NFC and cell phone integration has been widespread in the Japanese market for several years. It is supported by all major carriers and has significant market penetration in that market. More importantly, it works with an existing large ecosystem of contactless payments and identity applications. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osaifu-Keitai.
While I applaud Google's pushing NFC adoption via Android, the biggest barrier to adoption will be interoperability with existing payment infrastructure such as Suica http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suica. In other words, what the average person wants is use their phone to pay for a train ticket or a bowl of noodles. If that doesn't work, then the technology is uninteresting to them.
In most other places, notably japan unless you have the money to pay for private parking when you go to work you'll live the life of the 2hr rush, and be packed in, and leave your car at home. But everything you more than likely need is in walking or biking distance, and when it isn't you can get just about everything sent to your home.
Hardly anyone drives to work in Tokyo. Not because they leave their car at home, but because most people don't have or need a car.
In my apartment building there is no car park. But there is a bicycle park. This is typical for central Tokyo. People ride their bikes everywhere. Guess what the obesity rate is like?
This is an extremely pleasant way to live. There are three supermarkets and dozens of restaurants and bars within a ten minute walk of where I live. I can get anywhere in central Tokyo within 30 minutes by bicycle. Work is about 20 minutes away. There is no "2hr rush", whatever that is.
I used to live in a typical American style city with a 1+ hour commute by car each way in heavy traffic. Never again. Not only is it ecological vandalism, but it is a waste of the most precious resource you have: time.
Common sense says you are incorrectly applying your cultural biases.
In Japan, people generally dry their laundry by hanging it out. The concept of routinely using a dryer is regarded as wasteful and anti-ecological. Remember, this is a country where sustainability and recycling is taken seriously (over packaging in department stores being the exception).
In urban Japan, hanging out your washing usually places it in public view. A typical one person apartment in central Tokyo is maybe 40 square metres and there's nowhere else for it to go. Since so many people live so closely together there are a large number of social rules and mores in play. Within the culture, it is totally obvious that one doesn't take photos of people's laundry. Just like it's obvious that one doesn't make phone calls on the train and one takes one's shoes when using the changing rooms in a clothes store.
I know things probably don't work that way where you come from. But do try to understand that the world is a big place. Perhaps you should get out of your mother's basement sometime and see some of it?
I run 6to4 in my infrastructure so I speak from direct experience. You are correct in that it provides IPv6 connectivity over v4 transport. Furthermore it does nothing to fix v4 exhaustion. However I believe you are mistaken on two points:
1. You can have millions of v6 hosts sharing a single v4 endpoint. There is no one to one correspondence as you suggest.
2. None of these hosts (or the v4 endpoint) need run NAT of any description).
What 6to4 provides is an easy way for anyone with at least one v4 address to deploy entire v6 networks. No need for NATs or tunnel brokers or any cooperation from your ISP.
In the long run 6to4 will go away. When most ISPs support native v6 it will have served it's purpose. Right now, it is a key element to solving the chicken and egg problem of bootstrapping v6 in the real world.
6to4 is not "carrier grade NAT". It is a doorway into the v6 world where NAT of any sort is simply not required.
NAT is stateful, 6to4 is stateless. Nat multiplexes using port numbers, 6to4 tunnels but doesn't multiplex. Nat munges headers, 6to4 doesn't. Nat undermines global addressability, 6to4 adheres to this principle.
As you quote "Level 3 switches are basically routers". Actually, by definition, using level 3 information *is* routing. Calling them level 3 switches because it is a hardware rather than software implementation ignores basic computer science. But that's no surprise from a marketing department.
You missed the bit where anyone with v4 connectivity can use 6to4 right now. No need for massive router upgrades or ISP cooperation, etc. Just turn it on. If you plan for a 10 minute upgrade, you'll have time to make a coffee as well. Assuming basic sysadmin competence.
I'm mystified as to why you think switches (which are layer 2) would need upgrading to support IPv6,
Of course, in the longer run, native v6 support from your ISP is highly desirable for optimal routing. But end users don't need to wait for this.
Anyone with IPv4 addresses can use 6to4 right now to provide IPv6 connectivity. Software support for IPv6 is common, e.g. apache, postfix, etc. Operating system support is widespread, e.g. linux, *bsd, etc.
There are no real barriers to having IPv6 public facing services for vendors except rank incompetence.
Books are cheap in the U.S. and people have a lot of room to store them, so Kindle is definitely a niche product in its domestic market. However, in other countries books are expensive and often space is at a premium. Kindle offers huge advantages, and would be wildly successful in these markets.
How does Amazon respond to this market need? They refuse point blank to sell kindle devices or media to anyone outside North America.
Sure, whispernet is NA only. But a USB connection works just as well...
What sane company ignores its largest potential market? And when it does, the writing is on the wall. If I was a shareholder, I would be livid.
So the only question that remains is why Kindle is being set up for failure? Simple incompetence? Xenophobia? Or something more subtle?
As a (previous) employee in Australia, I've questioned some of the draconian things I've been asked to sign. Common responses are "this is just standard.. everybody signs it" or "sign this as is, or you don't get the job". The latter is particularly pernicious since often you are only presented with this paperwork on your first day, i.e. after quitting your last job.
It's good to see courts finding such dirty tricks as being unenforceable. Australian management, being amongst the worst in the world, typically seem to rely on these "techniques" rather than honest negotiation.
We don't even know how many species live in the oceans. See http://www.coml.org/ for details on the marin elife census. Last month, 100 new species were found by one expedition alone. Chances are that we are still only scratching the surface.
So, how can these bozos predict the depletion of ocean life when they can't even count how many species, let alone individual organisms, are living in that habitat?
The answer: they can't. More fucking scare tactics from the green fringe. Leave the real science to the scientists and go back tou your granola!
Some programmers seem to be quite bad at estimating the time required to write and test code.
In my experience, programmers who provide accurate estimates are punished. What normally happens is that an accurate estimate is deemed "unacceptable" and then there is a period of harrassment during which the programmer is "bid-down" with the estimate until it is 0.5 to 0.1 times the original time/money. Then the project comes in within 10% of the original estimate (unless everyone panics and it really blows out).
Now in any rational system, the programer would receive an apology and the manager who fucked up so badly would be sacked. But in reality, the programmer is scapegoated.
Now older and more experienced programmers may have the guts to refuse to to be negotiated down with estimates. But the less experienced have no chance. Strangely, many companies seem to prefer malleability over performance.
Actually, general relativity tells us that time travel in both directions is possible by following a precise trajectory around a massive rotating cylinder.
Slashdot Mirror
NFC and cell phone integration has been widespread in the Japanese market for several years. It is supported by all major carriers and has significant market penetration in that market. More importantly, it works with an existing large ecosystem of contactless payments and identity applications. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osaifu-Keitai.
While I applaud Google's pushing NFC adoption via Android, the biggest barrier to adoption will be interoperability with existing payment infrastructure such as Suica http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suica. In other words, what the average person wants is use their phone to pay for a train ticket or a bowl of noodles. If that doesn't work, then the technology is uninteresting to them.
In most other places, notably japan unless you have the money to pay for private parking when you go to work you'll live the life of the 2hr rush, and be packed in, and leave your car at home. But everything you more than likely need is in walking or biking distance, and when it isn't you can get just about everything sent to your home.
Hardly anyone drives to work in Tokyo. Not because they leave their car at home, but because most people don't have or need a car.
In my apartment building there is no car park. But there is a bicycle park. This is typical for central Tokyo. People ride their bikes everywhere. Guess what the obesity rate is like?
This is an extremely pleasant way to live. There are three supermarkets and dozens of restaurants and bars within a ten minute walk of where I live. I can get anywhere in central Tokyo within 30 minutes by bicycle. Work is about 20 minutes away. There is no "2hr rush", whatever that is.
I used to live in a typical American style city with a 1+ hour commute by car each way in heavy traffic. Never again. Not only is it ecological vandalism, but it is a waste of the most precious resource you have: time.
Common sense says you are incorrectly applying your cultural biases.
In Japan, people generally dry their laundry by hanging it out. The concept of routinely using a dryer is regarded as wasteful and anti-ecological. Remember, this is a country where sustainability and recycling is taken seriously (over packaging in department stores being the exception).
In urban Japan, hanging out your washing usually places it in public view. A typical one person apartment in central Tokyo is maybe 40 square metres and there's nowhere else for it to go. Since so many people live so closely together there are a large number of social rules and mores in play. Within the culture, it is totally obvious that one doesn't take photos of people's laundry. Just like it's obvious that one doesn't make phone calls on the train and one takes one's shoes when using the changing rooms in a clothes store.
I know things probably don't work that way where you come from. But do try to understand that the world is a big place. Perhaps you should get out of your mother's basement sometime and see some of it?
I run 6to4 in my infrastructure so I speak from direct experience. You are correct in that it provides IPv6 connectivity over v4 transport. Furthermore it does nothing to fix v4 exhaustion. However I believe you are mistaken on two points:
1. You can have millions of v6 hosts sharing a single v4 endpoint. There is no one to one correspondence as you suggest.
2. None of these hosts (or the v4 endpoint) need run NAT of any description).
What 6to4 provides is an easy way for anyone with at least one v4 address to deploy entire v6 networks. No need for NATs or tunnel brokers or any cooperation from your ISP.
In the long run 6to4 will go away. When most ISPs support native v6 it will have served it's purpose. Right now, it is a key element to solving the chicken and egg problem of bootstrapping v6 in the real world.
6to4 is not "carrier grade NAT". It is a doorway into the v6 world where NAT of any sort is simply not required.
NAT is stateful, 6to4 is stateless. Nat multiplexes using port numbers, 6to4 tunnels but doesn't multiplex. Nat munges headers, 6to4 doesn't. Nat undermines global addressability, 6to4 adheres to this principle.
Yeah, they are practically identical.
As you quote "Level 3 switches are basically routers". Actually, by definition, using level 3 information *is* routing. Calling them level 3 switches because it is a hardware rather than software implementation ignores basic computer science. But that's no surprise from a marketing department.
You missed the bit where anyone with v4 connectivity can use 6to4 right now. No need for massive router upgrades or ISP cooperation, etc. Just turn it on. If you plan for a 10 minute upgrade, you'll have time to make a coffee as well. Assuming basic sysadmin competence.
I'm mystified as to why you think switches (which are layer 2) would need upgrading to support IPv6,
Of course, in the longer run, native v6 support from your ISP is highly desirable for optimal routing. But end users don't need to wait for this.
Anyone with IPv4 addresses can use 6to4 right now to provide IPv6 connectivity. Software support for IPv6 is common, e.g. apache, postfix, etc. Operating system support is widespread, e.g. linux, *bsd, etc.
There are no real barriers to having IPv6 public facing services for vendors except rank incompetence.
Books are cheap in the U.S. and people have a lot of room to store them, so Kindle is definitely a niche product in its domestic market. However, in other countries books are expensive and often space is at a premium. Kindle offers huge advantages, and would be wildly successful in these markets.
How does Amazon respond to this market need? They refuse point blank to sell kindle devices or media to anyone outside North America.
Sure, whispernet is NA only. But a USB connection works just as well...
What sane company ignores its largest potential market? And when it does, the writing is on the wall. If I was a shareholder, I would be livid.
So the only question that remains is why Kindle is being set up for failure? Simple incompetence? Xenophobia? Or something more subtle?
As a (previous) employee in Australia, I've questioned some of the draconian things I've been asked to sign. Common responses are "this is just standard.. everybody signs it" or "sign this as is, or you don't get the job". The latter is particularly pernicious since often you are only presented with this paperwork on your first day, i.e. after quitting your last job. It's good to see courts finding such dirty tricks as being unenforceable. Australian management, being amongst the worst in the world, typically seem to rely on these "techniques" rather than honest negotiation.
We don't even know how many species live in the oceans. See http://www.coml.org/ for details on the marin elife census. Last month, 100 new species were found by one expedition alone. Chances are that we are still only scratching the surface. So, how can these bozos predict the depletion of ocean life when they can't even count how many species, let alone individual organisms, are living in that habitat? The answer: they can't. More fucking scare tactics from the green fringe. Leave the real science to the scientists and go back tou your granola!
Some programmers seem to be quite bad at estimating the time required to write and test code.
In my experience, programmers who provide accurate estimates are punished. What normally happens is that an accurate estimate is deemed "unacceptable" and then there is a period of harrassment during which the programmer is "bid-down" with the estimate until it is 0.5 to 0.1 times the original time/money. Then the project comes in within 10% of the original estimate (unless everyone panics and it really blows out).
Now in any rational system, the programer would receive an apology and the manager who fucked up so badly would be sacked. But in reality, the programmer is scapegoated.
Now older and more experienced programmers may have the guts to refuse to to be negotiated down with estimates. But the less experienced have no chance. Strangely, many companies seem to prefer malleability over performance.
Actually, general relativity tells us that time travel in both directions is possible by following a precise trajectory around a massive rotating cylinder.