Seriously the iphone3gs was the perfect iphone in the hand.
If I could have one iphone it would be a iphone3gs with iphone 7 upgrades.
Did the iPhone 3 GS have the amount of storage that an iPhone 7 has - like 32GB? Usually, the reason an iToy can't be upgraded is the storage. I had a first generation iPod Touch (8GB) that stopped at iOS 4.3, and my iPad Mini, which has 16GB, has stopped at iOS 9.3. I have an iPhone 7 w/ 128GB, and I don't think there will be an iOS version that it won't support.
Aside from Samsung, one does have the Google Pixel and other Android phones. Windows Phones are almost dead - unless and until we see what the 'Surface Phone' is really like, and what sort of apps it attracts.
Problem is that people just have no idea about how to leave well enough alone. They think that people get bored looking at the same layout, and then apply changes that are majorly habit altering
I myself have an iPhone 7, and since it has enough storage (128GB), I don't anticipate getting another one ever - until this phone dies. Only worry - that the iOS update would go all the way up to something like this. Once a sweet spot has been reached, leave it alone
It's also remarkable how many computing conventions used today were introduced during those earliest days.
What would be remarkable is if people actually acknowledged that most of those conventions existed well before the Macintosh. Instead, what we'll most likely get are a lot comments from clueless Mac fanboys who think Apple invented everything in the computer except the electricity.
Maybe the Internet Archive could address this by including emulators for computers dating back to the ENIAC
Uh, that's a common abbreviation for 'By the way' and has been in use on Usenet since the 90s - long before SMS. Just b'cos you're unaware of it doesn't mean that other people who aren't should be snuffed out of existence by the whims of thugs like you
Afrinic is the internet registry of ALL Africa, including Madagascar and some Indian Ocean Islands like Mauritius. It's not a national registry of Botswana.
The wildcard usually used is *. One could use # to denote the version number, or ? if one wants to indicate a single character wildcard. But ^ denotes 'control', like ^t being 'control-tab'. So the critic of this usage was on perfectly solid ground
The closest thing to any inquisition in this day & age is shariah courts in most Muslim countries. Whose people are generally not online to begin with.
Aren't most national internet registries run by the governments? It may or may not be the case in Western countries, but I'd imagine that in Africa and Asia, it would. In which case, if the RIR were to deny IP blocks to a certain country's government, that would mean that their internet registry wouldn't get it either, and therefore, neither would anybody else in that country.
He bombed Syria b'cos that pretty daughter of his came w/ pictures of those dead gassed babies, telling him, 'Daddy, do something'. So he called Gen Mattis and the rest was history. Somehow, forgot his own campaign points of what would Assad's replacements look like.
It would also cover any transfer of address space to those entities from others. That withdrawal of services would escalate if the country continued to pull the plug on internet access. Under the proposal: "In the event of a government performing three or more such shutdowns in a period of 10 years -- all resources to the aforementioned entities shall be revoked and no allocations to said entities shall occur for a period of 5 years."
Is this even doable? If it is, why wasn't it arbitarily done by the IANA globally for ALL IPv4 addresses? That way, it could have reallocated both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses to everybody, so that everybody can be comfortably dual stacked, and get an opportunity to migrate to IPv6 completely without any pain or forced expense.
Talking about Africa, Afrinic some years ago decided to delay its IPv6 migration, since most Africa specific content is still there only on IPv4. Also, the demands on IPv4 there are light enough that that is the one geography that's not been under pressure to migrate.
Moving to IPv6 should make things easier, one would think. Right now, under IPv4, they have already entered phase 1 of IPv4 exhaustion. Once they're busy distributing IPv6, they could distribute it directly to organizations, I'd think. Are there any laws that restrict RIRs to assigning IP addresses only to national IP registries, or are they at liberty to assign them directly to ISPs? If no, then Afrinic could directly assign a/16 to say, an organization in Zaire, and bypass their regime.
Being able to blame Internet disconnection on external forces would just be icing on the cake.
What we really ought to do is declare free communication a human right (though I pity the person trying to figure out language allowing the suppression of dangerous misinformation, harassment, incitement to violence, etc.), then make damn sure the borders stay 'information porous'.
Just like beaming propaganda radio or television, we ought to be forcing free information flow on tyrannical regimes... at home and abroad. A government tries to lock things down, and the rest of the world should be working on whatever is practical for getting packets in and out of the 'no communication' zone.
I would say that the authoritarian authorities in these countries want their populaces to be cut off from the internet, but they themselves want to continue enjoying it. If this proposal is adapted, then no new addresses will be available to even supporters of the regimes, such as government officials. And if 10 years pass and the addresses are recalled, that would really dry them up. Assuming that they don't know tunneling, or other such techniques.
One thing hardly has anything to do w/ the other - and that's w/o touching your mixed metaphors regarding the neck massager
IPv6 was designed from ground up to be a replacement for, not an enhancement to, IPv4. Bottom line was that there was no way to extend IPv4 addresses b'cos any fix would have to monkey around w/ the definition of the lengths of the source and destination address headers, and the moment one touched that, every router on the internet would have to be upgraded. Given the effort involved, the IETF decided that rather than do piecemeal solutions, they'd do one cleanroom implementation of the internet protocol using everything that had been learned over the decades of IPv4 usage.
Your reference to cloud computing is neither here nor there: cloud computing can happen w/ either IPv4 or IPv6: it's just that instead of happening on disparate clients that can have any platform - be it Wintel, Mac, Lintel, BSD, Amiga, OS/2, Haiku, et al, where the solution would have to be tested on all, the computing is done on a central server that is controlled by the entity providing the computing service. Maybe it's a good thing for maintenance reasons, or a bad thing due to privacy implications, but either way, it has nothing to do w/ the IPv4 vs IPv6 debate. And cloud computing can be open source or closed source: the fact that it sits on Linux or BSD servers as opposed to Windows servers has nothing to do w/ it.
IPv6 is already on our phones: if you use Verizon, chances are that that's what your phone uses to get on the internet. In fact, for the networks, which have millions of subscribers, but there ain't millions of IPv4 addresses, and NAT is a kludge when it comes to handling mobile IP traffic, IPv6 IS the norm. The ISPs are getting there, although they still don't look like they have their roadmap clear. I have Xfinity both at home & Comcast business at work. At work, IPv6 is what's used to get on the internet: at home, it's IPv4. Go figure!
Reading the summary, since the issue is regarding IPv6 packets that are undetected on an IPv4 network that's unaware of the protocol, it'll only make it easier for IPv6 to be a disguised carrier of attack vectors
Just because something works doesn't mean that it scales. When you are unable to add any new boxes to the network, or when your ISP ultimately pulls IPv4 support due to the address shortage, the only thing that would be working perfectly would be your intranet - your 192.168 network
XP actually didn't support IPv6 out of the box: that support had to be added later.
Saying that IPv6 is 20 years old is misleading, given that only recently have enterprises accelarated their moves to this protocol, and also, a lot of changes happened in the IPv6 spec over that time (e.g. the deprecation of IPv4 compatible addresses)
But if OS/2 was capable of so many things and was so good, why didn't IBM port it pretty early on to the POWER architecture - be it RS/6000, PowerPC or any of their successors? I dunno about RS/6000, but PowerPC had the PowerPC 620 in something like 1997. Granted, it's performance was really poor, but it could certainly have been a test bed for a 64-bit OS/2, assuming that there wasn't a 64-bit version of POWER2 available
Instead, by doing a completely new project - Workplace OS, or OS/2 on a Mach 3.0, IBM created a monstrous disaster that never took off
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously the iphone3gs was the perfect iphone in the hand.
If I could have one iphone it would be a iphone3gs with iphone 7 upgrades.
Did the iPhone 3 GS have the amount of storage that an iPhone 7 has - like 32GB? Usually, the reason an iToy can't be upgraded is the storage. I had a first generation iPod Touch (8GB) that stopped at iOS 4.3, and my iPad Mini, which has 16GB, has stopped at iOS 9.3. I have an iPhone 7 w/ 128GB, and I don't think there will be an iOS version that it won't support.
Aside from Samsung, one does have the Google Pixel and other Android phones. Windows Phones are almost dead - unless and until we see what the 'Surface Phone' is really like, and what sort of apps it attracts.
Problem is that people just have no idea about how to leave well enough alone. They think that people get bored looking at the same layout, and then apply changes that are majorly habit altering
I myself have an iPhone 7, and since it has enough storage (128GB), I don't anticipate getting another one ever - until this phone dies. Only worry - that the iOS update would go all the way up to something like this. Once a sweet spot has been reached, leave it alone
No, that would be the Apple Galaxy iNote 7
It's also remarkable how many computing conventions used today were introduced during those earliest days.
What would be remarkable is if people actually acknowledged that most of those conventions existed well before the Macintosh. Instead, what we'll most likely get are a lot comments from clueless Mac fanboys who think Apple invented everything in the computer except the electricity.
Maybe the Internet Archive could address this by including emulators for computers dating back to the ENIAC
Uh, that's a common abbreviation for 'By the way' and has been in use on Usenet since the 90s - long before SMS. Just b'cos you're unaware of it doesn't mean that other people who aren't should be snuffed out of existence by the whims of thugs like you
Why not just drink cyanide?
Afrinic is the internet registry of ALL Africa, including Madagascar and some Indian Ocean Islands like Mauritius. It's not a national registry of Botswana.
The wildcard usually used is *. One could use # to denote the version number, or ? if one wants to indicate a single character wildcard. But ^ denotes 'control', like ^t being 'control-tab'. So the critic of this usage was on perfectly solid ground
The closest thing to any inquisition in this day & age is shariah courts in most Muslim countries. Whose people are generally not online to begin with.
Aren't most national internet registries run by the governments? It may or may not be the case in Western countries, but I'd imagine that in Africa and Asia, it would. In which case, if the RIR were to deny IP blocks to a certain country's government, that would mean that their internet registry wouldn't get it either, and therefore, neither would anybody else in that country.
Ah, the age old libre vs gratis argument of rms.
The stuff you are describing is owned further downstream, by IANA and the RIRs. ICANN owns the TLDs.
He bombed Syria b'cos that pretty daughter of his came w/ pictures of those dead gassed babies, telling him, 'Daddy, do something'. So he called Gen Mattis and the rest was history. Somehow, forgot his own campaign points of what would Assad's replacements look like.
Except that the country in question won't be able to network either, if the addresses they use have conflicts with IPs in other countries
Reading this part of the summary:
It would also cover any transfer of address space to those entities from others. That withdrawal of services would escalate if the country continued to pull the plug on internet access. Under the proposal: "In the event of a government performing three or more such shutdowns in a period of 10 years -- all resources to the aforementioned entities shall be revoked and no allocations to said entities shall occur for a period of 5 years."
Is this even doable? If it is, why wasn't it arbitarily done by the IANA globally for ALL IPv4 addresses? That way, it could have reallocated both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses to everybody, so that everybody can be comfortably dual stacked, and get an opportunity to migrate to IPv6 completely without any pain or forced expense.
Talking about Africa, Afrinic some years ago decided to delay its IPv6 migration, since most Africa specific content is still there only on IPv4. Also, the demands on IPv4 there are light enough that that is the one geography that's not been under pressure to migrate.
Moving to IPv6 should make things easier, one would think. Right now, under IPv4, they have already entered phase 1 of IPv4 exhaustion. Once they're busy distributing IPv6, they could distribute it directly to organizations, I'd think. Are there any laws that restrict RIRs to assigning IP addresses only to national IP registries, or are they at liberty to assign them directly to ISPs? If no, then Afrinic could directly assign a /16 to say, an organization in Zaire, and bypass their regime.
Being able to blame Internet disconnection on external forces would just be icing on the cake.
What we really ought to do is declare free communication a human right (though I pity the person trying to figure out language allowing the suppression of dangerous misinformation, harassment, incitement to violence, etc.), then make damn sure the borders stay 'information porous'.
Just like beaming propaganda radio or television, we ought to be forcing free information flow on tyrannical regimes... at home and abroad. A government tries to lock things down, and the rest of the world should be working on whatever is practical for getting packets in and out of the 'no communication' zone.
I would say that the authoritarian authorities in these countries want their populaces to be cut off from the internet, but they themselves want to continue enjoying it. If this proposal is adapted, then no new addresses will be available to even supporters of the regimes, such as government officials. And if 10 years pass and the addresses are recalled, that would really dry them up. Assuming that they don't know tunneling, or other such techniques.
Already the case in North Korea
One thing hardly has anything to do w/ the other - and that's w/o touching your mixed metaphors regarding the neck massager
IPv6 was designed from ground up to be a replacement for, not an enhancement to, IPv4. Bottom line was that there was no way to extend IPv4 addresses b'cos any fix would have to monkey around w/ the definition of the lengths of the source and destination address headers, and the moment one touched that, every router on the internet would have to be upgraded. Given the effort involved, the IETF decided that rather than do piecemeal solutions, they'd do one cleanroom implementation of the internet protocol using everything that had been learned over the decades of IPv4 usage.
Your reference to cloud computing is neither here nor there: cloud computing can happen w/ either IPv4 or IPv6: it's just that instead of happening on disparate clients that can have any platform - be it Wintel, Mac, Lintel, BSD, Amiga, OS/2, Haiku, et al, where the solution would have to be tested on all, the computing is done on a central server that is controlled by the entity providing the computing service. Maybe it's a good thing for maintenance reasons, or a bad thing due to privacy implications, but either way, it has nothing to do w/ the IPv4 vs IPv6 debate. And cloud computing can be open source or closed source: the fact that it sits on Linux or BSD servers as opposed to Windows servers has nothing to do w/ it.
IPv6 is already on our phones: if you use Verizon, chances are that that's what your phone uses to get on the internet. In fact, for the networks, which have millions of subscribers, but there ain't millions of IPv4 addresses, and NAT is a kludge when it comes to handling mobile IP traffic, IPv6 IS the norm. The ISPs are getting there, although they still don't look like they have their roadmap clear. I have Xfinity both at home & Comcast business at work. At work, IPv6 is what's used to get on the internet: at home, it's IPv4. Go figure!
Reading the summary, since the issue is regarding IPv6 packets that are undetected on an IPv4 network that's unaware of the protocol, it'll only make it easier for IPv6 to be a disguised carrier of attack vectors
Just because something works doesn't mean that it scales. When you are unable to add any new boxes to the network, or when your ISP ultimately pulls IPv4 support due to the address shortage, the only thing that would be working perfectly would be your intranet - your 192.168 network
XP actually didn't support IPv6 out of the box: that support had to be added later.
Saying that IPv6 is 20 years old is misleading, given that only recently have enterprises accelarated their moves to this protocol, and also, a lot of changes happened in the IPv6 spec over that time (e.g. the deprecation of IPv4 compatible addresses)
But if OS/2 was capable of so many things and was so good, why didn't IBM port it pretty early on to the POWER architecture - be it RS/6000, PowerPC or any of their successors? I dunno about RS/6000, but PowerPC had the PowerPC 620 in something like 1997. Granted, it's performance was really poor, but it could certainly have been a test bed for a 64-bit OS/2, assuming that there wasn't a 64-bit version of POWER2 available
Instead, by doing a completely new project - Workplace OS, or OS/2 on a Mach 3.0, IBM created a monstrous disaster that never took off
That does happen. It's known as systemd