This story is entirely based on the idea that "computer programmer" is different from "software developer", which the Bureau of Labor Statistics considers different occupations. It's as though "lawyer" and "attorney" were considered separate professions.
If you want to see how moronic this is, look up the definitions and see where the definition says people with these occupations work.
Where do software developers work? "In companies that develop software"
Where do computer programmers work? "Indoors, in offices."
IPv6 clients (or in theory any kind of IPv4 successor) can reach IPv4 servers via some kind of translation layer (for example NAT64) - so IPv6 is backwards-compatible with IPv4 in that direction.
The inverse direction (IPv4 client to IPv6 server) is however not possible, since IPv4 is not forward-compatible with any possible successor, because it is not possible to encode more information into 32-bit than 32-bit.
Yes, v6 is backwards compatible with v4 now, via dual stack, Teredo, 6to4, 6rd, 6over4, ISATAP, 6in4/4in6, NAT64/DNS64, 464xlat, DS-lite, MAP-T/E, 4rd, LW4over6 and probably other methods I'm forgetting. In fact many of these were in there from the start, so it was always backwards compatible.
You could make a reasonable argument that it has too many ways of being backwards compatible, even.
They aren’t compatible. There is a device in the middle doing a translation for you.
That’s like saying HTTP can talk to FTP servers as long as there is an HTTP to FTP proxy.
The only thing that makes them seem compatible is there is a well formed address space in v6 that clients send v4 requests to. But it’s still v6 and a 64 proxy needs to have an actual IPv4 address to translate the source to before sending it via v4 to the actual destination.
> They aren’t compatible. There is a device in the middle doing a translation for you.
Which was true of all the IPng candidates, and not just the one that ended up being chosen for "IPv6".
There is no way to expand the addresses space (as found in IPv4) to something greater that 32-bits in a compatible: new API calls, data structures, DNS records, etc, were always going to be needed.
To list "not compatible" as a con of IPng/IPv4 is non-sensical.
I'm aware there's a middle box. My point is that the middle box is a compatibility layer which, by definition, has the effect of enabling compatibility (at least in one direction).
The usual "they should have designed it to be compatible" nonsense usually comes from the crowd with zero suggestions of how to have a 32-bit addressed device send to packets to something with an address outside its universe.
Point is that djb was as wrong then as they are now.
Well, finding out the author works at my alma mater the weirdest way possible: recognizing our Class B in the opening paragraph. I still catch myself typing 131.193 when I go to type in IP addresses on the numpad, just a force of habit.
Of course, my home network's IPv4 space uses the same 10 block as the subnets I worked with most of my time there.
DJB point about the magic moment makes sense to me. What is the point of a separate network that has 33% adoption? It has virtually no impact to alleviate IP address exhaustion, and therefore there is no incentive.
The vast majority of that ~%40 of internet traffic is in direct disagreement with said prophecy though. Mobile carriers like T-Mobile, Verizon, AT&T, Telstra, Deutsch Telekom, Orange, (...you get the idea) all used pure IPv6 backbones with NAT64 edges to role out mobile telecommunications without needing double/CG-NAT or boatloads of public IPv4. Each connection made via IPv6 is transparently 1 less NAT session out a public v4 address and the IPv6 design greatly optimized the way the mobile network cores were built out. This is what has driven the growth of IPv6 on the internet (as more users switch to mobile) rather than an explosion of wireline and business users making the switch.
Where pressure is still lacking is in "small" enterprise type case (like most businesses, regional health systems, local government facilities, and so on) where the difference isn't really that much vs networks with 100 million or more clients riding). Only when corps get to the size of e.g. Microsoft do they really start seeing similar value at the moment. Everyone else can scrape by just getting that small bit of IPv4 and forgetting about it for now.
I think this article was written by AI. It claims Amy was a WWII character, when she was actually a modern one. Also it has the usual preamble paragraphs that read like a sixth-grader's term paper.
5 points by dfboyd on March 11, 2022 | parent | context | next [–] | on: Don't ask to ask, just ask (2019)
46 points by dfboyd on Jan 23, 2021 | parent | context | prev | next [–] | on: Please don't say just hello in chat (2013)
I am the original author of the document this document was based on. It was an internal Wiki page at Google written when I was an SRE. After I wrote the original page, someone put up an internal shortlink at "go/nohello". After I left Google, someone took the Wiki page content and [illegally, since it was Google confidential, simply from being on the internal Wiki], and put it up on the net at "nohello.com".
46 points by dfboyd on Jan 23, 2021 | parent | context | prev | next [–] | on: Please don't say just hello in chat (2013)
I am the original author of the document this document was based on. It was an internal Wiki page at Google written when I was an SRE. After I wrote the original page, someone put up an internal shortlink at "go/nohello". After I left Google, someone took the Wiki page content and [illegally, since it was Google confidential, simply from being on the internal Wiki], and put it up on the net at "nohello.com".
Yeah, kinda makes sense a SRE at google would get annoyed at people even saying hi.
Did you manage to fix your stress levels or are you now bouncing around working massively hardcore jobs and burning out once a year, then taking a few months off and repeating?
I took a pay cut, got out of that game. And holy shit, life is more relaxed doing security incident response than SRE ;)
In the early days of word processing (runoff, troff, IBM script etc.) when people used line-oriented editors like ed, it was considered good practice to split each sentence across lines at the boundaries of clauses and phrases, for ease of rearranging them. The effect is similar to what's described in the article.
What really matters is how much carbon you can capture per unit electricity used. Presumably you're going to run the carbon-capture plant on renewable electricity. If it can't capture more carbon per watt-hour than your dirtiest non-renewable power plant, you might as well just use the renewable electricity directly and junk the non-renewable plant.
>The extracted CO2 will then be piped from the collector boxes to a nearby processing facility, where it will be mixed with water and diverted to a deep underground well.
And there it will rest. Underground. Forever, presumably. The carbon dioxide captured from the Icelandic air will react with basalt rocks and begin a process of mineralization that takes several years, but it will never function as a heat-trapping atmospheric gas again.
The only use is in removing it from the atmosphere.
That's not entirely true. IIRC, climeworks have also partnered with companies who can use the CO2 directly (in carbonated drinks, or in actual greenhouses).
The majority of the CO2 in drinks will probably just end up the air again, unless some of it binds to calcium in the body or something?
Yeah that's what I suspect. Apparently some of the consumed CO2 binds with calcium, some is burped out, and some presumably comes out the other end, but I couldn't find any numbers on how much ends up where.
Where did this crazy list come from? Has the guy never looked at an actual telephone?
The following mapping from letters to digits is given:
E | J N Q | R W X | D S Y | F T | A M | C I V | B K U | L O P | G H Z
e | j n q | r w x | d s y | f t | a m | c i v | b k u | l o p | g h z
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
|9
We want to use this mapping for encoding telephone numbers by words, so
that it becomes easier to remember the numbers.
