Nokia had the best reception of any cell phone company (at least, that was their reputation). They made nice hardware. Apparently they have the best camera of any cell phone.
Given all that, they could have competed. Not because Android is magic, but because WP8 counteracts any benefit their phones ever had. Buy an Android with an amazing camera? Sure! Buy WP8 with an amazing camera? Does it even have a fart app?
The thing is... if the guys at cyanogenmod had a ROM for the LUMIA, maybe I could've bougth one, even if there was no Nokia-native Android. Problem now is... nokia hw is MS... and I don't feel fine on giving MS more lawyer-power than they already have.
I totally agree. And also I guess people is less inclined to buy the same thing again because they release it under a new media, when they can get it "cheaper" some place else. The hole equation does not make sense.
Say I have a DVD, paid some 20 bucks. The "industry" is saying that is loosing lots of money because others copy the DVD without paying. Conclusion, so DVD Movie product cost= Movie rights cost + DVD media costs. Movie rights should be a lot you say, as other people are offering even similar packaging for much less, if they don't pay "Movie rights" portion of the equation.
But then it comes BluRay. Now I want my movie library in glorious HiDef. You'll think a BluRay Movie = Movie Rights + BluRay media costs. As you already own the Movie Rights for home use, you'll think you can get a better price. Well, you don't! Movie Rights now seems like a cheap thing that costs 0, as the "Industry" wants me to pay full fare again.
Microsoft has a huge developer base, they are Nokia desperately needs and what MS is bringing to the table in this deal. MS can evidently count on these developers to give their platform a shot, historically not a bad gamble. The foundation has been laid, now comes the critical part: converting these available apps into actual sales and a viable business financially. So far the only platform where users consistently spend a lot of money is iOS with Android a distant second.
Nokia needs people buying their phones. My family has 6 Nokia phones (3 symbian). Our first buy after the announcement has already been a Droid. It's cool with Nokia, but MS? Thanks, but no thanks.
In the team I work in, there are some 5 E71. All are thinking about other brands after Nokia commited suicide (Again, I work with DBA's, Sysadmins, Network Admins. NO WAY they're buying MS *).
I don't know how this compares to iPhone and Android, but 1.5 million SDK downloads, 36k developers, and 13k apps is impressive for a 6 month old platform that, by Slashdot's account, has 4 users.
That's great!. But considering symbian had about 10% market share last time I checked (and going down), MS some 2% maybe? then it's great someone is downloading all that!. Now, they need people to buy their phones, and that's were the hard part comes. Even old nokia users (such as myself) see nokia-wp as something to stay away from, and people already on other platforms don't feel as going back to WP (even more Samsung or HTC). So, the actual question is, what's the market they're after?
I'm a programmer, not a sysadmin/network guy. While I like to think I have a reasonable understanding of networking just as a result of being "in the neighbourhood", my first reaction to "public IP" was, "the device will be publically accessible". After thinking about it and doing a little reading, I understood that this wasn't the case (it all still goes through one point, and that one point gets to say "nope", at least in most setups)..
Hello
I worked with companies with networks of +5000 desktops. The "public IP address" fear doesn't come from the fact that the device will be publically accessible, but that their action can be "publically recorded". One of the selling points of IPv6 is that you can have your own IP address. Good. Now, Companies such as [google, ms that provide advertising and services like webmail and talk to identify you] will be able to track your IPv6 address and map it to the few users of your desktop/laptop on your company. Now, imagine, what possibilities does that open?
Yes, there are cookies to track a certain users with a certain browser. But you can delete them. Your whole company might look to the external world as a few IPv4's addresses now (and you could do the same on IPv6 using application proxies, but that just adds costs). Now... can you do the same with all of the browsers of all of the users on your desktop and even succeed if you are getting a few ip addresses? and if not, then what possibilities are available to those tracking you?
And God no, please, NO MORE NAT. Definitely not in IPv6. We don't need it, and don't want it. It's a crock.
I want NAT as my customers wants NAT. Let's do this: Let's agree on a protocol that allows you to enable NAT if you so desire, and disable if you so desire. We'll be both happy!. I'm sure that a protocols that enables both types of users will have good success.
I hear things like "every device gets a public IP" and freak out
Why? Why on earth? There are these things called firewalls, right....
I'll hijack a 2003 post:
One of the primary uses of NAT is to provide provider (and registry)
independence. It also provides a way to get around ISP restrictions on
the number of devices customers can connect to a network.
Off the top of my head, I believe as long as any of the following are
true:
- you must renumber if you change service providers
- renumbering requires any effort whatsoever from the end user
- renumbering interrupts services in any way
- requesting addresses requires any formal process or procedures
you will have NAT, regardless of whether it is IPv4 or IPv6.
Attempting to legislate behavior through non-binding standards activities contrary to customer desires is a waste of everyone's time.
I hear things like "every device gets a public IP" and freak out
Why? Why on earth? There are these things called firewalls, right....
Yes, there are fierwalls!. Only thing,a lot of people want them to keep operating in the same way (Fw + NAT). They don't want to get assigned an IPv6 address that can be tracked at the IP level and mapped to a specific user or set of them.
in 1991, J. Aron—the Goldman subsidiary—wrote to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the government agency overseeing this market) and asked for one measly exception to the rules.
The whole definition of physical hedgers was needlessly restrictive, J. Aron argued. Sure, a corn farmer who bought futures contracts to hedge the risk of a glut in corn prices had a legitimate reason to be hedging his bets. After all, being a farmer was risky! Anything could happen to a farmer, what with nature being involved and all!
Everyone who grew any kind of crop was taking a risk, and it was only right and natural that the government should allow these good people to buy futures contracts to offset that risk.
But what about people on Wall Street? Were not they, too, like farmers, in the sense that they were taking a risk, exposing themselves to the whims of economic nature? After all, a speculator who bought up corn also had risk—investment risk. So, Goldman’s subsidiary argued, why not allow the poor speculator to escape those cruel position limits and be allowed to make transactions in unlimited amounts? Why even call him a speculator at all? Couldn’t J. Aron call itself a physical hedger too? After all, it was taking real risk—just like a farmer!
On October 18, 1991, the CFTC-in the person of Laurie Ferber, an appointee of the first President Bush—agreed with J. Aron’s letter. Ferber wrote that she understood that Aron was asking that its speculative activity be recognized as “bona fide hedging”—and, after a lot of jargon and legalese, she accepted that argument. This was the beginning of the end for position limits and for the proper balance between physical hedgers and speculators in the energy markets.
To look at this another way—just to make it easy—let’s create something we call the McDonaldland Menu Index (MMI). The MMI is based upon the price of eleven McDonald’s products, including the Big Mac, the Quarter Pounder, the shake, fries, and hash browns. Let’s say the total price of those eleven products on November l, 2010, is $37.90. Now let’s say you bet $1,000 on the McDonaldland Menu Index on that date, November 1. A month later, the total price of those eleven products is now $39.72.
Well, gosh, that’s a 4.8 percent price increase. Since you put $1,000 into the MMI on November 1, on December 1 you’ve now got $1,048. A smart investment!
Just to be clear—you didn’t actually buy $1,000 worth of Big Macs and fries and shakes. All you did is bet $1,000 on the prices of Big Macs and fries and shakes.
But here’s the thing: if you were just some schmuck on the street and you wanted to gamble on this nonsense, you couldn’t do it, because your behavior would be speculative and restricted under that old 1936 Commodity Exchange Act, which supposedly maintained that delicate balance between speculator and physical hedger (i.e., the real producers/consumers). Same goes for a giant pension fund or a trust that didn’t have one of those magic letters. Even if you wanted into this craziness, you couldn’t get in, because it was barred to the Common Speculator. The only way for you to get to the gaming table was, in essence, to rent the speculator-hedger exemption that the government had quietly given to companies like Goldman Sachs via those sixteen letters.
I am writing this text (Mar 12) to give you some peace of mind regarding some of the troubles in Japan, that is the safety of Japan’s nuclear reactors. Up front, the situation is serious, but under control. And this text is long! But you will know more about nuclear power plants after reading it than all journalists on this planet put together.
There was and will *not* be any significant release of radioactivity.
By “significant” I mean a level of radiation of more than what you would receive on – say – a long distance flight, or drinking a glass of beer that comes from certain areas with high levels of natural background radiation.
I have been reading every news release on the incident since the earthquake. There has not been one single (!) report that was accurate and free of errors (and part of that problem is also a weakness in the Japanese crisis communication). By “not free of errors” I do not refer to tendentious anti-nuclear journalism – that is quite normal these days. By “not free of errors” I mean blatant errors regarding physics and natural law, as well as gross misinterpretation of facts, due to an obvious lack of fundamental and basic understanding of the way nuclear reactors are build and operated. I have read a 3 page report on CNN where every single paragraph contained an error.
We will have to cover some fundamentals, before we get into what is going on.
Construction of the Fukushima nuclear power plants
The plants at Fukushima are so called Boiling Water Reactors, or BWR for short. Boiling Water Reactors are similar to a pressure cooker. The nuclear fuel heats water, the water boils and creates steam, the steam then drives turbines that create the electricity, and the steam is then cooled and condensed back to water, and the water send back to be heated by the nuclear fuel. The pressure cooker operates at about 250 C.
The nuclear fuel is uranium oxide. Uranium oxide is a ceramic with a very high melting point of about 3000 C. The fuel is manufactured in pellets (think little cylinders the size of Lego bricks). Those pieces are then put into a long tube made of Zircaloy with a melting point of 2200 C, and sealed tight. The assembly is called a fuel rod. These fuel rods are then put together to form larger packages, and a number of these packages are then put into the reactor. All these packages together are referred to as “the core”.
The Zircaloy casing is the first containment. It separates the radioactive fuel from the rest of the world.
The core is then placed in the “pressure vessels”. That is the pressure cooker we talked about before. The pressure vessels is the second containment. This is one sturdy piece of a pot, designed to safely contain the core for temperatures several hundred C. That covers the scenarios where cooling can be restored at some point.
The entire “hardware” of the nuclear reactor – the pressure vessel and all pipes, pumps, coolant (water) reserves, are then encased in the third containment. The third containment is a hermetically (air tight) sealed, very thick bubble of the strongest steel. The third containment is designed, built and tested for one single purpose: To contain, indefinitely, a complete core meltdown. For that purpose, a large and thick concrete basin is cast under the pressure vessel (the second containment), which is filled with graphite, all inside the third containment. This is the so-called “core catcher”. If the core melts and the pressure vessel bursts (and eventually melts), it will catch the molten fuel and everything else. It is built in such a way that the nuclear fuel will be spread out, so it can cool down.
right after the "Holding his breath and doing his very best to imagine that the hooker is someone that looks marginally better and smells a whole hell of a lot nicer, Larry dives in. "
I'll put it simple: I have worked with two cards: some intel at work, nvidia at home. The "chess" screen saver when turning, whatever figure should be "behind" when turning, it always appeared "first" on the intel graphics card when it was actually "behind" in the perspective. Always worked on Nvidia. Don't know if that's solved now, but I never had an issue with nvidia.
The thing is that in a NAT environment, all sessions from an organization behind a NAT4 device, all they see is the NAT device IP address, and not the real IP address of the systems the user is at.
If in a IPv6 NAT-less world, you have a firewall, but no NAT, you see what each individual IP6 address likes or diskiles, regardless the span of a "session" . That could be interesting for folks like Google to do "analytics" on what you browse. Also, it could be interesting for other folks if they narrow down that IP6 address to a name.
Another hint: no NAT means you know what each address browses... loads of fun if you can pinpoint specific addresses within an organization! Now, what's all that bad rap about a unique internet ID in the US?
> I won't, since I don't think anyone is going to port scan me.
>Here's an IPv6 address: 2001:0db8:85a3:0000:0000:8a2e:0370:7334, the bold bit is the local part. How much bandwidth is your script kiddie going to have to have to find 0000:8a2e:0370:7334 in the range 0-ffffffffffffffff?
Simple, social engineering: just make some of those ip addresses "browse" a specific address you control, and you'll know specifically what each address is and fingerprint it. Loads of fun if you are or catch an ISP machine and what to "see" the little things some of your customers "browse"!!
Slashdot Mirror
Nokia had the best reception of any cell phone company (at least, that was their reputation). They made nice hardware. Apparently they have the best camera of any cell phone. Given all that, they could have competed. Not because Android is magic, but because WP8 counteracts any benefit their phones ever had. Buy an Android with an amazing camera? Sure! Buy WP8 with an amazing camera? Does it even have a fart app?
The thing is... if the guys at cyanogenmod had a ROM for the LUMIA, maybe I could've bougth one, even if there was no Nokia-native Android. Problem now is... nokia hw is MS... and I don't feel fine on giving MS more lawyer-power than they already have.
I totally agree. And also I guess people is less inclined to buy the same thing again because they release it under a new media, when they can get it "cheaper" some place else. The hole equation does not make sense.
Say I have a DVD, paid some 20 bucks. The "industry" is saying that is loosing lots of money because others copy the DVD without paying. Conclusion, so DVD Movie product cost= Movie rights cost + DVD media costs. Movie rights should be a lot you say, as other people are offering even similar packaging for much less, if they don't pay "Movie rights" portion of the equation.
But then it comes BluRay. Now I want my movie library in glorious HiDef. You'll think a BluRay Movie = Movie Rights + BluRay media costs. As you already own the Movie Rights for home use, you'll think you can get a better price. Well, you don't! Movie Rights now seems like a cheap thing that costs 0, as the "Industry" wants me to pay full fare again.
So, guess they shouldn't have it both ways.
Winphone 7 isn't that good? But which Winphone 7? WinPhone Basic 1100 edition? WinPhone Entry TeenAge Edition? WinPhone GrownUp Edition? WinPhone Enterprise Entry Edition? WinPhone RealPhone Basic Edition?
AS an owner of two Nokia Smartphones, I won't be buying MS phones, no matter what. And I would have a Nokia Android phone by now, if there was one.
I'm in the southern hemisphere, you insensitive clod! ok, maybe next time.
Well, if this extorsion business model works for MS, then maybe they'll get to the conclusion that they don't need nokia and WP7.
Microsoft has a huge developer base, they are Nokia desperately needs and what MS is bringing to the table in this deal. MS can evidently count on these developers to give their platform a shot, historically not a bad gamble. The foundation has been laid, now comes the critical part: converting these available apps into actual sales and a viable business financially. So far the only platform where users consistently spend a lot of money is iOS with Android a distant second.
Nokia needs people buying their phones. My family has 6 Nokia phones (3 symbian). Our first buy after the announcement has already been a Droid. It's cool with Nokia, but MS? Thanks, but no thanks.
In the team I work in, there are some 5 E71. All are thinking about other brands after Nokia commited suicide (Again, I work with DBA's, Sysadmins, Network Admins. NO WAY they're buying MS *).
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows_phone/b/wpdev/archive/2011/03/30/a-year-later-the-windows-phone-7-numbers-that-matter.aspx
I don't know how this compares to iPhone and Android, but 1.5 million SDK downloads, 36k developers, and 13k apps is impressive for a 6 month old platform that, by Slashdot's account, has 4 users.
That's great!. But considering symbian had about 10% market share last time I checked (and going down), MS some 2% maybe? then it's great someone is downloading all that!. Now, they need people to buy their phones, and that's were the hard part comes. Even old nokia users (such as myself) see nokia-wp as something to stay away from, and people already on other platforms don't feel as going back to WP (even more Samsung or HTC). So, the actual question is, what's the market they're after?
How many home routers support IPv6?
Most all of which support an adequate version of dd-wrt (WRT54GL's, and up).
I'm a programmer, not a sysadmin/network guy. While I like to think I have a reasonable understanding of networking just as a result of being "in the neighbourhood", my first reaction to "public IP" was, "the device will be publically accessible". After thinking about it and doing a little reading, I understood that this wasn't the case (it all still goes through one point, and that one point gets to say "nope", at least in most setups). .
Hello I worked with companies with networks of +5000 desktops. The "public IP address" fear doesn't come from the fact that the device will be publically accessible, but that their action can be "publically recorded". One of the selling points of IPv6 is that you can have your own IP address. Good. Now, Companies such as [google, ms that provide advertising and services like webmail and talk to identify you] will be able to track your IPv6 address and map it to the few users of your desktop/laptop on your company. Now, imagine, what possibilities does that open?
Yes, there are cookies to track a certain users with a certain browser. But you can delete them. Your whole company might look to the external world as a few IPv4's addresses now (and you could do the same on IPv6 using application proxies, but that just adds costs). Now... can you do the same with all of the browsers of all of the users on your desktop and even succeed if you are getting a few ip addresses? and if not, then what possibilities are available to those tracking you?
And God no, please, NO MORE NAT. Definitely not in IPv6. We don't need it, and don't want it. It's a crock.
I want NAT as my customers wants NAT. Let's do this: Let's agree on a protocol that allows you to enable NAT if you so desire, and disable if you so desire. We'll be both happy!. I'm sure that a protocols that enables both types of users will have good success.
I hear things like "every device gets a public IP" and freak out
Why? Why on earth? There are these things called firewalls, right....
I'll hijack a 2003 post:
One of the primary uses of NAT is to provide provider (and registry) independence. It also provides a way to get around ISP restrictions on the number of devices customers can connect to a network.
Off the top of my head, I believe as long as any of the following are true: - you must renumber if you change service providers - renumbering requires any effort whatsoever from the end user - renumbering interrupts services in any way - requesting addresses requires any formal process or procedures
you will have NAT, regardless of whether it is IPv4 or IPv6.
Attempting to legislate behavior through non-binding standards activities contrary to customer desires is a waste of everyone's time.
I hear things like "every device gets a public IP" and freak out
Why? Why on earth? There are these things called firewalls, right....
Yes, there are fierwalls!. Only thing,a lot of people want them to keep operating in the same way (Fw + NAT). They don't want to get assigned an IPv6 address that can be tracked at the IP level and mapped to a specific user or set of them.
So this CPU accelerates ssh? So it's a Linux/BSD/*ix accelerator? Microsoft won't be happy.
You mean to do this: http://www.cpeterson.org/2011/03/10/why-gas-is-so-expensive-today-hint-its-not-libya/
from TFA:
in 1991, J. Aron—the Goldman subsidiary—wrote to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the government agency overseeing this market) and asked for one measly exception to the rules.
The whole definition of physical hedgers was needlessly restrictive, J. Aron argued. Sure, a corn farmer who bought futures contracts to hedge the risk of a glut in corn prices had a legitimate reason to be hedging his bets. After all, being a farmer was risky! Anything could happen to a farmer, what with nature being involved and all!
Everyone who grew any kind of crop was taking a risk, and it was only right and natural that the government should allow these good people to buy futures contracts to offset that risk.
But what about people on Wall Street? Were not they, too, like farmers, in the sense that they were taking a risk, exposing themselves to the whims of economic nature? After all, a speculator who bought up corn also had risk—investment risk. So, Goldman’s subsidiary argued, why not allow the poor speculator to escape those cruel position limits and be allowed to make transactions in unlimited amounts? Why even call him a speculator at all? Couldn’t J. Aron call itself a physical hedger too? After all, it was taking real risk—just like a farmer!
On October 18, 1991, the CFTC-in the person of Laurie Ferber, an appointee of the first President Bush—agreed with J. Aron’s letter. Ferber wrote that she understood that Aron was asking that its speculative activity be recognized as “bona fide hedging”—and, after a lot of jargon and legalese, she accepted that argument. This was the beginning of the end for position limits and for the proper balance between physical hedgers and speculators in the energy markets.
To look at this another way—just to make it easy—let’s create something we call the McDonaldland Menu Index (MMI). The MMI is based upon the price of eleven McDonald’s products, including the Big Mac, the Quarter Pounder, the shake, fries, and hash browns. Let’s say the total price of those eleven products on November l, 2010, is $37.90. Now let’s say you bet $1,000 on the McDonaldland Menu Index on that date, November 1. A month later, the total price of those eleven products is now $39.72.
Well, gosh, that’s a 4.8 percent price increase. Since you put $1,000 into the MMI on November 1, on December 1 you’ve now got $1,048. A smart investment!
Just to be clear—you didn’t actually buy $1,000 worth of Big Macs and fries and shakes. All you did is bet $1,000 on the prices of Big Macs and fries and shakes.
But here’s the thing: if you were just some schmuck on the street and you wanted to gamble on this nonsense, you couldn’t do it, because your behavior would be speculative and restricted under that old 1936 Commodity Exchange Act, which supposedly maintained that delicate balance between speculator and physical hedger (i.e., the real producers/consumers). Same goes for a giant pension fund or a trust that didn’t have one of those magic letters. Even if you wanted into this craziness, you couldn’t get in, because it was barred to the Common Speculator. The only way for you to get to the gaming table was, in essence, to rent the speculator-hedger exemption that the government had quietly given to companies like Goldman Sachs via those sixteen letters.
I am writing this text (Mar 12) to give you some peace of mind regarding some of the troubles in Japan, that is the safety of Japan’s nuclear reactors. Up front, the situation is serious, but under control. And this text is long! But you will know more about nuclear power plants after reading it than all journalists on this planet put together.
There was and will *not* be any significant release of radioactivity.
By “significant” I mean a level of radiation of more than what you would receive on – say – a long distance flight, or drinking a glass of beer that comes from certain areas with high levels of natural background radiation.
I have been reading every news release on the incident since the earthquake. There has not been one single (!) report that was accurate and free of errors (and part of that problem is also a weakness in the Japanese crisis communication). By “not free of errors” I do not refer to tendentious anti-nuclear journalism – that is quite normal these days. By “not free of errors” I mean blatant errors regarding physics and natural law, as well as gross misinterpretation of facts, due to an obvious lack of fundamental and basic understanding of the way nuclear reactors are build and operated. I have read a 3 page report on CNN where every single paragraph contained an error.
We will have to cover some fundamentals, before we get into what is going on.
Construction of the Fukushima nuclear power plants
The plants at Fukushima are so called Boiling Water Reactors, or BWR for short. Boiling Water Reactors are similar to a pressure cooker. The nuclear fuel heats water, the water boils and creates steam, the steam then drives turbines that create the electricity, and the steam is then cooled and condensed back to water, and the water send back to be heated by the nuclear fuel. The pressure cooker operates at about 250 C.
The nuclear fuel is uranium oxide. Uranium oxide is a ceramic with a very high melting point of about 3000 C. The fuel is manufactured in pellets (think little cylinders the size of Lego bricks). Those pieces are then put into a long tube made of Zircaloy with a melting point of 2200 C, and sealed tight. The assembly is called a fuel rod. These fuel rods are then put together to form larger packages, and a number of these packages are then put into the reactor. All these packages together are referred to as “the core”.
The Zircaloy casing is the first containment. It separates the radioactive fuel from the rest of the world.
The core is then placed in the “pressure vessels”. That is the pressure cooker we talked about before. The pressure vessels is the second containment. This is one sturdy piece of a pot, designed to safely contain the core for temperatures several hundred C. That covers the scenarios where cooling can be restored at some point.
The entire “hardware” of the nuclear reactor – the pressure vessel and all pipes, pumps, coolant (water) reserves, are then encased in the third containment. The third containment is a hermetically (air tight) sealed, very thick bubble of the strongest steel. The third containment is designed, built and tested for one single purpose: To contain, indefinitely, a complete core meltdown. For that purpose, a large and thick concrete basin is cast under the pressure vessel (the second containment), which is filled with graphite, all inside the third containment. This is the so-called “core catcher”. If the core melts and the pressure vessel bursts (and eventually melts), it will catch the molten fuel and everything else. It is built in such a way that the nuclear fuel will be spread out, so it can cool down.
This t
It is still available on my browser. Got the image from here: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3322650&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=2
right after the "Holding his breath and doing his very best to imagine that the hooker is someone that looks marginally better and smells a whole hell of a lot nicer, Larry dives in. "
enough said.
Last time I checked, IPv6 adoption was under 1% of IPv4. IPv6 has its own merits when it comes to its low adoption.
So 1000000 users can't view Yahoo's Web server...
And nothing of value was lost.
Having Yahoo, wikipedia and mayor news sites is a good thing to try out before pr0n sites try ipv6. A breakdown on the latter could bring real panic.
I don't even have my real name on my FB account. :)
I'll put it simple: I have worked with two cards: some intel at work, nvidia at home. The "chess" screen saver when turning, whatever figure should be "behind" when turning, it always appeared "first" on the intel graphics card when it was actually "behind" in the perspective. Always worked on Nvidia. Don't know if that's solved now, but I never had an issue with nvidia.
The thing is that in a NAT environment, all sessions from an organization behind a NAT4 device, all they see is the NAT device IP address, and not the real IP address of the systems the user is at.
If in a IPv6 NAT-less world, you have a firewall, but no NAT, you see what each individual IP6 address likes or diskiles, regardless the span of a "session" . That could be interesting for folks like Google to do "analytics" on what you browse. Also, it could be interesting for other folks if they narrow down that IP6 address to a name.
Another hint: no NAT means you know what each address browses... loads of fun if you can pinpoint specific addresses within an organization! Now, what's all that bad rap about a unique internet ID in the US?
> I won't, since I don't think anyone is going to port scan me. >Here's an IPv6 address: 2001:0db8:85a3:0000:0000:8a2e:0370:7334, the bold bit is the local part. How much bandwidth is your script kiddie going to have to have to find 0000:8a2e:0370:7334 in the range 0-ffffffffffffffff? Simple, social engineering: just make some of those ip addresses "browse" a specific address you control, and you'll know specifically what each address is and fingerprint it. Loads of fun if you are or catch an ISP machine and what to "see" the little things some of your customers "browse"!!