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.
Every time there's a "just add an extra octet" argument, I feel some people are completely clueless about how hardware works.
Most hardware comes with 32-bit or 64-bit registers. (Recall that IPv6 came out just a year before the Nintendo 64.) By adding only an extra octet, thus having 40 bits for addressing, you are wasting 24 bits of a 64-bit register. Or wasting 24 bits of a 32-bit register pair. Either way, this is inefficient.
And there's also the fact that the modern internet is actually reaching the upper limits of a hypothetical 64-bit IPv5: https://lemmy.world/comment/10727792. Do we want to spend yet another two decades just to transition to a newer protocol?
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
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.
NAT does not provide security whatsoever. If the NAT mapped your (internal IP, internal port) to a certain (external IP, external port) and you do not have a firewall enabled, everyone can reach your device by simply connecting to that (external IP, external port).
I haven't seen routers that do not come with IPv6 firewalls enabled by default.
I reckon I see most IPv6 complainers are from the US though...
In my country, turning on IPv6 is not really something ceremonial, it's just literally clicking on the IPv6 checkbox. The default configurations set in the router are good enough for an average home user, firewalls and all that security jazz are enabled by default.
The DNS didn't break just because I enabled IPv6, nor did my phone apps stop working. Life goes on, and I have gotten rid of that terrible CGNAT. Somehow this is not the case for many US users across multiple ISPs, I have heard IPv6 horror stories from Verizon, Comcast, and AT&T. Like how did you manage to do that?
How is this "dropping packets" not applicable to firewalls, then? You are not just going to casually connect to my IPv6 device as we're speaking. The default-deny firewall in my router does the heavy lifting... just like what NAT did.
Honestly, it just sounds like you need to brush up on networking knowledge. Repeat after me: NAT is not security.
Oh come on, are you seriously suggesting that default-deny stateful firewall is not the norm??
Holy. Fucking. Shit. Indeed.
You keep on suggesting to me that you really have no idea how networking works. (Which is par on course for people thinking NAT == security, but I digress)
Let me tell you: All. Modern. Routers. include a stateful firewall. If it supports NAT, it must support stateful firewalling. To Linux at least, NAT is just a special kind of firewall rule called masquerade. Disregarding routers, even your computer whether Linux (netfilter) or Windows (Windows Firewall) comes built-in with a stateful firewall.
Also, icons. The icons in Windows XP are too recognizable. You need to minimalize them. In fact, minimalize it so hard that not one person could understand what the icon is even referring to.
I still don't quite get why some people are defending manufacturers which remove the headphone jack on their phones...
3.5mm jacks don't cost much materially. Removing it doesn't bring any benefit at all, and you are forced to buy a bluetooth headphone or a Type-C-to-3.5mm dongle on top of that.
I don't see how the jack can make a phone less appealing? 99% of the time you'll be looking at the screen, you're not going to see the headphone jack.
Though, perhaps it's because of lifestyle differences between countries (I am not American), I simply cannot imagine not using the 3.5mm jack ever. I am still using AUX on my car radio.
I am trying to. My current phone has a headphone jack. But I fear that the possibility of getting a high-end phone with a headphone jack is diminishing.
I don't think the battery argument is convincing enough to me unfortunately, since it's more likely that the recent increase in battery capacity is due to battery chemistry improvements rather than increased physical size.
I mean, I have two similar sized phones from different eras. One had 3000mAh, another had 5000mAh. They both include a headphone jack.
I've noticed that many Reddit users with the username format Word_Word_Number (for example Absolute_Bot_1230) are almost guaranteed to either be a bot or extremely inflammatory -- it's like everything they post is meant to generate controversies.
JavaScript ( sh.itjust.works )
It's easier to remember the IPs of good DNSes, too. ( lemmy.sdf.org )
Today in our newest take on "older technology is better": why NAT rules!
Snapdragon X Elite Reviews are Out: Solid Performance and Great Battery Life | Beebom ( beebom.com )
Roses are red, violets are blue, everyone is using IPv6, why aren't you? ( lemmy.world )
Context:...
If Windows XP was released in 2024 ( lemmy.world )
Credit: https://grimgreenfo.rest/notes/9tn7wtthrdb5013t
Dual headphone jack smartphone scores high in new reparability video ( www.notebookcheck.net )
Reddit if full of bots: thread reposted exactly the same, comment by comment, 10 months later ( i.imgur.com )
For the threads with the older one on the left: https://lemmy.world/post/14859950...