Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:There *was* a proposal simpler than IPv6.. IPxl (Score 1) 125

What hardware concerns does IPv6 actually address? Far as I can tell it was created without too much concern for hardware. 128 bits for example. Most cpu's are going to have to use multiple cpu cycles. Due to registers being 32/64 bit (not including simd extensions.) These aren't really a concern considering how fast our computers are and that networking gear has special processors.

IPv6 fails in a few areas that some people refuse to even acknowledge. If they wanted IPv6 to be successful they would have kept it simple. For example getting rid of broadcast in favor or multicast. Another is the complete waste of addresses, each of my interfaces gets multiple /64 and then assigns the rest of the 64bit (randomly or from the mac address) if we were going to waste that many address we should have just stuck with 64bit.

64 bit addresses would have hit all the boxes of needs that ipv6 provides. BGP routes not taking up so much memory and being simpler globally. Every device being able to reasonably have it's own globally unique address.(Not every device needs a unique address) 128 bits is stupidly large, 33 bits for example is double the size of 32 bits. For each bit we are doubling.

IPv6 fails because they didn't think to make it simple. Embedded devices need to be simple, not every manufacturer is going to pay for the best programmers. I've dealt with too many "modems/routers" that barely understood ipv4 let alone ipv6.

IPxl if implemented could work. I see it as the same hack that UTF8 uses. It faces the same exact problem the IPv6 faces, Software/hardware would have to be upgraded. IPxl could then take the good stuff such as prefix delegation. (We are keeping dhcp and arp)

Comment Re:Dear Browser Manufaturers. (Score 1) 95

Chrome used to be this before Google bought doubleclick, then everything changed. Well maybe not memory efficient.

Seriously ad's can't get through if you block a few javascript API's. Javascript can't do anything without certain API's and access to the DOM. We know what API's/DOM get abused, lets create ways of letting users easily block those. Website abuses contextmenu functions. Let me block that easily.

Google even had it in their comics about how a popup would be minimized to the corner and required a user to drag it out before it would even render. Blocked a ton of annoying ad's. That is until Doubleclick was purchased.

It's annoyed me so much I even found the point that they refactored the code. I don't have the time or the understanding of the greater codebase to create a patch to add those features back in.

Comment How is airbnb a tech company? (Score 4, Insightful) 89

How is airbnb or many of these other startups tech companies?

Sure they use technology, but so does the grocery store down the street. Should we start labeling grocery stores as tech companies that have websites? If your main product isn't technology and instead you use some inhouse custom built website/app to sell some other product or service then your company isn't a tech company but a company that uses tech to enable your business model.

Lyft/uber/airbnb/ aren't tech companies They are something else. I wish they would stop masquerading.

Comment Tesla autopilot is the roomba of self driving cars (Score 1) 142

Tesla autopilot is the roomba of self driving cars. It's enough to generate interest in self driving cars and will spur more development till we have something more intelligent.The roomba would blindly go in circles but now we have vacuum cleaners that scan the room and create optimal paths.

It's a step in the correct direction.

Comment iMessage wasn't a technical fix (Score 2) 415

iMessage was a fix to a price issue, a political issue, and a control issue.

If cell phone companies weren't charging so much for something that should be free Apple would have had less incentive to come up with a solution that worked around them.

We should have extended sms/mms to include encryption and for it to be free worldwide. Instead we get a bunch of solutions that don't work with one another.

Comment Re:As a T-Mobile customer, I'm opposed to this mer (Score 4, Insightful) 86

What is your deal? I've seen you post this comment almost word for word on various other sites.

You've got some good points. But a lot of your argument doesn't seem to be about those points. Your argument seems to mostly have a emotional basis to it. As if you don't like the company/ies involved for whatever reason that you don't seem to be saying.

T-Mobile just has to maintain the cdma network for a little while. Years perhaps. Customer and hardware turnover will get customers onto hspa/lte compatible hardware. A lot of MetroPCS customers already have lte compatible devices. From the google search I see that it's hardware that's able to handle VoLTE. T-Mobile can make a push to improve the lte coverage and current MetroPCS hardware will be able to work without the cdma network. In the meantime they can continue to roam onto sprints network.

The maintenance of four different networks isn't really even a big deal. With the tower equipment that T-Mobile is using and deploying is capable of running all four with either a software update or very little hardware changes. I feel that you are also being a bit disingenuous with this argument since 2GSM UMTS/HSPA and LTE are in the 3gsm family and were designed to do handoffs with each other, cdma and lte were not so much.

As for the FCC requirements you don't actually know that the fcc is going to do that. The last few years it's been the two big dogs that have been making acquisitions. Those are different stories and I wouldn't use them as examples for a company the size of the new T-Mobile. If the new T-Mobile does indeed have to give up some spectrum we won't and don't know how much.

The technical issues you listed just don't seem to be that big of an issue. This is a business move. This is about combining two companies for the synergies. The real winner here is Deutsche Telekom. Which can sell off stock slowly from the newly formed company.

You're real reasons really show through when you decided to use that last sentence "This is a terrible, terrible, idea, and the people behind it are terrible, terrible, people." So again I ask. What's your deal?

Slashdot Top Deals

When Dexter's on the Internet, can Hell be far behind?"