The only thing done in hardware is generally the LAN switching. All bridging to/from WIFI and all traffic to/from the Internet (WAN port) is via a software path. The technology exists so it could be done in hardware, it just isn't necessary because the software path is fast enough.

I expect your house may be either doing or capable of doing a lot of IPv6 if the devices, software, etc are fairly current. Apple and Microsoft both use IPv6 for many functions, transparent to what the user sees. Apple has used IPv6 (linklocal) for configuring their Airport routers, for example. Many of the cloud based services like back to my mac are tunneling IPv6 in IPv4. Microsoft tunnels IPv6 for their cloud services, also.

It does not seem widely off - I used to manage a team of 10 people who did the admin/networking for 8000 users. We did not do all of the end user hand holding, though some days it seemed like we did. Our ratio was about 1:1 users to computers, so your needs may be higher with the larger percentage of users. Rules of thumb are useful, but in any support function is it really important to keep data on what you are doing. If the team works really hard it seems like you aren't even there. Most people don't understand the "magic" required to keep this stuff working. If you track calls/time, it is much easier to ask for more resources/staff when they are needed.

Telsa has a valuation in the billions of dollars. The way they pay back the loan is by having what the VC's call a "positive exit" - the company going public or being acquired by a larger company. Even growing organically they could do it - they are manufacturing constrained right now, the loan is all about expanding manufacturing. Personally, I would have rather seen the gov't broker a deal for Telsa to use the NUMI manufacturing plant in Fremont rather than get big gov't loan to build a new plant at the same time they are giving Toyota a bunch of incentives to keep NUMI open after GM walked. If I fit in the roadster, I'd want one. Got a ride in one and it was wicked fun. 0-80 in half a block.

While I'm not going to defend those who don't accept evolution, would it be too much to ask for the NY Times to state the percentages are in actual numbers rather than the impossible to read graph?

The graph sort of indicates that the US evolution acceptance is about 70% which is lower than it should be, but higher than the tone of the article would lead you to think. This is typical of the NY Times in that they are quite certain that those in NY are smarter and more worldly than those in the rest of the country.