It feels like you are constantly moving goal posts here. Your original statement was it will die a slow and quiet death. Are you now saying that this mobile use case will start to switch back to IPv4? It may not kill IPv4, like was initially planned, but it's not going away.

Apologies maybe slow death was the wrong phrase. I did mean that, but only in the non-mobile space. Obviously mobile device networks have made good use of IPv6 and will continue to.

However In another thread it was argued that when IPv4 addresses become very expensive, that could trigger a big shift to IPv6. I agree with this statement and so IMO it is possible that IPv6 may well become ubiquitous in the future.

When usage is increasing rapidly and is literally ~ 50% of the entire planet right now, how is ANY kind of 'death' a useful descriptor?

IPv4 is the one that descriptor belongs on, eh?

No I dont agree at all.

Usage is in no way 'rapidly increasing', in fact the google graph everyone is touting around shows that it has taken over 10 years to not even get to 50%. It also shows it is slowing down, the curve is starting to become less steep.

When Maximum possible IPv6 usage is not even at 50% after over a decade and the usage curve is slowing, how can you possibly say that IPv4 is dying and IPv6 usage is rapidly increasing?

Oh, now it’s a problem because it’s been about a decade?

So what, another decade and we should be mostly done?

What do you think is a reasonable amount of time to redo the entire world’s networking infrastructure across 200+ countries and 8 something billion people, exactly?

This is an absurd argument, you know that right?

> Oh, now it’s a problem because it’s been about a decade?

No, but taking over a decade to not even be half adopted does not count as rapid in my opinion.

> So what, another decade and we should be mostly done?

No, as I have said many many times, the graph is slowing.

> What do you think is a reasonable amount of time to redo the entire world’s networking infrastructure

We dont need to, thats the point. All networking equipment in the world already supports IPv6, so why isnt it at 100% usage and IPv4 is turned off already?

>This is an absurd argument, you know that right?

Who is the fool, the person saying what they think or the person continuing to participate in an argument they consider absurd?

You dont need to make everybody in the world agree with what you are saying, it is ok to have differing opinions. You know that right?

I am done now. I accept that you disagree with me and thats fine. Can you afford the same decency or will you continue to tell me I'm wrong?

Hahahahaha

The majority of their foundries are in Taiwan and South Korea which, to avoid politics, is outside what most people mean when they worry about tech made in China (they think about the PRC).

Does it really matter if they take these consumer friendly actions because they know it will get them good press and dedicated consumers? The end result is the same.

Like you touched on, for whatever reason, most large enough companies haven't seemed to figure out this obvious truth. I tend to believe it's because it's harder than it looks, once a company reaches a certain size. Now sure, they are by no means perfect, but I'd like to at least give them credit for being far better than any of the competition, no matter the rational behind it.

What if the action, it is responding to, is some sort of input other than directly human entered? Presumably, if it has a cameras, microphone, etc, people would want their assistant to do tasks without direct human intervention. For example: it is fed input from the camera and mic, detects a thunderstorm and responds with some sort of action to close windows.

It's all a bit theoretical but I wouldn't call it a silly concern. It's something that'll need to be worked through, if something like this comes into existence.

Define small business, because unless you are talking a mom and pop shop, my experience is severance is still a thing and definitely not big tech exclusive.

Any company under 50 employees, which makes up 85% of American businesses. And even bigger companies outside of tech usually give really small severance. Tech is basically the only area where you get 3-6 month packages for a standard lay off.

That example is so well known due to how exceptional it was, especially how the pilots handled it. Robert Pearson, the captain, was a very experienced glider pilot. That's something that not many commercial pilots have.

There were also two factors in the landing, that allowed for this to happen. You're going to be coming in really fast for a landing, when gliding in a commercial jet, and you don't have access to your thrust reversers to slow it down. There was a repurposed runway, that they used to land, that just happened to have been used as a drag racing track and had a guard rail. They were able to slow down by scraping across that. It also just so happened the nose gear didn't deploy fully so scraping the nose of the plane against the ground also helped slow it down.

Needless to say it was a bunch of very fortunate events that allowed it to not end in disaster. In any case I would consider it very risky.

And even with all that scraping damage they were able to fly the plane out, repair it, and put it back in service. Amazing.

I would hesitate to chalk it up to just theory, given it was in the NTSB report and they don't really mess around with throwing baseless stuff around. I'd be interested to take another look at it. They likely go into the material science and physics behind this very thing. They're usually filled with gems.

You also have to keep in mind, it wasn't just rubber against asphalt, it was rubber on a wheel that spins. I'm not sure if the front nose gear on a 767 has any brakes but even if it did, I can't imagine it would be sufficient at the speeds they were going.

They could have died. The nosewheel assembly being pushed up through the floor of the cockpit has killed more than one pilot.

I mistyped, as this was Canada it wouldn't be the NTSB but the Canadian equivalent at the time: Canadian Aviation Safety Board. The report is a good read.

Don't forget the surface area of contact...

Rubber likely grips much better than metal, however three wheels have massively lower surface area than the body of the plane, or even a small section of it like the head.

Of course we don't land tireless for other reasons (metal transfers heat exceptionally well unlike rubber, paint doesn't survive high speed impact, and it tends to deform upon impact with anything, making any future flights unsafe), but the fastest way to slow down if you don't care about safety or comfort would probably be to land tireless, if you could introduce some rotational spin, that might be faster (more force directed in multiple directions).

Also, on the note of "coefficient of friction", remember that this number is not just some innate property of a molecule - as the metal scratches the pavement and deforms, its coefficient of friction goes up as micro-deformities accrue.

You seem to be assuming those are "or" rather than "and"

OK, but then by that logic, solar and and wind shouldn't be categorized as clean energy either. Clearly it's a matter of degrees and meant as a useful segmentation for taxation, etc.

Even doing nothing is not "clean" by that philosophy, since you'd did and your rotting corpse would taint the soil, making it unclean by default.

Except it generally is shallow, for any advanced enough subject, and the scary part is you don't know when it's reached the limit of its knowledge because it'll come up with some hallucination to fill in those blanks.

If LLM's got better at just responding with: "I don't know", I'd have less of an issue.

I agree, but it's a known limitation. I've been duped a couple times, but I mostly can tell when it's full of shit.

Some topics you learn to beware and double check. Or ask it to cite sources. (For me, that's car repair. It's wrong a lot.)

I wish it had some kind of confidence level assessment or ability to realize it doesn't know, and I think it eventually will have that. Most humans I know are also very bad at that.

The RAM has always been the biggest issue, for me. I'd almost always prefer to have my larger data on an external system. In my case an NAS or several RAID enclosures. Having the data "mobility" is important. My normal workflow is to have my active work on the system in question and then move it back forth as I finish or swap projects. In recent years, I have never maxed out my storage on my Macs. To be fair, I don't work with a bunch of 4K video editing, or other huge datasets, so maybe that's where it becomes more of a problem.

> And if the virus had totally natural - accidental freak of Nature - origin, why would you give 4 year prison to a journalist who was covering the beginning of the pandemic in Wuhan?

I really wouldn't attach that much meaning to the prison sentence handed out. It is entirely in line with the CCP's behavior in the past. They strongly repress any information or people they perceive as causing them to lose face or look bad.

Not saying this is a conspiracy, but it does make it easier to forcefully cover up a conspiracy if they always react harshly to even small "infractions".