I was trying to remember his name and couldn't. Considered myself lucky for a while and then you come along. Thanks, jerk! (I guess I asked for it, didn't I?)
For me, it was the article shortly after the US invasion about Afghanis retrieving their Commodore 64s out of dirt holes and watching video...it kinda went downhill from there.
My brain isn't working right today, can someone help me out here?
Okay, firstly Enry (630!) the switch from address classes to CIDR actually became the problem. It caused a tremendous blow up in the size of the routing tables. IPv6 is a switch back away from CIDR, not all the way to classful but far enough to control the size of the tables at the cost of 'address overallocation'. Allocating each IPv4/32 independently would have required something like a 30GB routing table compared to the current IPv4 of quite a few megabytes and the IPv6 of tens of kilobytes.
The problem I was addressing wasn't routing - it was the lack of IP addresses and how just because someone has 18 million addresses doesn't mean that all of them are available.
This means that a/64 is the smallest network that will be allocated, as it contains 2^64 host addresses it's big enough for any private network.
It doesn't need to be 18 million devices - each subnet is already dropped by two to have a gateway and broadcast address. It's also unlikely that every/24 will have all 254 remaining devices on it. At work I have a/22 and only have about 700 IP addresses assigned, but the rest are unusable to anyone outside my group.
This is one of the core problems with IPv4 (which CIDR) skirted around. IPv6 has this problem as well, but having more IP addresses available than number of atoms in the sun (or something like that) means even with a ridiculous amount of waste there's still plenty of addresses to go around. Heck, Hurricane Electric assigned me a/64 IPv6 subnet (2^64 addresses available)
You're also forgetting worldwide organizations that need to do a site-to-site VPN. Each site now needs to coordinate its internal addressing so there's no overlap. Going with IPv6 completely eliminates this need.
Well, it is only the English version of Wikipedia. Which means that non-English speakers in the US (Spanish for example) are unaffected, but English speakers outside the US are stuck.
It's a difficult balance. I used to be them a few years ago before I was promoted and they're doing some of the same work I used to do (sysadmin rather than coding). Thus I have the technical skills to know exactly what they're doing and how they're implementing it. I always have to remind myself when they go a different course that it's no longer me that has to implement and maintain, so they can do it however they want as long as the project gets completed.
The payroll tax holiday would keep an extra $1,000 in the pockets of an average American worker — or $40 per paycheck, according to the administration.
Most people get paid every two weeks. 26 paychecks * $40= $1040. Some get paid twice a month. 24 paychecks * $40 = $960.
I do spend a bit of time making sure my thoughts are down properly. Too many comments that come out wrong because I wrote faster than I thought. Also had to wait for the preview to come up, make sure I didn't type anything wrong.
And no, I don't make $289/hour, but I do make a pretty decent amount. Meaning I should get back to work.
> I was paraphrasing you: "Completely taking tax increases off the table is stupid and shortsighted." My point was that tax increases are a red herring because the tax increases come nowhere near fixing the problem.
You were putting words in my mouth. I said nothing about spending cuts since THE DEMOCRATS ALREADY PROPOSED TRILLIONS IN CUTS NOR HAS ANY MAJOR DEMOCRAT INSISTED THAT TAX CUTS ALONE WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM (I helpfully put this in bold and used small words for you). Had I wanted to make a statement about that, I would have done so. Since the cuts were already proposed, I felt no need to comment on them. Until your (ahem) foolish talking points appeared.
I don't recall anyone saying that only tax increases will solve the problem. Democrats offered $1.3 trillion in cuts. Republicans offered $0 in tax increases. Your talking points need updating on every level.
Yes, and nobody (certainly not me, nor any major Democrat) is saying that tax increases alone will fix the problem. Democrats have offered trillions in spending cuts and almost all of the current R presidential candidates have said they'd reject a tax increase of $1 if it was offset by $10 in spending cuts! How can you have a good faith discussion about fixing our fiscal problems when one of the ways of helping fix it can't be discussed?
I...mail..checks to the credit union to be deposited? This isn't difficult - there's mailers I can get. Never had a lost deposit. Get extra cash out when getting groceries for day-to-day money.
Also, most of my immediate family has accounts at the same credit union, so sending/receiving money from relatives is quite easy.
Slashdot Mirror
My daughter is 9 and almost never asks for McDonalds when I give her the choice of where to go, and hasn't asked to go there in a few years.
I was trying to remember his name and couldn't. Considered myself lucky for a while and then you come along. Thanks, jerk! (I guess I asked for it, didn't I?)
You haven't been here that long.
For me, it was the article shortly after the US invasion about Afghanis retrieving their Commodore 64s out of dirt holes and watching video...it kinda went downhill from there.
My brain isn't working right today, can someone help me out here?
Okay, firstly Enry (630!) the switch from address classes to CIDR actually became the problem. It caused a tremendous blow up in the size of the routing tables. IPv6 is a switch back away from CIDR, not all the way to classful but far enough to control the size of the tables at the cost of 'address overallocation'. Allocating each IPv4/32 independently would have required something like a 30GB routing table compared to the current IPv4 of quite a few megabytes and the IPv6 of tens of kilobytes.
The problem I was addressing wasn't routing - it was the lack of IP addresses and how just because someone has 18 million addresses doesn't mean that all of them are available.
This means that a /64 is the smallest network that will be allocated, as it contains 2^64 host addresses it's big enough for any private network.
Where have we heard that before? (j/k)
It doesn't need to be 18 million devices - each subnet is already dropped by two to have a gateway and broadcast address. It's also unlikely that every /24 will have all 254 remaining devices on it. At work I have a /22 and only have about 700 IP addresses assigned, but the rest are unusable to anyone outside my group.
This is one of the core problems with IPv4 (which CIDR) skirted around. IPv6 has this problem as well, but having more IP addresses available than number of atoms in the sun (or something like that) means even with a ridiculous amount of waste there's still plenty of addresses to go around. Heck, Hurricane Electric assigned me a /64 IPv6 subnet (2^64 addresses available)
You're also forgetting worldwide organizations that need to do a site-to-site VPN. Each site now needs to coordinate its internal addressing so there's no overlap. Going with IPv6 completely eliminates this need.
Well, it is only the English version of Wikipedia. Which means that non-English speakers in the US (Spanish for example) are unaffected, but English speakers outside the US are stuck.
It's a difficult balance. I used to be them a few years ago before I was promoted and they're doing some of the same work I used to do (sysadmin rather than coding). Thus I have the technical skills to know exactly what they're doing and how they're implementing it. I always have to remind myself when they go a different course that it's no longer me that has to implement and maintain, so they can do it however they want as long as the project gets completed.
The simpler solution is to buy a Tivo.
FTFA:
The payroll tax holiday would keep an extra $1,000 in the pockets of an average American worker — or $40 per paycheck, according to the administration.
Most people get paid every two weeks. 26 paychecks * $40= $1040. Some get paid twice a month. 24 paychecks * $40 = $960.
I do spend a bit of time making sure my thoughts are down properly. Too many comments that come out wrong because I wrote faster than I thought. Also had to wait for the preview to come up, make sure I didn't type anything wrong.
And no, I don't make $289/hour, but I do make a pretty decent amount. Meaning I should get back to work.
In the 'what is your time worth' category, the amount of money spent just posting this to /. and having eyeballs look at it is WAY WAY more than $3.41.
(me typing this in is likely more than that).
Scott Brown [R-MA]
Way to keep the IT workers in MA on your side.
Well, it may have worked. Depends on if business picks up over time, but it's unlikely it will pick up enough to offset the losses.
You'd hope for increased business. Think of it as a promotion or loss leader to get people in the door.
*facepalm*
$1.3 trillion sounds like a lot of spending cuts, but you think what you want (and be wrong about it).
> I was paraphrasing you: "Completely taking tax increases off the table is stupid and shortsighted." My point was that tax increases are a red herring because the tax increases come nowhere near fixing the problem.
You were putting words in my mouth. I said nothing about spending cuts since THE DEMOCRATS ALREADY PROPOSED TRILLIONS IN CUTS NOR HAS ANY MAJOR DEMOCRAT INSISTED THAT TAX CUTS ALONE WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM (I helpfully put this in bold and used small words for you). Had I wanted to make a statement about that, I would have done so. Since the cuts were already proposed, I felt no need to comment on them. Until your (ahem) foolish talking points appeared.
Inflation happens. Things will always cost more money. Our population is aging, business is not stepping up to the plate.
This will be the third time I say this, and I'm amazed I have to do so:
NOBODY IS SAYING THAT TAX INCREASES ALONE WILL FIX THE PROBLEM. DEMOCRATS HAVE OFFERED SPENDING CUTS. REPUBLICANS HAVE OFFERED 0 TAX INCREASES.
I don't recall anyone saying that only tax increases will solve the problem. Democrats offered $1.3 trillion in cuts. Republicans offered $0 in tax increases. Your talking points need updating on every level.
Yes, and nobody (certainly not me, nor any major Democrat) is saying that tax increases alone will fix the problem. Democrats have offered trillions in spending cuts and almost all of the current R presidential candidates have said they'd reject a tax increase of $1 if it was offset by $10 in spending cuts! How can you have a good faith discussion about fixing our fiscal problems when one of the ways of helping fix it can't be discussed?
See? You're part of the problem.
Completely taking tax increases off the table is stupid and shortsighted.
Radi..what?
My Amazon Cloud player has 137 Albums and 212 Artists. Sorting by artist is completely retarded when dealing with compilations.
I...mail..checks to the credit union to be deposited? This isn't difficult - there's mailers I can get. Never had a lost deposit. Get extra cash out when getting groceries for day-to-day money.
Also, most of my immediate family has accounts at the same credit union, so sending/receiving money from relatives is quite easy.