Why should Facebook files be treated any differently than any other document? Is Zuckerman your doctor or lawyer or priest, to be given special privileges with respect to discovery? You can subpoena your opponent's private emails. Why should they not be able to subpoena your facebook files?
I had forgotten about Privoxy, which runs on a different machine without IPv6. Turned that off and only test 3 fails. Google doesn't want to return an AAAA record for test-ipv6.com.
You'd be hard put to find a dump rake still in use
on
Do Tools Ever 'Die?'
·
· Score: 1
Residential connectivity will go to nat or force the start of ipv6 there? And where?
My guess is that most residential connectivity will go to LSNAT for new customers and some ISPs will force existing accounts onto it. Most mobile will go to IPv6.
Well, when a customer calls in to ask about IPv6, it's a pretty safe bet that customer knows what IPv6 is.
But the ISP's executives who make the policy never hear about that call. They themselves barely comprehend the basics of networking and they certainly don't want their customers to worry their pretty little heads over anything technical. Besides, customers who ask about such things are troublemakers anyway. They'd just as soon we went away.
I'd try using an independant ipv6 broker to verify my ipv6 capabilities, but they all seem to assume that you'll still have a static ipv4 address that you are connecting from. I do not, so using that sort of service is problematic.
Hurricane Electric and SixXS tunnels work for me from a dynamic IPv4 address.
Exactly! Aside from causing the invention of the World Wide Web, what has modern particle physics ever done for us???
It doesn't matter what it has done for us. It matters what it did for the politicians. It gave them nuclear weapons, and because of that they are willing to spend trillions of what was once our money in their hope of something even better.
My argument: you need to take care about two experiments, twice as many occasions for something to go wrong.
With two independent methods you are more likely to detect errors. Problem is, you have to get them to agree.
what's wrong with the Watt balance alone?
Nothing. There is nothing wrong with the Avogadro approach, either. Problem is, they don't agree. Therefor at least one of them is wrong. If you choose one arbitrarily you have a 50% chance of being wrong. If you average them you have a 100% chance of being wrong.
That's essentially what they are doing in one of the methods (except for using silicon instead of oxygen). Problem is that should, according to theory, give the same result as the watt balance method. It doesn't.
Slashdot Mirror
Why should Facebook files be treated any differently than any other document? Is Zuckerman your doctor or lawyer or priest, to be given special privileges with respect to discovery? You can subpoena your opponent's private emails. Why should they not be able to subpoena your facebook files?
You can subnet however you want but some equipment may not support subnetting a /64 out of the box.
No, all are routable.
> http://www.rowserakes.com/dumprake.html
That's... amazing. Do those people make a hayloader as well?
> Still the best way to rake cut hay.
I'll stick with my side rakes.
I know of none who do. The Amish are not who you think they are.
> You can't call a line infinite if you've found one end of it.
Of course you can. Consider a list of the natural numbers, for example.
> Still a /64 seems absurdly large for one end user.
After all, there are only 18 quintillion /64s. Wouldn't want to waste any.
Yes. Then you get into crawling horrors such as multi-level NAT and aplication-level gateways.
> It appears that your tunnel doesn't work right.
I had forgotten about Privoxy, which runs on a different machine without IPv6. Turned that off and only test 3 fails. Google doesn't want to return an AAAA record for test-ipv6.com.
n/t
My guess is that most residential connectivity will go to LSNAT for new customers and some ISPs will force existing accounts onto it. Most mobile will go to IPv6.
But the ISP's executives who make the policy never hear about that call. They themselves barely comprehend the basics of networking and they certainly don't want their customers to worry their pretty little heads over anything technical. Besides, customers who ask about such things are troublemakers anyway. They'd just as soon we went away.
Hurricane Electric and SixXS tunnels work for me from a dynamic IPv4 address.
2, 3, 6, and 7 fail. The doofus "lameness filter" won't let me post the results.
They assume that none of their customers are able to verify anything or have ever heard of IPv6.
Because it would cost more to reallocate those underused /8s than to roll out IPv6 to the same number of users.
I get 7/10 with a working SixXS tunnel and 8.8.8.8 as nameserver.
For instance, by postulating "observers" who can collapse the wave function just by looking at it.
SixXS
Hurricane Electric
And others.
It doesn't matter what it has done for us. It matters what it did for the politicians. It gave them nuclear weapons, and because of that they are willing to spend trillions of what was once our money in their hope of something even better.
And the simplest theory is the one that does not collapse the wave function.
Been tried (as has ion deposition). Not possible to do precisely enough.
Yes.
With two independent methods you are more likely to detect errors. Problem is, you have to get them to agree.
Nothing. There is nothing wrong with the Avogadro approach, either. Problem is, they don't agree. Therefor at least one of them is wrong. If you choose one arbitrarily you have a 50% chance of being wrong. If you average them you have a 100% chance of being wrong.
> Are scientists dumber than I am?
Quite the contrary. "Journalists", on the other hand...
That's essentially what they are doing in one of the methods (except for using silicon instead of oxygen). Problem is that should, according to theory, give the same result as the watt balance method. It doesn't.