Slashdot Mirror

For example - this article.

Basically IPv6 does not offer anything to early-adopters.

Well, historically, there is a lot of evilness to go around.

No, it's not science.

Talking about "concensus" and taking polls among "scientists" is not science.

Telling people to have faith in global warming despite lacking evidence is not science.

Smearing everybody who disagrees is not science.

And some mysterious computer-models without tangible predictions is not science either. If you can predict the climate, publish your predictions for each and every weather station so we can compare predicted values to actual values. (Oh, and yes, I do know the difference between weather and climate.) But no, we get some hazy predictions for something in 100 years, yet nothing for next year. - This is like a Nostradamus-book that I once stumbled upon, it was great at predicting the past, made no predictions about the immediate future and only made some predictions for something very, very far away in the future. That is not science.

Moronic arguments about weather vs. climate are not science. Yes, I do know that weather is unpredictable like the bubbles in boiling water - yet I can predict the temperature in the cattle when I know the imputs. And I can predict the temperature for the next seconds better than for the next hours. Yet for "climate models", for some mysterious reason, they claim to predict the temperature in 100 years, but cannot predict it for the next 3 years, because "that's weather". Complete nonsense. This shows that "climate models" are not much more than a modernized version of vodoo-mumbo-jumbo. I will give a climate model credit when it can predict the mean temperature for NEXT YEAR for all weather stations on all continents with significantly better accuracy than the "same as this year"-prediction. But of course that would not be alarmist enough. If you cannot beat the most simple possible prediction (that the temperature is the same next year) then your climate model is absolutely worthless.

Reusing that famous "hockey-stick" diagram forever is also not science. Why do most temperature graphs stop at the early 2000's? Because there was almost no warming since then, that's why.

Idiotic doomsday scenarios are also not science. In history, the warm periods were also the better periods for humans. This "end of the world" - "waterworld" - "runaway" nonsense is completely overblown. When the earth gets warmer, it also radiates more into space during the night, therefore more CO2 may indeed lead to some warmer years, but not to some "runaway" effect. BTW, oil production is at it's peak and will no longer significantly rise, therefore CO2-production will also level off and begin to fall in a few decades.

Most mass-murderers and serial killers are gay.

Given the fact that pretty much everything is "racist" today, I have to chuckle every time when I read that word.

Yeah, as if we had anything resembling democracy. There are Republicans tampering with voting machines and Democrats getting elected by dead people and any reform is blocked because the party that is losing by the reform just blocks it.

I guess it is an idiocracy, because people are too stupid to realize how they get fooled.

There's always going to be shenanigans and tampering at the edges. Unless you believe in conspiracy theories... JFK won in 60 because Richard Daly had ballots altered in the basement of city hall, Diebold threw the election to Duyba in '04, etc... those shenanigans aren't enough to throw the result one way or the other.There are simply too many other people doing it right.

If we are an "idiocracy", it's not because of our politicians, but because of our own choices. We do things like demand budgets be cut, but then add "but not my *insert benefit here*".

President John Adams was just one of many who noted that unless the citizens themselves prize virtue, government will be corrupt and ineffective. We all complain about various political policies on both sides of the ideological spectrum, but at the core of our most important problems lies a big heapin' helping of hypocrisy... on our part. There's no conspiracy about that. We have to look in the mirror.

Yeah, as if we had anything resembling democracy. There are Republicans tampering with voting machines and Democrats getting elected by dead people and any reform is blocked because the party that is losing by the reform just blocks it.

I guess it is an idiocracy, because people are too stupid to realize how they get fooled.

There is a good article about why upgrading a webbrowser is pointless.

There has not been a new web-technology that I really need for the last 5 years, possibly longer. Please, fix the bugs first, don't break the extension-API and let the extension-programmers create all the bells and whistles. There is no reason to break compatibility more often than - say - every 5 years or maybe even longer.

... but it might get you killed in others.

Namecalling cannot change the fact that all those welfare-programs have only increased social stratification.

You may now say: "What a preposterous thing to say, without those welfare programs it would be even worse"

Not so. Government expenses go to private interests. Obama wants to give a couple of billion to some friends and Romney surely wants to wants to pay back Goldman Sachs for years of support (and in fact, Obama was also supported by Goldman Sachs - wow, only a "fucking retarded loonie" could possibly think that maybe all those millions are not going to starving babies?)

The bigger the government, the richer types like Romney, Soros or Bernanke will get.

I have to pick the candidate that I think will do the best job all around.

Yeah, that's why representative democracy does not work while direct democracy does.

The problem is just that the Democrats have more or less taken over the GOP and Ron Paul is the only real Republican left.

I know it's hard to believe after 12 years of Bushes, but the GOP used to be a party of small government, non-interventionism and individual rights.

When Clinton reduced social spending while the Bush before and after him increased it - who do you vote for when you are against big government?

So as far as I am concerned, it is either Ron Paul or a big-government-pro-war-bread-and-circuses president. It does not matter whether his name will be Obama, Romney or Gingrich.

Wait a minute - wasn't Obama supposed to fix all that? What about all these "Jesus was also a community-organizer" - stuff?

How is it possible that Obama's America becomes very much similar to the governments that Obama supports abroad?

Why does Obama start more wars all around the world than Bush, yet nobody seems to care?

Oh, and by the way, any moron who still believes that it's all the fault of R/D and that D/R would fix it: R+D are merely circus factions, both Romney and Obama are deep in the pocket of the banks, just like Bush was. And the media will do everything to prevent Ron Paul from winning.

Wait a minute - wasn't Obama supposed to fix all that? What about all these "Jesus was also a community-organizer" - stuff?

How is it possible that Obama's America becomes very much similar to the governments that Obama supports abroad?

Why does Obama start more wars all around the world than Bush, yet nobody seems to care?

Oh, and by the way, any moron who still believes that it's all the fault of R/D and that D/R would fix it: R+D are merely circus factions, both Romney and Obama are deep in the pocket of the banks, just like Bush was. And the media will do everything to prevent Ron Paul from winning.

And when the climate change followers start to call for faith despite missing data, who is unscientific?

are you going to hold out forever?

Yes, I'll be "holding out" with over 99% of users out there.

People, there will never be a IPv6 transition, period.

The crazy idea of the IPv6-designers was to expect all admins to request and configure new addresses - completely utopian.

Yes, NAT is not pretty. Yes, IPv6 would allow for a much cleaner network. But, no, that is not enough to push anybody to IPv6. There are no IPv6-ONLY services, therefore no benefit of running IPv6 on a client (regardless of dualstack). There are also no IPv6-ONLY clients, therefore no benefit of running IPv6 on a server (regardless of dualstack).

The alternative to IPv6 to work around the problem with NAT. And in fact that is the only way, because setting up IPv6 is useless because less than 1% use it while setting up a NAT-based solution, no matter how ugly, will get used and will get you some return of investment. And you know what? Because such NAT-based solutions are created everyday right now, they make IPv4 even more entrenched and any IPv6-transition even more complicated than it would have been before.

Oh, and on a private network, which is behind a NAT anyway, there is even less reason for IPv6 - Yes, I do have enough 10.0.0.0 addresses for my home network.

Exactly.

Basically, IPv6 is doomed because it is not compatible to IPv4-adresses.

Yeah, I know that dualstack exists, but the point is that if you cannot run IPv6 with a IPv4 address (filled up with zeros), it is useless.

Of course everytime someone points that out, there is a torrent of responses like this, all not understanding the problem:

• The admins are stupid if they cannot set up dual-stack. - Who is more stupid? The admin who sets up IPv6 that will never get used or the admin who waits for IPv6 to reach critical mass?
• Running dual-stack is so easy that it's stupid to even raise concerns about it - You have to get it your skull that running dual-stack is not the problem at all. The problem is requesting IPv6 addresses, updating DNS-entries and the general chaos that results from all this.
• There is no alternative. Anybody who does not see this is stupid. - Just because the alternative is not pretty does not mean it does not exist. The alternative is to work around the problem with NAT. And in fact that is the only way, because setting up IPv6 is useless because less than 1% use it while setting up a NAT-based solution, no matter how ugly, will get used and will get you some return of investment. And you know what? Because such NAT-based solutions are created everyday right now, they make IPv4 even more entrenched.

What the IPv6-people just refuse to understand is that there is zero benefit for running IPv6 now.

Exactly!

In fact I think they only did the Firefox-LTS version because people got the idea to fork it, not because they really listen to their users. Maybe somebody could threaten to do a Thunderbird-fork...

However, Thunderbird is not as profitable (important) as Firefox. Firefox brings in AFAIK 100 Million/year while Thunderbird probably brings close to nothing.

Seriously, Mozilla has something like 30% marketshare and IIRC Google gave them 300 Million. So they only manage to gain 3% (= 1/10 of Firefox users) with a conservative stable version, then that would be 30 million. Surely that would be worth the trouble.

Is nobody in the community smelling the money?

Obama has already made several steps towards war, and to say that the drone-campaign will continue is just the last step.

People were furious about Bush lies to start the wars. Obama has found the solution! Just don't talk about it, the people at home don't seem to care.

Agree completely. But in fact IIS will go the way of the Dodo. Not next year, but within the next 20 years.

Nonsense. IIS will become a legacy product

The share in Japan, Germany, Russia and many other countries already lies below 4% for many years. But also traditionally Microsoft-friendly countries can turn away from IIS, for example in the last 10 years, the share in France fell from 35% to 5%, in Brazil and Taiwan from over 45% to 15% and in India even from 65% to 18%.

IIS will probably be able to hold out another 10 years, but in the long term it's future is far from rosy.

What about:

4. All the self-hatred is ruining the fun. I mean seriously, when they start to offer counceling for the rapists and tell victims to shut up it might turn some people away from the movement, don't you think? It really shows that these self-hating white "progressives" really do mean it. What is more hateful than telling rape-victims to shut up and offering the dear rapist help to cope with this evil-evil society that did not give him enough welfare-money and therefore made him a rapist?

But can you form a stable movement around that culture?

There surely are a lot of progressives who will defend liberal craziness (especially here on slashdot), but when the girlfriend gets raped or is threatened, the survival instincts of most will be stronger.

Come on, Obama and Bernanke have already shown their support, they are already the 1%.

I guess they have to go to virtual reality because Occupy-camps have degenerated into an ugly multicultural nightmare.

To know on what side an occupy-protester stands, just ask him/her whether he/she would abolish central banking.

IPv6 cannot be introduced because it is incompatible

SOPA is just the latest "Change" that we got from Obama.

Doesn't anybody find it strange that There are no protests against Obama's wars?

Must not criticize this Nobel Peace Price winner, it would make quite a lot of people feel very stupid when they first treat him as the next messiah ("Jesus was also a community organizer", remember?) and then critizise him.

Yeah, 'cause nobody ever criticizes Obama.

Liberals detest him almost as much as right-wing radio talkshow hosts do.

I won't be voting for him, because his silence is effectively an endorsement of the previous administration's war crimes.

People at debian, Linux Mint, etc.:

All you have to do is fork Firefox, fix the release schedule and earn many millions.

When you look at how fast Libreoffice has taken over from OpenOffice, a sane version of Firefox (like Icecat) could get 10% marketshare within a year, which translates into about 100 million per year.

Doesn't anybody find it strange that There are no protests against Obama's wars?

Must not criticize this Nobel Peace Price winner, it would make quite a lot of people feel very stupid when they first treat him as the next messiah ("Jesus was also a community organizer", remember?) and then critizise him.

Sure, as soon as "him" comes forward. Tell me, do you see any "hims" in the 2012 Presidential race so far?

Well, CNN has publicly admitted that they want to kick out Ron Paul of the race.

That's because he has a consistent voting record of voting against government growth and wars.

The sad thing is that everytime I bring up this massive scandal of enormeous proportions, I only get a shrug or something like "it's always been that way" as a response.

But in fact, Richard Nixon was impeached for far less and while certainly there was corruption before it seems to have gotten out of hand with the Bush/Obama bailouts.

Yeah, right, those stupid rednecks don't have enough faith in global warming.

Anybody who knows even little history knows that the side that calls on "scientific consensus" (i.e. authority instead of evidence) loses in the end.

Hey, at some time people even got jailed or burned for deriving from the "scientific consensus".

Microsoft is basically telling their customers that they don't want their business.

http://in-other-news.com/2011/Microsoft-We-have-no-obligation-to-return-data-to-you-

What we need is stability, we need less versions (preferrably one per year or even less than that).

http://in-other-news.com/2011/The_problem_with_Firefox_and_how_it_could_be_fixed

The "old management" has threatened with "unexpected consequences", which in commy-speak probably means "we will nuke you".

Nobody knows much about the new guy, so almost anything can happen.

Or maybe you could have sent passengers up for only 100x what a ticket on Virgin Galactic would cost.

Actually, the Space Shuttle was a vehicle for space tourism almost from the beginning.

Not his legitimacy, something much more important his moral fiber.

Yeah and actually, he is quite open about it.

What is even more scary is that many of his voters probably think like him.

Well, Microsoft said they had "no obligation to return data" to their customers.

You have to be both grossly overconfident and very naive to do business with that company.

And to all MS-apologists: No, it is not the case that "everybody does this". Most companies do provide guarantees to their customers, especially when it comes about handling data. What is the point of storing something in "the cloud" when the company boldly tells you that they have "no obligation" to even give you the data back? Of course there are some things where MS cannot be avoided, but it is your choice to minimize or maximize your exposure.

So when MS screws you over, don't complain. Also I just don't get the philosophy to shut down all servers when some deadline runs out - it would cost MS practically zero to just keep the servers running - but no, they must turn everything off to inflict maximum pain for their (hopefully ex-) customers.

And no, NAT is not a solution.

Well, since IPv6 just will not happen, it's the best (which is not hard, because it's the only one) solution we have.

They still behave like they had a monopoly. But that days are over. The tactics that worked 10 years ago are now hurting them. And they don't seem to realize it.

When the "scientists" say that there is no evidence for warming, but we should believe in it anyway, I'd say it's a religion.

Actually I'm a bit between the tables as I believe that higher CO2 levels might make for a slightly warmer climate, but I don't subscribe to the "Florida will be gone" doomsday scenarios.

Indeed, it looks like we have already reached the plateau - We have warmer weather than we had 40 years ago, but it doesn't seem to get any warmer.

Too bad, I guess I will be modded down by both sides now...

When the "scientists" say that there is no evidence for warming, but we should believe in it anyway, I'd say it's a religion.

Canada can barely manage with two languages.

This concept of yours is based on...?

You should really read this text, it describes the situation in Canada as civil war with juridical means.

After all, why worry when you know that global warming is good for world peace?

So for once, people will not be lying when they say that USA spread peace in the world?

After all, why worry when you know that global warming is good for world peace?

You forget that water does not hydrate

Clearly the "Occupy" meme is being abused now.

Come on, clearly you don't know what occupy is about.

I mean, Obama and Bernanke as part of the 99%? Is there anybody who believes this nonsense?

If you look for somebody who is hated by the 1% and unfairly treated and ignored by the media, look at Ron Paul.

Also, learn Russian.

Do you think that Obama is caring about what happens after the 2012 election? Does any politician except maybe Ron Paul? *Only* the capitalist part of our culture cares about the future because only the capitalist part can inherit it to their children. The socialist part (i.e. state) is taking up huge debts, causing huge ecological damage and in general does not really care much about anything beyound the next election. Why? Because why should a president solve a problem that will emerge when another president is in office? Nope.

But don't worry, we will run out of oil anyway. Chances are, you are much more likely to freeze to death when the oil becomes too expensive for heating than anything about "climate change".

The problem is that there is no benefit in using IPv6 as long as there are no IPv6-only services.

Therefore, it is unlikely that IPv6 can be rolled out successfully.

Are you living in a reality-distortion field?

Actually, there were a lot of antiwar-demonstrations against Bush and I don't recall anybody calling him a "war hero". (Can you cite a source for that outrageous claim?)

In fact it's completely reverse: Bush's illegal wars get critizised (and rightly so) and of course he lied about them. Obama on the other hand does not get critizised and doesn't even bother to tell about it.