I agree with all of your points, however, this sort of tickled me in a weird way:
>
I betcha it was a white guy ...
> "Yah, you just draag ze files to zis Auscvitz ikon, and zhey dissapear!"
I can sort of see the meaning you're trying to convey by your use of these...clever bits of "reverse racism". However, it seems to be a case of the pot calling the kettle matte.
Sorry, had to nitpick:-/ I'm not meaning to troll by saying this, but if you are indeed trolling yourself, heh, congrats.
Sure, the IP stacks on the world's machines wouldn't mind, but I'm sure the applications might have a bit of a problem communicating with machines in the more diverse regions of the planet.
First off--Where at, then, in the IPv4 packet header, do you suggest putting the "differentiator"? Oh, shucks, I guess there isn't much space left in the header. (I'm interpreting you literally, here.)
Not to mention, the Internet is about connectivity, and what you describe is balkanizing it all. What if my friend in Zimbabwe was running a web server, and me, in Ukraine, wanted to view his web site? The only possible way to view the web site would be to know the address of a proxy server that was also within the same portion of his network, and possibly, any addresses of any proxies in between, in order to get a single HTTP request out.
The results of your idea wouldn't be far from necessitating something akin to bang paths like in UUCP. Once again, the Internet was architected with the value of end-to-end connectivity in mind, and you are obviously attempting to negate that value.
There is a point in time where duct tape and baling wire isn't so much of a good option.
> IPv4 is just easier for home and small business networks.
This isn't meant as an attack, but how so?
Also, it's rather easy to add a node to an IPv6 network, just plug it in. The router is really the only thing that needs any sort of manual configuration. This is possible because of intelligent route solicitation and advertisement. From an administration standpoint, as most networks/organizations will have at least a/64 delegation, there would be fewer headaches about DHCP leases and such, since the host portion of the address is made up based on any sort of device-specific hardware address (like a MAC address)--Thus minimizing the chance of receiving someone else's address to an anomaly.
You're basically insinuating that it's particularly innovative for Microsoft to continue down the path of integrating every possible feature into a single, monolithic application. Unix's continuity is probably a side effect of each tool being completely specialized to its own task.
I'm far more concerned with aspects of computing that are outside of my control, like my ISP, or the various DNS servers throughout the world, or perhaps even Google. So, my own paranoia is my vote as most annoying adware, and if I am correct, I will have also confirmed my vote for the most insidious spyware.
This may or may not have any relevance to the grandparent post, but for the sake of argument--Packets are packets. It doesn't matter which addresses are stuck on the headers of each packet, since they are all being crammed through the same pipe at the same speed. So broadband providers who stipulate such a stupid improviso should fuck themselves.
For clarification, I believe he was insinuating that NetBSD already runs on those platforms. His question is, of course, will several machines of different processor types be able to share and distribute processor time? For the time being, that answer is, unfortunately, no. However, if we are talking storage clusters, then yeah, everything would work out just fine.
I still use a NeXTcube regularly, as well as a circa-'94 Toshiba Portege 3600-T for wardriving. I mustn't also forget my Mac SE/30, which is happily powered by NetBSD.
But I suppose my Apple IIe is really the oldest. It makes a quaint serial terminal, and plays a bitchin' game of Donkey Kong.
Rubbish! If anything, the wifi makes you stronger (in the USA, anyways)!! I can already type faster after transferring many hours of death metal over wifi! And it sounds better, too! I can also see the crumbs of Taco Bell meat wedged in my keys, now, too!
Really, when you use the ROX pinboard, it's all great. To get the proper feel, hunt down the location of the icons for the icon theme you're using for the XFce panel and use it for your ROX folders. Make sure to set ROX to not override window manager control of the root window.
I'm curious, do you *HAVE* to reinstall OSes, even if you're, erm, running NetBSD or some such? My first guess would be no, but it's unsafe to assume such things sometimes.
At first, it looked like the first sentence said "Car That Can Park Put Itself Up For Sale." It's probably just me, but I think a car that can put itself up for sale is probably more eloquent than one that can't.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's not give the GNU guys any ideas. ;)
Lunar rock is too busy getting its ass sued.
Sorry, had to nitpick :-/ I'm not meaning to troll by saying this, but if you are indeed trolling yourself, heh, congrats.
How can we help?
A majot word up to this and the grandparent post. Posting on my SL-5500. I'm even running a MUD on this, for no apparent reason!
Contributing to what you've said; my thought was, the equation was balanced when that happened.
Sure, the IP stacks on the world's machines wouldn't mind, but I'm sure the applications might have a bit of a problem communicating with machines in the more diverse regions of the planet.
First off--Where at, then, in the IPv4 packet header, do you suggest putting the "differentiator"? Oh, shucks, I guess there isn't much space left in the header. (I'm interpreting you literally, here.)
Not to mention, the Internet is about connectivity, and what you describe is balkanizing it all. What if my friend in Zimbabwe was running a web server, and me, in Ukraine, wanted to view his web site? The only possible way to view the web site would be to know the address of a proxy server that was also within the same portion of his network, and possibly, any addresses of any proxies in between, in order to get a single HTTP request out.
The results of your idea wouldn't be far from necessitating something akin to bang paths like in UUCP. Once again, the Internet was architected with the value of end-to-end connectivity in mind, and you are obviously attempting to negate that value.
There is a point in time where duct tape and baling wire isn't so much of a good option.
This isn't meant as an attack, but how so?
Also, it's rather easy to add a node to an IPv6 network, just plug it in. The router is really the only thing that needs any sort of manual configuration. This is possible because of intelligent route solicitation and advertisement. From an administration standpoint, as most networks/organizations will have at least a
A-fucken'-men.
When did he say he tolerated their censorship?
You're basically insinuating that it's particularly innovative for Microsoft to continue down the path of integrating every possible feature into a single, monolithic application. Unix's continuity is probably a side effect of each tool being completely specialized to its own task.
I'm far more concerned with aspects of computing that are outside of my control, like my ISP, or the various DNS servers throughout the world, or perhaps even Google. So, my own paranoia is my vote as most annoying adware, and if I am correct, I will have also confirmed my vote for the most insidious spyware.
Aren't they always? /me tosses karma into a pool of liquid hot magma.
Nobody really said you cannot use NAT with IPv6. Just thought I'd be the devil's advocate and point out the obvious. ;)
This may or may not have any relevance to the grandparent post, but for the sake of argument--Packets are packets. It doesn't matter which addresses are stuck on the headers of each packet, since they are all being crammed through the same pipe at the same speed. So broadband providers who stipulate such a stupid improviso should fuck themselves.
Actually, that's an assload troy.
For clarification, I believe he was insinuating that NetBSD already runs on those platforms. His question is, of course, will several machines of different processor types be able to share and distribute processor time? For the time being, that answer is, unfortunately, no. However, if we are talking storage clusters, then yeah, everything would work out just fine.
I still use a NeXTcube regularly, as well as a circa-'94 Toshiba Portege 3600-T for wardriving. I mustn't also forget my Mac SE/30, which is happily powered by NetBSD.
But I suppose my Apple IIe is really the oldest. It makes a quaint serial terminal, and plays a bitchin' game of Donkey Kong.
Rubbish! If anything, the wifi makes you stronger (in the USA, anyways)!! I can already type faster after transferring many hours of death metal over wifi! And it sounds better, too! I can also see the crumbs of Taco Bell meat wedged in my keys, now, too!
Woo, try 802.11a sometime...
Really, when you use the ROX pinboard, it's all great. To get the proper feel, hunt down the location of the icons for the icon theme you're using for the XFce panel and use it for your ROX folders. Make sure to set ROX to not override window manager control of the root window.
I'm curious, do you *HAVE* to reinstall OSes, even if you're, erm, running NetBSD or some such? My first guess would be no, but it's unsafe to assume such things sometimes.
At first, it looked like the first sentence said "Car That Can Park Put Itself Up For Sale." It's probably just me, but I think a car that can put itself up for sale is probably more eloquent than one that can't.
Wow, this is awesome !! This is one step closer to things like, watch-sized EMP death rays.
I've always wanted an EMP in my watch.
man i ain't know how it works, i just know that it's swiss, mang