I'm 22, from Australia.

In school we used computers for everyday stuff: documents, presentations research, etc. But from what I can remember we were never taught anything about them at all.

Laser pointers are unpolarised; how would a polarising filter help to stop them?

The summary seems a bit confused, like they've misinterpreted the proposed standardisation of HSTS and the beginning of work on HTTP 2.0 as the same thing.

Innovation is a means to an end, not an end in itself. "Most innovative" on its own should not be a criterion in choosing a hash function.

No, in the late 90s, most Internet users connected via dial-up and didn't have a router at all.

Of the three or four cheap routers I have tested, from different manufacturers, using different chipsets and different operating systems, none have used DHCP information to answer DNS queries.

Yes. In IPv6, a home internet connection generally has a rarely-changing prefix that can be converted to a name and address with the ISP's cooperation.

But in IPv4, a home internet connection generally has a rarely-changing prefix that can be converted to a name and address with the ISP's cooperation.

How is IPv6 worse?

The amount it cost in 1994 is irrelevant in the decision about what to do with it now.

If it can be sold for $1 billion, then giving it away for nothing is equivalent to giving away $1 billion.

If we solved IPv4 exhaustion using NAT, we would divide the Internet into people with public IP addresses and people without public IP addresses. Those without public IPs can't run servers on the standard ports, possibly can't run servers at all, and are limited in their ability to use peer-to-peer protocols.

It's not true that "all current needs are solved by NAT".

It's a bit late to say "ignore IPv6 completely". IPv4 has already run out, and IPv6 is already deployed in production.

But if you stop swearing at IPv6 and start making coherent evidence-supported arguments against it, maybe people will start listening to you in time for IPv8.

Giving away a block of IPv4 addresses worth about $1 billion is the same as literally giving away $1 billion of taxpayers' money. I don't think that would be doing "the right thing" for the people of the UK.

My DHCP server is a crappy consumer appliance that can't update DNS from DHCP without unsupported and buggy third-party firmware hacks. I think the majority of internet users are in the same situation.

> Facebook takes your data and sells it to corporations.

No, Facebook sells targeted advertising. e.g a corporation could say "Show this ad to all the gay people" or something. The corporations generally don't actually receive any of your data.

Hard drives need to be sealed to be immersed, as mentioned at http://gigaom.com/cloud/intel-immerses-its-servers-in-oil-and-they-like-it/ .

UStream did not falsely claim to own the rights, they just claimed that infringement occurred. It's wrong, but it's not fraud.