Comment Re:I don't think it would matter (Score 1) 57
Comment Re:China is terrible (Score 2) 55
Comment Re:a step too far (Score 1) 347
you sir, are blind, war is never good
What an utterly naive interpretation of world history you have. I can assure you, if you'd been a Jew being rounded up for extermination in WW2 you'd have a different opinion. Likewise, if you were Chinese or Korean being subjugated by Imperial Japan, you'd have a different perspective. There is such a thing as a "just war" even though you somehow ignore the concept. It's usually when your opponent starts the war and is hell bent on eradicating you and your way of life.
Alas, you sit there in perfect safety and comfort, passing judgement on those who sacrificed fa more than you can ever imagine so you could impugn their sacrifices.
Comment Re:Oh look. (Score 1) 347
For now, people can worry about what type of weapons to use and whether or not certain types should be banned.
But in the future, all the debates will be about will be "how do we pick just the right grid squares in which to Kill All Humans?"
Banned for who? And who's going to enforce this ban?
You have to remember any treaty (a) must have signatories that agree to follow it and (b) there must be a method of enforcement. If you lack either of these two conditions, the treaty has no effect.
Comment Re: Oh look. (Score 1) 347
If there was a "total war" America would not exist anymore.
Not sure how you think you could pull that off, but whatever.
We sink your carriers, then we siege your cities.
Again...exactly how do you plan to accomplish this? It's not like Iran hasn't been firing missiles at our carriers this whole time. Yeah, it's a halfhearted effort by the Iranians, but what exactly do you think would happen to Iran if you managed to even damage one of our carriers, much less sink one? I can describe it thusly: the American gloves would come off. Iran would be plastered into oblivion via conventional bombardment, and there's very little Iran could do to stop it. Sure, we'd take losses, but the Iranian regime would cease to exist in totality. America has had this option available to it since day one. We haven't exercised it. Not because we couldn't do it but because we chose not to. Do not mistake restraint for a lack of capability.
Comment what was the point of turning around (Score 1) 164
Comment This is actually old tech. (Score 3, Insightful) 65
Comment Re:Not Constitutional (Score 1) 58
Comment Re:The last time Trump was president (Score 1) 184
Comment Re:It's so old... (Score 1) 47
Comment I used them (Score 1) 180
Comment Re:My home network is nearly pure IPv6 (Score 1) 73
I have something like ~1.2 trillion times the number of routable addresses that the entire IPv4 space has. Not all are reachable, of course, just the services that need incoming access and they're each on their own isolated DMZ.
Comment Re:My home network is nearly pure IPv6 (Score 1) 73
Comment My home network is nearly pure IPv6 (Score 1) 73
I have an SSH bastion set up. In all this time there has not been a single SSH attempt from the internet. On IPv4 it was constant background noice.
For those legacy IPv4-only systems on the internet, I set up NAT64. I have an IoT VLAN and IoT 2.4 GHz wireless network that are only IPv4 because a lot of IoT network stacks are junk.
I'm still farting around with it, but man oh man, there's no way I'd go back to IPv4. It was one of the best moves I've done in ages.