orangeboats

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

Subways are pretty much exclusively built in the cities, and the US doesn't lack cities. The same is true for most countries.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago

Indeed, the Ryzen laptops are very nice! I have one (the 4800H) and it lasts ~8 hours on battery, far more than what I expected from laptops of this performance level. My last laptop barely achieved 4 hours of battery life.

I had stability issues in the first year but after one of the BIOS updates it has been smooth as butter.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

If proper SATA ever goes away, I'd wager that there will still be SATA-to-USB adapters on sale. Heck, people still find ways to connect floppy drives to their modern PCs.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

I use IPv6 exclusively for my homelab. The pros:

  • No more holepunching kludge with solutions like ZeroTier or Tailscale, just open a port and you are pretty much good to go.

  • The CGNAT gateway of my ISP tends to be overloaded during the holiday seasons, so using IPv6 eliminates an unstability factor for my lab.

  • You have a metric sh*t ton of addressing space. I have assigned my SSH server its own IPv6 address, my web server another, my Plex server yet another, ... You get the idea. The nice thing here is that even if someone knows about the address to my SSH server, they can't discover my other servers through port scanning, as was typical in IPv4 days.

  • Also, because of the sheer size of the addressing space, people simply can't scan your network.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

And boy we are hitting new peaks since the page was fixed. It's 47.11% now!

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 month ago (2 children)

This is why I try my damnedest not to write in weakly typed languages.

string + object makes no logical sense, but the language will be like "'no biggie, you probably meant string + string so let's convert the object to string"! And so all hell breaks loose when the language's assumption is wrong.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Private addresses don't necessitate NAT. IPv6 also allows private addresses in the form of fd00::/8, like fd00:face:b00b:1::1.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

.local is already used by mDNS

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 months ago

This is an EU4 / CK3 / HOI4 joke

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I have a 64-bit computer, it can address up to 18.4 exabytes, but my computer only has 32GB, so I will never use the vast majority that address space. Am I "wasting" it?

You are using the addressing bits in the form of virtual memory. Right now. Unless you run a unikernel system, then in that case you could be right, but I doubt it.

Anyway, this is apples and oranges. IP addresses are hierarchical by design (so you have subnets of subnets of subnets of ...), memory addresses are flat for the most part, minus some x86 shenanigans.

Yes they are all "used" but you don't need them. We are not using 2^128 ip addresses in the world.

But we do need them! The last 64 bits of your IPv6 addresses are randomized for privacy purposes, it's either that or your MAC address is used for them. We may not be using those addresses simultaneously but they certainly are used.

Despite that, there still are plenty of empty spaces in IPv6, that's true. But they will still be used in the future should the opportunity arise. Any "wastage" is artificial, not a built-in deficiency of the protocol. Whereas if we restricted the space to 40 bits, there will be 24 bits wasted forever no matter how.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

You're not "wasting" them if you just don't need the extra bits

We are talking about addresses, not counters. An inherently hierarchical one at that (i.e. it goes from top to bottom using up all bits). If you don't use the bits you are actually wasting them.

you can gradually make the other bits available in the form of more octets

So why didn't we make other bits available for IPv4 gradually? Yeah, same issue as that: Forwards compatibility. If you meant that this "IPv5" standard should specify compulsory 64-bit support from the very beginning, then why are you arbitrarily restricting the use of some bits in the first place?

If you're worried about wasting registers it makes even less sense to switch from a 32-bit addressing space to a 128-bit one in one go

All the 128 bits are used in IPv6. ;)

view more: ‹ prev next ›