> I don't restrict the argument to just infrastructure. It's commerce as well, where some person/company accepts responsibility for another person's wealth or property (as with the original post and their stock exchange comment). All of these things are the same, and the argument is the same.

Okay, so the dry cleaner DOES need a private army to defend your clothes in case of attack by China.
A minute ago you shifted to "society absolutely cannot function without", but now we're back to all commerce. I can go either way, I just wish you'd pick one and stick with it. It's kind of annoying when you change your position with each post as your previous post is shown,to be ridiculous.

So now we're at "anyone in commerce is negligent unless they have a private army capable of standing their ground agains attack by the Chinese government ", correct?

Well we're kind of getting somewhere.

Infrared: below red
Infrasound: below sound
Infrastructure: below structure

> "Infrastructure" means that everyone relies on this, and society can not function without it.

Not in any way, shape or form, not even a litle bit close or related.
Infrasound does not mean "sound that society cannot function without", and infrastructure does not mean "structure that society cannot function without".

Infrastructure means parts and pieces which are underneath structure. A wire is not itself a structure, but an underlying part of a structure, such as my home network. Wiring is therefore infrastructure. A building's infrastructure is it's wires, beams, etc - all of the stuff that underlies the structure.

You seem to be silently adding "nationally critical " to the word infrastructure. From there, you've decided it's okay for China to attack nationally critical infrastructure.

> For posterity, "the Ocean" is at least close to the function of the Internet, where "New York" is not.

Okay, let's go with that, then.

> If a person runs a boat on the ocean are they not required to have gear to operate safely? If a boat owner had no lifeboats, no radar, no radio, not enough people to staff the boat would they not be held accountable if the boat had an accident?

An attack is not an accident. The government of China is _attacking_ US resources via the internet. We're not talking about accidents - someone didn't trip over the power cord. It's an attack by a foreign force. Having enough people to staff the boat, and a radio etc doesn't do much good when your ship is attacked by a foreign government. Your argument is that the ship (or web site) should have armament capable of defeating an attacking state, a rising superpower no less. "If they can't defend themselves against an attack from China, they deserve to be attacked and it's okay for China to attack them." That's your thesis, right? In the case of shipping, that would mean that each cargo ship should have anti-aircraft missiles, a squadron of fighter jets escorting it, etc. That's what it takes to defend a ship against an attack.

Other people think that operating fighter jets and otherwise defending the citizens against attacks by foreign nations is the proper role of the national government. "To raise and support armies", as the constitution says. Your idea that each citizen should have a private army capable of defending them against China is an interesting one.

> In the corporate world no-one's manipulating huge spreadsheets or writing 500 page legal documents on an iPad.

I'm guessing that in your corporate world, nobody HAS huge spreadsheets because they're putting the huge stuff in the RDMS whre it belongs. iPads aren't the right tool for significant datasets, and neither is Excel. In my world, most people do not use the right tool for the job.

Did you read rhe article? Micron claims their write endurance isn't a problem because of the way they implemented trim. That could make sense, if they avoided erasing and writing at all sometimes.

The internet isn't safe, so it's all the victim's fault, and we should ignore the attackers. Hmmm.
"Anyone in any business who doesn't realize that the internet^H^H^H^H^H^H New York isn't a safe playground. .."

That's your theory, right? Because the internet / New York / the ocean isn't a safe place, anyone attacked on the internet or in New York had it coming. The government of China is attacking our internet infrastructure, but theyget a pass because the internet isn't perfectly safe, right? The high seas also are not perfectly safe, so it would be okay for China to attack our shios at sea?

> and then suddenly we completely ran out of IPv4 addresses, so everyone, even Microsoft, had no choice but to get moving on IPv6

Ftfy . Most computing devices sold in the last three years don't run Windows. Microsoft is now a minority player. Android is #1, iOS #2.

So which companies have influence? Android is the most popular operating system, so it's support of IPv6 is important. Most end points that need new addresses get those addresses assigned by one of the major mobile carriers, while older equipment is still using the same old IPs on Comcast and Time Warner. The equipment on the backbones is mostly Cisco gear, so it matters what Cisco supports the best, but they'll provide whatever Comcast and Level3 want to buy.

Making assumptions about how often trim might be used for any given workload only obscures the actual write endurance. Much like a 100GB capacity tape that's marked as 200GB because dome data that the manufacturer chose compressed 2:1 before being sent to the tape drive. Your mpeg movies aren't going to compress, so you'll be able to put 100GB of movies on that 100GB tape. The 200GB number is pure marketing BS.

At least with tapes, all if the companies use the same 2:1 bs factor, so they can be compared. There's no telling what assumptions Micron made about the use of trim, so there's no way to compare this drive's endurance to any other, or to estimate it's actual endurance for any real workload.

Quoting TFS for your enjoyment:

> but not in Massachusetts. The state's supreme court says

Also, if Washington mandates a policy, there is a good chance they'll do something stupid like say "all bits must be treated equally". All bits are not in fact equal. The right thing to do is to block connections from that Nigerian prince with a billion dollars to give away, and prioritize the communications of the search and rescue team.

I'm in favor of network neutrality as a concept. I don't trust Washington to get it right.
Further, even if Washington gets it right, there is little chance that the common understanding of the regulations will be correct or even reasonable. As an example, HIPPA says that hospitals may not sell patient data to marketers. Health care professionals MAY discuss patient care with family members and anyone else that they think the patient would approve of. However, two staff members at the local hospital refuse to discuss with me the billing for my newborn daughter's care, because they think HIPPA prevents them from discussing anything until the patient signs their form. My daughter won't be able to sign her name for another few years, so I guess the hospital won't be getting paid for a few years.

What are the odds that Washington is going to come up wuth regulations that are both reasonable (you can block attackers and spammers) AND simple enough that the high school kid working the support line understands the regulations as they affect hos job.

It seems you're not familiar with how the internet works beyond your own modem.
Back when you had a dialup modem and you spent an hour a day online, your ISP had run a T1 line from thw nearest largw city to Yourtown, which supported 300 customers, each online an hour a day.

Next, your ISP spent $XX million deploying high speed lines and each customer used ten times as much bandwidth. That meant the ISP had to replace that T1 with a T3, which they were able to share with the local school system. Then customers started watching video , and therefore using more bandwidth. To provide the additional bandwidth, the ISP had to put in a T3 of their own, which again cost millions. Then Youtube showed up, customers used more bandwidth, and two more T3s were required for Yourtown. The ISP paid a ton of money for those two new T3 lines. Then Netflix, and the new OC-192 line for Yourtown.

The ISP's cost function is much like your own- if your housemates use more bandwidth, you'll need to upgrade from 10Mbps to 25Mbps. If their customers use more bandwidth, the ISP will need to upgrade from 1,000Mbps to 10,000Mbps. Along with the lines, they'll need to upgrade all their equipment from gigabit to 10 gigabit.

This raises the question of why Comcast would care. For many years at least, the conventional wisdom among service providers and other carriers was that they'd prefer to NOT know what a customer uses the service for. If the ISP doesn't, and can't, know which sites customers are visiting, they can't be held responsible either legally or in regards to PR. I was shopping for a colo facility for the backup service I offer and the contract for one facility said "no porn". That was a definite deal-breaker for me - I most definitely do not want to look at what my customers are having backed up, and therefore become responsible for it. It would be a huge waste of my time to deal with any copyright violations, verify age reqirements, etc so the business is better off not know what the bits are. Just store the bits (or transfer them, in Comcast's case). That would save Comcast a bunch of money compared to monitoring and therefore needing to moderate the content.

Also, transporting natural gas from, a temporary site like most oil wells is problematic. It doesn't make sense to run pipelines to a well that will only there for a year, and natural gas doesn't compress well. This is why people who need gas in a tank use propane.

If you are correct that it increases the amount that can be recovered from an individual well site, then it follows that it therefore reduces the number of well sites required to meet world petroleum demand. After all, Texas oil fields supplied all the oil we need, we wouldn't have even be talking about drilling in Alaska or offshore.

> ZFS is not in the microsoft tradition

Balsa (Gnome email client): 2.5 MB, reads email. Optionally use libgtkhtml (315kb) to render HTML email.

Microsoft Outlook: (Microsoft email client): Several GBs. Reads email, handles calendar, embedded mail server, task list weather reports(?!?!) fax, rss, html templates, _sharing_ calendars. Loads MS Word (several GB) to partially display HTML messages.

Let's break this down into three statements and see where we disagree:

1. It appears that the Microsoft tradition is big monolithic packages that do everything. Including weather reports embedded in their email client.
Do you disagree with that?

2. Do you disagree with the statement that the Unix tradition (from ed to grep to elm and balsa) is small, focused tools?

3. Do you disagree with the statement that ZFS is a volume manager, a filesystem, a raid-like redundancy system, and a few other other things as well? In other words, that it's a big, monolithic package tat does many things. Do you disagree with that?

You LIKE ZFS. I understand that. It does a lot of cool things. It does a lot of boring things. It does a lot of things. Just like Microsoft Office.