Management has no interest in employee's personal lives. Hence we don't block facebook, youtube, etc. The goal is to keep the company asset's safe. Employees are made aware during their orientation that we have the ability to monitor their computers in every way. The message has been, if you want privacy, use your mobile device (and don't vote for Democrats and their spy programs).
The real problem is routing table size with BGP. As we continue to divide the internet into smaller routable blocks, this is requiring an exponential amount of memory in BGP routers. Currently, the global BGP table requires around 256mb of RAM. IPv6 makes this problem 4 times worse.
IPv6 is a failure, we don't actually _need_ everything to have a publicly routable address. There were only two real problems with IPv4: wasted space on legacy headers nobody uses, and NAT traversal. IETF thumbed their noses as NAT (not-invented-here syndrome) and instead of solving real problems using a pave-the-cowpaths-approach, they opted to design something that nobody has a real use for.
Anyway, I'm hoping a set of brilliant engineers comes forward to invent IPv5, where we still use 32 bit public address to be backward compatible with today's routing equipment, but uses some brilliant hack re-using unused IPv4 headers to allow direct address through a NAT.
Actually that's the only reason I like upstart. Maybe with Ubuntu onboard with systemd we can get an alternate, easier-to-use syntax than the default systemd.
The real problem is the American people and electing a president that is nothing more than a celebrity. Obama knew all this was happening, and was willfully complicit to let the government violate our rights. Unfortunate the hippies and liberals can't look past their retarded drum protests to bring Obama to justice for letting the government violate our rights (spying, without due process/warrants) and Snowden, for being so irresponsible in the way he revealed what was happening.
"I was surprised to see not a single reference to a real-world conflict that plausibly would not have occurred in the absence of observed climatic extremes. If the authors wish to claim a strong causal link, providing some form of case validation is critical."
Global Climate change is a serious issue, but 'science' like this only strengthens the opposition to any real change. Once again, climate 'science' is now just fear mongering. Way to go!