "cheating", I recommend attention medication. I am very smart, and did exceptionally well in school, but found myself unable to take even "start small" tasks to completion when not faced with an absolute, completely immutable deadline (and even then, I still handed in papers days late). I tried methods found in books, tried adjusting diet and routine, tried altering workplaces, went as far as trying to do work without an internet connection (!) -- nothing.
This had nothing to do with motivation. I believed strongly in open source software, and loved to code small projects, but never finished anything. I enjoyed writing, and tried no less than 5 times to start a blog. I started building electronic circuits like headphone amplifiers but abandoned them halfway through soldering. No matter how much I wanted or tried to get stuff done, it just wouldn't happen.
A year and a half ago I started taking Vyvanse, which is essentially a slow-release amphetamine salt compound. Since then, I've completed an excellent and productive internship at Apple, shipped two major releases of Quod Libet (an open-source music library application), and am actually making progress on a sprawling thesis, three things I would never have imagined being able to do before. I've even seen a difference socially (I can have conversations that are important to others but meaningless to me without getting bored) and emotionally (I no longer feel like a failure or a waste of potential).
Other people have posted many great suggestions, and by all means, try them. But also talk to a qualified psychiatrist that you trust.

这个Vyvanse就是下面的

ADD meds (Attention Deficit Disorder)。。。。好囧。。。

后面的回复就没看了。太多太长了～～～～～～

小时候总结的resources + skills + attitude，我发现attitude这个东西有的时候是害人的。过于注重调整attitude会让你迷糊和自以为是。调节attitude是在高压迫不得已情况下的一种自我调整的手段。这样做事很牵强，很容易疲劳，人也很容易老化。甚至attitude最终被tweak成一种belief，这下就彻底脑残了。

Types of passion:

1. Goal, passion to complete
2. Peer, passion to compete
3. Life, passion to survive

Now the original article says

1. passion for nothing
2. passion for one thing
3. passion for everything

People with a passion for everything are not interested in things themselves, they’re interested in interest.

The 3rd category is particles in the beginning of an explosion, 2nd is the flying out splashes, 1st is the long dead ones. It's funny because my observations is based on statical, scalar behavior of passion, while the author is more time-oriented and a vector field, which is what the true passion is about.

Mine is too informal :(

via

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

Why people are reluctant to read TFM or TFA?

Let me give you an example. Google just announced Google Chart Tools, which looks fine to me, so the front page describes two kinds of charts: Image charts and Interactive charts, and blah blah blah pros and cons about choosing, and yet it links to their standalone blah blah page. Their separate page describes how to generate a chart, by adding epic long list of URL parameters.

So if you are about to use the Google Chart API, you have to read through their manuals, think about your goals, and interpreting them to a URL construction process, and viola your Chart is here.

But My questions is: do people really have to read a long and stupid post to make a chart?

Why can't we have a step-by-step, or a parameter tweaking GUI, like those we use in MS Office Excel?

The real stupidity lies in the difference of Procedural knowledge and Descriptive knowledge. Google Chart API manuals sucks, because the API authors translate a procedural HOWTO to a long and boring descriptive article, which I call it compiling. Now if a user wants to make a chart by Google Chart API, he has to translate it back to procedural practice, which takes a lot of time to decompile and shit load of extra effort to become proficient with this kind of work.

It's the same with FAQs. People seldom look into FAQs, but often ask more. Why? Because people are more willing to get to know how directly instead of know that. The future of FAQs, is to translate the Frequently Asked procedures into a formal semantic logical database, then a NLP frontend chat program to answer people's questions interactively.

However there's a useful aspect of the difference, if you want to make something deliberately hard to understand, you might want to translate it to descriptive form. From my personal experience, if Cisco books were too easy to understand and implement, the Internet would be more chaotic and messed up. Every netadmin and ISP would make some kind of modification and customization out of standard protocols, which eventually and ultimately makes the Internet un-inter-connectable.

tl;dr manuals, FAQs and long article sucks because the they fail to notice the huge difference between Procedural knowledge and Descriptive knowledge.