what's this vim shit?
"Getting nostalgic about VIM"
That's for PFYs. Gnarly old Unix admins like me get nostalgic over vi which predated vim by about 20 years.
151 posts • joined 6 Jun 2020
"I have heard of DC outskirt commutes where from the highway you can see your destination and probably walk there in 10 minutes"
Have you ever tried walking for 10 minutes in the DC area in the humidity and 30C+ heat of summer or the -5-10C and 50cm+ of snow in winter? Besides, walking in the USA is a commie plot to bankrupt the oil and car companies.
"When a device has a defect, Apple first goes through denial, then a period of withdrawal where they avoid talking about it, perhaps followed by a bit of victim blaming, then acknowledge it grudgingly but say it only impacts a handful of devices, then as the howls mount, admit it actually is bad enough they have to do something about it"
Remarkably similar to the Kubler-Ross model of grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance.
"Everyone is so complaining and in the same time cannot live without Office or Teams. "
You're speaking for yourself. I've been doing IT for over 40 years and got along just fine without using anything from Microsoft*. Ever. Or IBM.
* This has had the added benefit of never getting asked to fix Microsoft Shit for colleagues, family, friends, neighbours, etc.
No fucking chance. It'll take at least 30-50 years to get a more competent administration. That's how long is needed to get clueful people with a STEM background into the top jobs in government and politics. If they eve do. Just look at that today. Almost all the MPs, senior civil servants, and policy wonks come from the B ark of lawyers, PPE students, arts graduates, classics scholars and similar pond life.
Hoping for more government competence is fine. But the signs point in the other direction. The wildly useless and stupid Priti Vacant, Mad Nad and JRM are still in post despite their protector's resignation.
Some government and corporate enterprises have whole blocks of ip numbers for their personal business use. Whilst useful to them perhaps its time to get the vast amount of unused numbers freed up by requiring evidence of need.
Most of those blocks were handed out long before the policy of needs-based address allocations or the RIRs existed. So it's not possible to forcibly reclaim unused addresses from them. There's no legal basis for that action. Assuming there was an IPv4 address police. Which there isn't.
These "legacy" IP addresses are already being freed up and recycled. For example, the UK government started selling off unused chunks of DWP's 51/8 in 2015: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-32826353. Microsoft bought Nortel's address space after the company went bust in 2011.
Further tinkering with IPv4 address allocations is too silly for words. If all of the IPv4 space was available and could be perfectly distributed/utilised, it would not be enough. ~4 billion addresses is too small for a planet with 7-8 billion people. Trying to get closer to 100% utilisation of IPv4 is pointless. There just aren't enough v4 addresses to go round.
Oops! I misread 240/4 as 240/8 - so shoot me.
240/4 means 16 /8s, not one. So at previous depletion rates, if that address space was available - and it can't be for legacy reasons - 240/4 would last until around the end of next year. At which point we're back where we are today: no more IPv4 and a need to deploy IPv6.
The article says "a new initiative has been proposed that could free up hundreds of millions of addresses that are currently unused". But it only mentions 3 /8s. Which can't easily be brought into use. 3 /8s is ~48M IPv4 addresses. Which is quite a lot less than hundreds of millions.
BTW if there were hundreds of millions of IPv4 addresses going spare, somebody would have figured out how to distribute them by now. They haven't. That's because there's next to no IPv4 space left to allocate. It's almost all gone.
This idea is bat-shit crazy.
There's an unknown but significant installed base that cannot properly handle these "special" /8s. There's next to no chance of fixing those elderly and unsupported/unmaintained protocol stacks.
Even if these backwards compatibility issues could be addressed (excuse the pun), freeing up those three /8s will be an utter waste of time. In the last 3-4 years of IPv4 distribution, the Internet went through 1 /8 of v4 every month or theresabouts. If these three /8s could be made available now - how? - they'd be used up by September. And probably a lot sooner than because the address brokers and speculators will surely snaffle them up.
Stop fucking about with the dregs of IPv4. There's no point. Any effort wasted on that is better spent getting IPv6 deployed.
So you're seriously telling us that either a single column in a database table containing a payment amount, or possibly a hardcoded amount in a COBOL program cannot, in any way whatsoever, be updated?
How else do you think Fujistu, IBM, Serco, Crapita, etc make their billions from government IT contracts?
The ITU whilst having many negatives have managed to largely keep the international telephone network running outside of national politics.
You are delusional.
The ITU does not run the international telephone network. It doesn't run anything. It never has.
It doesn't interfere in national politics or operational matters: local numbering schemes, regulation, pricing, call routing, etc. What goes on inside a country's borders is nobody else's business. The ITU is deeply involved in international geopolitics and telephony arrangements: what is and isn't a country, who gets an E.164 code point and what it is used for, cross-border tariff arrangements, etc. It fact, that's the ITU's core mission - apart from preserving its bloated and expensive bureaucracy.
BTW the Internet is something for the whole world. It's never been an extension of US imperialism.
It's largely an accident of history that global co-ordination of the Internet is done by a multistakeholder US non-profit, iCANN. Before ICANN existed, no governments cared about Internet governance. The US government realised some degree of adult supervision was needed and that body had to have support from industry and other key sectors (which included governments). ICANN was the result.
And while ICANN is flawed, it is light years ahead of what the ITU could have done if they'd been in charge. For starters, anyone can participate in ICANN and be heard. It costs nothing. Unlike the ITU where you have to pay $$$ in membership fees that can only be afforded by governments and multibillion businesses.
Why is this framework so expensive and why has it taken so long to produce it?
There will only be four questions:
1) Are you KPMG/Crapita/Serco/Delottes/Accenture?
2) Have you donated large sums to the Conservative Party?
3) Will you provide lucrative sinecures for corrupt/disgraced MPs and retired civil servants?
4) Can Baroness Dildo Harding be in charge?
If the answer to all 4 is yes, you're in.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022