On a grander scale, that how insane conspiracies continue to live on; such as with the 9/11 Truthers. And that likely applies here. It doesn't matter that the facts don't support your conspiracy. All that matters is that propaganda fits the narrative people already know (government is bad). In my own opinion, much of the same applies to the pro-pirate fan base and their anti-corporate/money ideology (corporations are bad).
In essence, the more you can re-enforce the narrative with propaganda, the more the propaganda re-enforces the narrative. It more or less becomes self fulfilling prophecy. So it makes complete sense if you can shape the narrative through propaganda, you have a powerful weapon at your disposal.
Interestingly enough is right. The ONLY reason Christianity was able to take root is because it spoke to the lowly peasant. Meaning, anyone can speak directly to God, never requiring a priest as an immediacy. And so it spread - the religion for the layman. The same thing happened with Islam. You only need priests to teach, guide, and console such that you can one day do the same. Hell, they worship idols despite it being one of the most basic and fundamental tenets not to do so. And that's one of many endless reasons why the Catholic Church is the world's largest cult. They are not true to their own, most basic doctrine.
And in exchange for your official, sanctimonious lies, you get to tithe, tithe, tithe, so the Pope can have yet another gold spoon.
Last I saw, mostly because of immigration policy (which completely excludes illegal immigration), the US is projected to hit one billion by 2060-2070. The number can be halfed if immigration policy changes back to historic norms.
In fairness, the 9/11 attackers gained access to the cockpit because they the already locked cockpit door was unlocked by the pilots. The terrorists were cutting on a female passenger and said they would kill her unless they unlocked the door.
The difference between then and now is that same locked door is now bullet proof with strong hinges to better resist battering.
I thought all this was very well known up front. I read articles months ago about how they did not address the "death grip" issue at all. And according to what I read, the ONLY changes made were a CDMA specific antenna and corresponding chipset/drivers. Assuming that's true, how could anyone possibly be surprised that the same issue persists. After all, I've not read anything which supports Apple even attempted to remediate the issue.
Its basically the same 'ol device with the same 'ol flaws.
SQL databases are just too complicated for the average IT professional, let alone the average person. And their proliferation into even desktop software, such as various accounting packages, is a development that will keep our industry on it's toes for some time to come.
Well, there are DBAs with lots of stripes and then there are DBAs by title. A decade ago I found many a professional DBA to which I could rub shoulders. These days, I rarely find a DBA, who is only in title. Seemingly, more and more DBAs exist not by skill and deep knowledge but rather by one's ability to install the corresponding RDBMS. With the advent of MySQL, seemingly many a web developer fancies themselves to be a DBA. Made worse, most of these guys don't even know the difference between a b-tree or hash table.
Given that many databases implement hash tables specifically because they are faster than b-trees in many uses cases.
Different algorithms have ideal applications. B-trees are a good, general purpose algorithm. When used properly, hash tables can be considerably faster than the fastest B-tree. Then again, used improperly, hash tables can be extremely slow; as you rightly pointed out.
Issues such as ram, cpu cache, and locality, and quality of the hash generator (perfect hash or as close as is possible), frequently play considerable roles in determining overall performance. As such, the one-off, generic performance analysis posts which are taking place here are almost universally wrong; save only where the specific considerations have been noted.
Time and time again, the question of Oracle-like hints for PostgreSQL pops up on the PostgreSQL mailing lists. I thought I share some links as I find the topic fairly interesting. Hopefully the DBAs out there will too.
I've not read the book but have read comments from several developers who contribute to PostgreSQL. All comments I've read on this book give it a strong thumbs up.
Take it or leave it, but based on feedback from the people who know the internals of PostgreSQL, this book is worth owning if PostgreSQL is important to you in the least.
Nice to see someone that knows what the hell they are talking about.
As for the "first to sight" rule which was being addressed, that really stems from entry of aircraft carriers. Meaning, the first to be sighted was frequently the first to be sunk. I never heard of it being applied outside of that context.
Time in flight for an artillery shell ranges widely. I've heard numbers ranging from 10 - 60 seconds with something like 30 seconds on average. Any object in the air that long is subject to wind and likely wind from many different directions and speed during its time in air. To say they were scattered is an understatement.
Even modern, land based artillery can miss its target by several hundred yards. That is, after all, why guided shells has been such a boon for artillery. And even with active guidance, accuracy within 4m is considered excellent.
Now combine a ship on water which adds much instability to accuracy, plus the various wind patterns which are frequently associated with water meeting land and what is traditionally fairly long distances, a fairly primitive ballistic computers, no guided munitions, and much larger variations in powder than we have today, anyone who says battleships were 99% accurate is completely delusional. And that's why artillery was not uncommon to rain down on those who called it in.
There is no basis for that statement. With your logic, as web traffic grows for any site, all ad revenue is just enough to cover growth. Realistically we know such a notion is idiotic and it simply doesn't work that way.
As I originally said, contrary to your wild and completely unreasonable guesses, the only reasonable assumption is they were making a fair bit of profit and have an encouraging growth outlook.
Unless you have hard numbers, you assumptions not only don't add up, but fly in the face of back of the napkin math.
The data point is best completely ignored. Outages like that do periodically occur and are well documented. Furthermore, they have occurred long before 4G was deployed. Such a failure could have been anything from wiring problem, faulty antenna, or even a software glitch.
But, it says it happened 5.6 miles from the transmitter, it almost certainly means the article is completely confused. Which if true, means GPS IS NOT BEING JAMMED. PERIOD. For them to be that close to a transmitter means they are in space, which simply isn't likely. Likely, they are talking about WAAS, which is not GPS in of itself. Rather, WAAS is ground based signal correction/enhancement which is used to increase GPS accuracy; but GPS still works without it.
If in fact 4G interferes with WAAS, expect the FCC force 4G to new frequencies as without WAAS, some GPS IFR aviation approaches can not be legally or safely performed. Simply put, air safety and speed is likely to trump high speed wireless broadband. Worst case this means some approaches may become obsoleted and unlikely to affect anyone else other than pilots.
If this is true it means the up and coming cash cow and one of the largest payola maker for representatives is now default for US. Yes, that means UAVs are now unsafe for operation. That also means IFR aviation traffic in inclement weather is many cases is now impossible. It means the entire GPS and navigation markets have been destroyed.
Simply put, if in fact there is any proof that GPS can be compromised by 4G deployment, the FCC will be forced to move 4G to another frequency. Period.
Can you imagine headline, "FCC sued for string of airliner crashes - negligent homicide charges filed against head." And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
No bones about it. *IF* its even remotely true, 4G would be forced to change. Otherwise both safety of the masses and economic damage is just too massive to ignore. Not to mention the possibility of criminally negligent charges.
The Pirate pay makes no money as result of the files being shared
Factually incorrect. They are generating revenue from content. That's how EVERYONE generates revenue from ads. You MUST have content. In their case, content is usually someone else's property. That means they absolutely are making money as a result of files being shared; as that's the content. In short, there is no difference. They are making their money from the trade of someone else's property. The only real distinction is who is paying them (end users verses advertisers).
Actually, no speculation is needed. Over the years large monetary offers of cash have been tossed around for obtaining Pirate Bay. If Pirate Bay was not generating a profit, its extremely unlikely such offers would exist. But, one could assume they intended to monetize the services, which is certainly possible.
Furthermore, its extremely unlikely they would operate Pirate Bay at a loss for such a long duration. And its even more unlikely that Pirate Bay would exactly break even, thusly not providing for profit. As such, the ONLY reasonable assumption is they were making money left and right. And unless pirates have figures which contradict such extremely reasonable assumptions, any statement to the contrary is borderline bullshit.
You're missing the point. Knowing full well he'd be targeted, perhaps he didn't care and hoped to create a trail which would lead to yet more work. The degree of disclosure and penetration really doesn't matter if it allows for continued reciprocal discovery and as a result, arrests.
And what you're ascribing as an "elaborate ruse", could really be, indifference and a desire to get more work.
As a side note, just about every branch of military and three lettered organization is well documented to use such ploys.
Countlessly, I've seen friends mask horrible insights into their other's behavior because they like sex. The expression, "love is blind", is completely true; albeit, with "sex is blind", to be far more accurate. All too often, so long as sex is involved, people absolutely refuse to critically review the compatibility of their mate. All too often, their search for compatibility starts and ends at body parts.
The result really isn't surprising because they are taking all of their cues from society. Society very clearly tells men to hunt sex. Sex is a prize and women are a necessity of that prize. Society very clearly tells women to use sex as a weapon and to clue men as harshly as possible when you can't otherwise manipulate your way. Which basically means, from day one they are not only using each other, but manipulating each other. Their relationship has absolutely no basis of compatibility. Hardly surprising that selfish, manipulative people, who refuse to examine their relationship beyond body part compatibility, have such horribly failures in their relationship.
And as a side note, the often portrayed, "strong, black women, relationship godess", is the perfect recipe to completely destroy any and all relationships. And its not just me saying so. Statistically, black women have the worst relationships, typically without a man, with kids, and extremely unhappy. Moreso, black men are being pushed away from black women by black women. Far too many black women have been brainwashed by "black culture" and especially shitty movies, which teach black women to be whores and alone; incompatible with any self respecting man. The movie, "Guess Who", has a great example of dysfunctional, "black" relationships. I point this out because many aspects of non-black society embrace many of the same dysfunctional concepts, but to a lessor, less passionate degree.
Science says there is no connection between Stonehenge and the Druids. That's largely a creation of pop culture.
Realistically, we know almost nothing of the culture which created Stonehenge and even less about what proceeded it. We do know several civilizations took root afterwards because of burial remains; to wit, we can identify with various known and documented cultures.
For what its worth, I saw a documentary on these rocks many a year ago. They attempted to move a rock using fx- fans, which basically created winds of a small hurricane. They were completely unable to move a single rock. Furthermore, such winds are completely undocumented for the region. Not to mention, most agree such winds, in moving the rock, would sandblast the trail, obliterating it.
Realistically, these rocks are a scientific mystery. Some have suggested the rocks are in fact NOT moving and that its an illusion created by its tail. Along these lines, some scientist say we should be looking for alternate explanations of how the tail (the trail) is created rather than focusing on what appears to be moving rocks.
Better prepared? Sounds like the perfect trap whereby idiots are lured into it.
Sure, a worthless website may have been hacked - but at what cost to themselves? How many telltale signs did they leave behind for yet more prosecutions?
How so? I'll ignoring that your statement is a red herring troll and bite...
And I'll offer that by your own logic, you are stating that IPv4 is mis-designed and a kludge, which the world has outgrown. Since IPv6 fixes an endless list of IPv4 problems, using your own argument, we are better off with IPv6, regardless of your "assessment."
Basically, you're complaint is that NAT sucks and that we're better off by forcing NAT and an even worse protocol on the mases; which completely ignores that fact that if you get off your lazy ass, such paths for a migration can be completely skipped and ignored.
Basically, NAT64 is only a problem when you have lazy people like you who refuse to migrate to a superior solution. First you bitch there isn't a migration path. A migration path is provided and then you bitch that a migration path is provided. WTF?! You do realize that once people have migrated, NAT isn't needed. AND, given many networking needs, is simply not required.
Please don't mod parent up because the posts are a bunch of misinformed bullshit.
The only valid argument contained in either of those links are, "we need a migration plan." That's it. Its hardly earth shattering.
And in the second link I can summarize that idiocy easily: 1) Pragmatically not a problem and just ignorant whining 2) Pragmatically not a problem and just ignorant whining 3) Boohoo, its a problem and can't be solved because I'm ignoring that people have already solved the problem which doesn't exist.
You're talking apples and oranges. Most of your comment simply doesn't make sense.
In order for IPv4 to be compatible with IPv6, ALL IPv4 stacks would require updates and still have all of the IPv4 flaws and problems and limitations - like addressing. Or, with the same hassle, you can update to IPv6, get superior addressing, lots of additional benefits, AND backward compatibility via either dual stack (IPv4+IPv6) or technology such as NAT64 and DNS64.
So yes, as others have said, the migration is a mess, but by in large, the only real problem is one of mindshare - not technology. And poor excuses, such as that article, only serves to slow adoption and creation problems while spreading misnomers about adoption possibilities.
I guess you could argue that articles such as that created solutions such as NAT64, but given that such solutions exist today, we don't have a reason to look back at such articles at this point.
Slashdot Mirror
On a grander scale, that how insane conspiracies continue to live on; such as with the 9/11 Truthers. And that likely applies here. It doesn't matter that the facts don't support your conspiracy. All that matters is that propaganda fits the narrative people already know (government is bad). In my own opinion, much of the same applies to the pro-pirate fan base and their anti-corporate/money ideology (corporations are bad).
In essence, the more you can re-enforce the narrative with propaganda, the more the propaganda re-enforces the narrative. It more or less becomes self fulfilling prophecy. So it makes complete sense if you can shape the narrative through propaganda, you have a powerful weapon at your disposal.
Interestingly enough
Interestingly enough is right. The ONLY reason Christianity was able to take root is because it spoke to the lowly peasant. Meaning, anyone can speak directly to God, never requiring a priest as an immediacy. And so it spread - the religion for the layman. The same thing happened with Islam. You only need priests to teach, guide, and console such that you can one day do the same. Hell, they worship idols despite it being one of the most basic and fundamental tenets not to do so. And that's one of many endless reasons why the Catholic Church is the world's largest cult. They are not true to their own, most basic doctrine.
And in exchange for your official, sanctimonious lies, you get to tithe, tithe, tithe, so the Pope can have yet another gold spoon.
Last I saw, mostly because of immigration policy (which completely excludes illegal immigration), the US is projected to hit one billion by 2060-2070. The number can be halfed if immigration policy changes back to historic norms.
In fairness, the 9/11 attackers gained access to the cockpit because they the already locked cockpit door was unlocked by the pilots. The terrorists were cutting on a female passenger and said they would kill her unless they unlocked the door.
The difference between then and now is that same locked door is now bullet proof with strong hinges to better resist battering.
I thought all this was very well known up front. I read articles months ago about how they did not address the "death grip" issue at all. And according to what I read, the ONLY changes made were a CDMA specific antenna and corresponding chipset/drivers. Assuming that's true, how could anyone possibly be surprised that the same issue persists. After all, I've not read anything which supports Apple even attempted to remediate the issue.
Its basically the same 'ol device with the same 'ol flaws.
SQL databases are just too complicated for the average IT professional, let alone the average person. And their proliferation into even desktop software, such as various accounting packages, is a development that will keep our industry on it's toes for some time to come.
Well, there are DBAs with lots of stripes and then there are DBAs by title. A decade ago I found many a professional DBA to which I could rub shoulders. These days, I rarely find a DBA, who is only in title. Seemingly, more and more DBAs exist not by skill and deep knowledge but rather by one's ability to install the corresponding RDBMS. With the advent of MySQL, seemingly many a web developer fancies themselves to be a DBA. Made worse, most of these guys don't even know the difference between a b-tree or hash table.
Ahh Greg thanks! I quickly tried to find some of the other links but I couldn't remember the article name. Good job!
I'd already read those posts. Thanks for round this out.
P.S. I frequently enjoy your blog posts. I look forward to reading whatever the winds bring.
Given that many databases implement hash tables specifically because they are faster than b-trees in many uses cases.
Different algorithms have ideal applications. B-trees are a good, general purpose algorithm. When used properly, hash tables can be considerably faster than the fastest B-tree. Then again, used improperly, hash tables can be extremely slow; as you rightly pointed out.
Issues such as ram, cpu cache, and locality, and quality of the hash generator (perfect hash or as close as is possible), frequently play considerable roles in determining overall performance. As such, the one-off, generic performance analysis posts which are taking place here are almost universally wrong; save only where the specific considerations have been noted.
The right answer is - it depends.
Time and time again, the question of Oracle-like hints for PostgreSQL pops up on the PostgreSQL mailing lists. I thought I share some links as I find the topic fairly interesting. Hopefully the DBAs out there will too.
Why PostgreSQL Doesn't Have Query Hints
Why PostgreSQL Already Has Query Hints
Plan Tuner - Ripped from the above link
And in case you don't know, this is a great place to stay current with PostgreSQL development and technology.
Please don't feed the trolls.
Please moderate parent post into oblivion.
I've not read the book but have read comments from several developers who contribute to PostgreSQL. All comments I've read on this book give it a strong thumbs up.
Take it or leave it, but based on feedback from the people who know the internals of PostgreSQL, this book is worth owning if PostgreSQL is important to you in the least.
Nice to see someone that knows what the hell they are talking about.
As for the "first to sight" rule which was being addressed, that really stems from entry of aircraft carriers. Meaning, the first to be sighted was frequently the first to be sunk. I never heard of it being applied outside of that context.
Time in flight for an artillery shell ranges widely. I've heard numbers ranging from 10 - 60 seconds with something like 30 seconds on average. Any object in the air that long is subject to wind and likely wind from many different directions and speed during its time in air. To say they were scattered is an understatement.
Even modern, land based artillery can miss its target by several hundred yards. That is, after all, why guided shells has been such a boon for artillery. And even with active guidance, accuracy within 4m is considered excellent.
Now combine a ship on water which adds much instability to accuracy, plus the various wind patterns which are frequently associated with water meeting land and what is traditionally fairly long distances, a fairly primitive ballistic computers, no guided munitions, and much larger variations in powder than we have today, anyone who says battleships were 99% accurate is completely delusional. And that's why artillery was not uncommon to rain down on those who called it in.
a very small amount of profit, but that's it.
There is no basis for that statement. With your logic, as web traffic grows for any site, all ad revenue is just enough to cover growth. Realistically we know such a notion is idiotic and it simply doesn't work that way.
As I originally said, contrary to your wild and completely unreasonable guesses, the only reasonable assumption is they were making a fair bit of profit and have an encouraging growth outlook.
Unless you have hard numbers, you assumptions not only don't add up, but fly in the face of back of the napkin math.
and according to TFA
The data point is best completely ignored. Outages like that do periodically occur and are well documented. Furthermore, they have occurred long before 4G was deployed. Such a failure could have been anything from wiring problem, faulty antenna, or even a software glitch.
But, it says it happened 5.6 miles from the transmitter, it almost certainly means the article is completely confused. Which if true, means GPS IS NOT BEING JAMMED. PERIOD. For them to be that close to a transmitter means they are in space, which simply isn't likely. Likely, they are talking about WAAS, which is not GPS in of itself. Rather, WAAS is ground based signal correction/enhancement which is used to increase GPS accuracy; but GPS still works without it.
If in fact 4G interferes with WAAS, expect the FCC force 4G to new frequencies as without WAAS, some GPS IFR aviation approaches can not be legally or safely performed. Simply put, air safety and speed is likely to trump high speed wireless broadband. Worst case this means some approaches may become obsoleted and unlikely to affect anyone else other than pilots.
You're right. The report is likely to be bogus.
If this is true it means the up and coming cash cow and one of the largest payola maker for representatives is now default for US. Yes, that means UAVs are now unsafe for operation. That also means IFR aviation traffic in inclement weather is many cases is now impossible. It means the entire GPS and navigation markets have been destroyed.
Simply put, if in fact there is any proof that GPS can be compromised by 4G deployment, the FCC will be forced to move 4G to another frequency. Period.
Can you imagine headline, "FCC sued for string of airliner crashes - negligent homicide charges filed against head." And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
No bones about it. *IF* its even remotely true, 4G would be forced to change. Otherwise both safety of the masses and economic damage is just too massive to ignore. Not to mention the possibility of criminally negligent charges.
The Pirate pay makes no money as result of the files being shared
Factually incorrect. They are generating revenue from content. That's how EVERYONE generates revenue from ads. You MUST have content. In their case, content is usually someone else's property. That means they absolutely are making money as a result of files being shared; as that's the content. In short, there is no difference. They are making their money from the trade of someone else's property. The only real distinction is who is paying them (end users verses advertisers).
Actually, no speculation is needed. Over the years large monetary offers of cash have been tossed around for obtaining Pirate Bay. If Pirate Bay was not generating a profit, its extremely unlikely such offers would exist. But, one could assume they intended to monetize the services, which is certainly possible.
Furthermore, its extremely unlikely they would operate Pirate Bay at a loss for such a long duration. And its even more unlikely that Pirate Bay would exactly break even, thusly not providing for profit. As such, the ONLY reasonable assumption is they were making money left and right. And unless pirates have figures which contradict such extremely reasonable assumptions, any statement to the contrary is borderline bullshit.
In short, you are absolutely correct.
You're missing the point. Knowing full well he'd be targeted, perhaps he didn't care and hoped to create a trail which would lead to yet more work. The degree of disclosure and penetration really doesn't matter if it allows for continued reciprocal discovery and as a result, arrests.
And what you're ascribing as an "elaborate ruse", could really be, indifference and a desire to get more work.
As a side note, just about every branch of military and three lettered organization is well documented to use such ploys.
We have a winner!!!
Countlessly, I've seen friends mask horrible insights into their other's behavior because they like sex. The expression, "love is blind", is completely true; albeit, with "sex is blind", to be far more accurate. All too often, so long as sex is involved, people absolutely refuse to critically review the compatibility of their mate. All too often, their search for compatibility starts and ends at body parts.
The result really isn't surprising because they are taking all of their cues from society. Society very clearly tells men to hunt sex. Sex is a prize and women are a necessity of that prize. Society very clearly tells women to use sex as a weapon and to clue men as harshly as possible when you can't otherwise manipulate your way. Which basically means, from day one they are not only using each other, but manipulating each other. Their relationship has absolutely no basis of compatibility. Hardly surprising that selfish, manipulative people, who refuse to examine their relationship beyond body part compatibility, have such horribly failures in their relationship.
And as a side note, the often portrayed, "strong, black women, relationship godess", is the perfect recipe to completely destroy any and all relationships. And its not just me saying so. Statistically, black women have the worst relationships, typically without a man, with kids, and extremely unhappy. Moreso, black men are being pushed away from black women by black women. Far too many black women have been brainwashed by "black culture" and especially shitty movies, which teach black women to be whores and alone; incompatible with any self respecting man. The movie, "Guess Who", has a great example of dysfunctional, "black" relationships. I point this out because many aspects of non-black society embrace many of the same dysfunctional concepts, but to a lessor, less passionate degree.
Science says there is no connection between Stonehenge and the Druids. That's largely a creation of pop culture.
Realistically, we know almost nothing of the culture which created Stonehenge and even less about what proceeded it. We do know several civilizations took root afterwards because of burial remains; to wit, we can identify with various known and documented cultures.
For what its worth, I saw a documentary on these rocks many a year ago. They attempted to move a rock using fx- fans, which basically created winds of a small hurricane. They were completely unable to move a single rock. Furthermore, such winds are completely undocumented for the region. Not to mention, most agree such winds, in moving the rock, would sandblast the trail, obliterating it.
Realistically, these rocks are a scientific mystery. Some have suggested the rocks are in fact NOT moving and that its an illusion created by its tail. Along these lines, some scientist say we should be looking for alternate explanations of how the tail (the trail) is created rather than focusing on what appears to be moving rocks.
Better prepared? Sounds like the perfect trap whereby idiots are lured into it.
Sure, a worthless website may have been hacked - but at what cost to themselves? How many telltale signs did they leave behind for yet more prosecutions?
How so? I'll ignoring that your statement is a red herring troll and bite...
And I'll offer that by your own logic, you are stating that IPv4 is mis-designed and a kludge, which the world has outgrown. Since IPv6 fixes an endless list of IPv4 problems, using your own argument, we are better off with IPv6, regardless of your "assessment."
Basically, you're complaint is that NAT sucks and that we're better off by forcing NAT and an even worse protocol on the mases; which completely ignores that fact that if you get off your lazy ass, such paths for a migration can be completely skipped and ignored.
Basically, NAT64 is only a problem when you have lazy people like you who refuse to migrate to a superior solution. First you bitch there isn't a migration path. A migration path is provided and then you bitch that a migration path is provided. WTF?! You do realize that once people have migrated, NAT isn't needed. AND, given many networking needs, is simply not required.
Please don't mod parent up because the posts are a bunch of misinformed bullshit.
The only valid argument contained in either of those links are, "we need a migration plan." That's it. Its hardly earth shattering.
And in the second link I can summarize that idiocy easily:
1) Pragmatically not a problem and just ignorant whining
2) Pragmatically not a problem and just ignorant whining
3) Boohoo, its a problem and can't be solved because I'm ignoring that people have already solved the problem which doesn't exist.
Not so fast? How about, BULLSHIT!
You're talking apples and oranges. Most of your comment simply doesn't make sense.
In order for IPv4 to be compatible with IPv6, ALL IPv4 stacks would require updates and still have all of the IPv4 flaws and problems and limitations - like addressing. Or, with the same hassle, you can update to IPv6, get superior addressing, lots of additional benefits, AND backward compatibility via either dual stack (IPv4+IPv6) or technology such as NAT64 and DNS64.
So yes, as others have said, the migration is a mess, but by in large, the only real problem is one of mindshare - not technology. And poor excuses, such as that article, only serves to slow adoption and creation problems while spreading misnomers about adoption possibilities.
I guess you could argue that articles such as that created solutions such as NAT64, but given that such solutions exist today, we don't have a reason to look back at such articles at this point.