Every user on Verizon 4G LTE gets an IPv6 address and an IPv4 address as well.

Time Warner != Time Warner Cable != Time Warner Telecom

This is about Time Warner Cable, whereas the vague term Time Warner is often used to refer to Time Warner Cable and/or Time Warner Telecom which are separate companies. (granted, the does the same thing)

That said, having another company say that what Comcast is doing is unfortunate. Comcast is trying to bully L3 into settlement-based peering, but it is Comcast's end traffic (as an eyeball network, not a transit provider) that is causing this imbalance. If you ask me, Comcast should be the one paying L3 as a customer (like they probably were at some point).

BGP prefix hijacking
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_hijacking

the 15% number came from the number of prefixes hijacked, not the actual amount of data (as TFA says here)

I felt shaking in my apartment for 25-45 seconds in North Syracuse, accompanied by my LCD and desk wiggling

I have dd-wrt running on a WRT610Nv2 just fine (stable and great performance):
root@AptGetMooN:~# uptime
  03:26:38 up 46 days, 1:23, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
root@AptGetMooN:~# uname -a
Linux AptGetMooN 2.6.24.111 #785 Tue Feb 23 05:15:36 CET 2010 mips unknown
Release: 02/23/10 (SVN revision: 13972)

I had originally bought it because my apartment compelx has so many 2.4GHz access points and other devices in the band that I can't get any reasonable, sustained throughput and levels of packet loss on any channel.

I bricked it at first by using a kernel 2.4 image by accident, but it is trivial to mod a serial port/jack into the case for serial access (I bought a cheap Nokia 3.3v serial to USB adapter and gave it a 3/32" audio plug to plug into the WRT610N with)

I can hit 12MB [yes bytes]/s to wireless clients from the wired LAN, and 18MB/s from wireless clients to the wired LAN

I'm definitely happy with this since unbricking it, in all respects. With the serial port, now I don't need to worry about future software updates going sideways either.

Parent is incorrect -

Nowhere did CC or Trey/Parker say that the images of Cruise or Mohammed being censored were not part of the show. It was the *auditory* censorship that was added by CC prior to airing. I haven't seen anything to suggest that the CENSORED box over Mohammed and Cruise were not part of the episode itself (without that, the point of Cruise being censored would have been weaker). I'd love to be proven wrong on this, I really would - however everything I have seen indicates that only the aural censorship was imposed by CC, and that's what the official statements I've seen have said. The only places I've seen anything saying that the black boxes were added by CC were by posts like this and unauthoritative blogs by authors who may have been equally ill-informed. I see that the parent is saying CC may have censored Cruise as a joke - but I haven't seen anything to suggest CC did that, only the beeping/aural censoring.

Like I said, I'd love to see a statement or other proof to the contrary. Either way CC toppled on this way too easily and for no reason, that argument isn't damaged by this.

I am concerned that this idea, if implemented, would stick around for way too long and would actually impede the progress of IPv6 adoption. I would be much more comfortable with an idea like this if it had an expiration date from the start, e.g. "this listing mechanism will be considered deprecated after 2 years, and will become unavailable on <date>." Without this, I can see it being hard-coded into and depended on by way too many apps, tools, companies, sites etc etc for years to come, and actually inhibiting IPv6 adoption and causing connectivity issues.

There are loads of issues with outdated blacklists for spam-fighting, for example, and issues with companies and other bodies using their own out-of-date copies/instances of such lists. What would keep problems like that from plaguing this idea, if it was implemented?

Without an expiration date, what would urge these companies to stop using this, or urge others to stop using this instead of offering up content natively on v6 to all?

For the record, I have hosted a large variety of sites (including the official sites for the game Soldat, its related projects, communities, etc) for a few years, including fully dual-stacked DNS and mail infrastructure for over two years with *zero* connectivity issues from any users whatsoever, and that has even been all through a Hurricane Electric tunnel, pushing a significant amount of content over IPv6.

As far as I know, NetNod was not operating this i-root instance that was returning the censored answers.

I was following along with this on the dns-operations mailing list. This pertained to i-root in Asia, and various i-root node operators said "this is not our box". It was a rogue root server (whether installed by the Chinese government or an ISP guided by the government's hand) (as far as netnod/i-root is concerned) announcing the anycast block used by i-root. In doing so they basically advertised themselves as a root node for i-root and it doesn't seem like this was Netnod-affiliated at all. The summary (I didn't re-read the article to see if that said the same) implies that netnod was running this intentionally and serving up Chinese-censored results for affected sites. All this would take is a person with the ability to have their upstreams accept BGP announcements for the anycast block for i-root and run the server. Then any requests to i-root that are topologically "close" will start using this node.

Before anyone continually says that an ISP must have intentionally configured their servers to use this root, they should read up on IP anycasting and read the thread on the dns-operations mailing list instead of these 2nd/3rd/4th-hand summaries that are beginning to skew the facts.

https://lists.dns-oarc.net/pipermail/dns-operations/2010-March/005260.html

Nonetheless, it was a court order forcing Wikipedia to reveal user data that otherwise wouldn't have been exposed. Whether or not it is useful is more or less irrelevant in this case, the precedent is probably the larger component to the story.

And in theory, future revisions of DisplayPort should be able to support daisy chaining displays off of one port on the host computer. I read about DP quite a bit when I bought my Dell 2408WFP last year, and was impressed by the amount of things that were taken into consideration/allowed for in future revisions of DP when its protocol was first being designed. I don't have a source for this, but I suspect it was on wikipedia and/or one of its references for the article.

Yeah, for home users they still block these incoming ports (and outgoing 25)

I already use rail transportation as much as possible now because it is cheap, easy, and about as green as transportation can realistically get right now. I've gone from Albany to Chicago many times and taken the train. While it may not be the fastest thing in the world, $75 gets you one way, with extremely lenient baggage policies (two large carryons, three huge checked bags, and up to 3 extra or oversized checked bags for $10/each). My girlfriend and I were able to move out to Chicago for summer work and back for just the ticket price each way, since we could pack and check everything as baggage on Amtrak. I try to use rail travel whenever I go anywhere longer distance. I may be going to Texas to check out some job stuff down there (from NY), and I'd probably even consider taking the train down for that. Even moreso if some day there were more high speed rail options (whereas right now there are very few high-speed rail options in the US)

High speed rail would be awesome, and I'm sure people would use it. I know I would.

I'm tired of this kind of fear mongering, and it seems to show up on Slashdot as well as other places way too much.

What? The world is ending? An ISP just misconfigured their router and their peers or upstreams need to be better about filtering. The same goes for adoption of BCP38 to prevent intentional or accidental route hijacks.

That is all. For now.