Pup Biru

yeah viable is such a variable concept

i guess like… i have a friend that is a lab tech, and he vibe coded a stand alone HTML and JS page for their team to take CSV and filter it… the excel process they used before was horrendous… in that case, i guess that’s a viable product: it works, isn’t buggy (or at least bugs will become well known and able to be manually avoided or worked around)… i’d say that’s an MVP but wouldn’t be so if you wanted to productise it

vibe coding is trash for MVPs… it’ll get you there, but as always the achilles heel of vibe coding is maintenance and bugs

vibe coding is great for a POC, but the defining difference between a POC and an MVP is that a POC is made to be thrown out, doesn’t have to work all the time (you can say “ah yup just need to give it a kick” when you’re showing it off and manually intervene)

vibe coding is good to show a basic, unmaintainable, non-production version of a feature of function, but then you need to take that and manually build it into your MVP - perhaps by copying some minor parts of the POC, but verifying every step

if you’re taking about charlie kirk with that “civil conversation” bit, those conversations were using misleading half truths to publicly debate people he disagrees with in order to convert the people around said debate to his cause. i wouldn’t call that civil… civil is healthy, truthful debate on the merits: not winning at all costs

honestly the text kinda looks like it’s AI generated… has weird kerning, things aren’t quite right

i’ll add a concrete example to this… i’ve described a startup i built in another comment but TLDR:

compliance obligations when protecting kids from sexual predators are difficult to prove: sexual abuse usually comes out 30 years later, so standard record keeping is pretty fraught… companies (like the company monitoring compliance - our startup for example) might not exists any more, paper gets lost, database formats become difficult or impossible to read

writing signed proof of compliance to the blockchain is a way of ensuring that an organisation was doing what they could at the time… how this is achieved is tricky for anyone but the source of record, but with blockchain it’s possible (described in the post)

it’s not technically legal afaik… the license defines a user pretty rigorously

“creamy” is a pretty common positive attribute for ice cream

security by obscurity doesn’t work on its own, but is a single pillar in a multi-faceted security strategy. in the case of FOSS vs closed source, the down sides (not having eyes on it, etc) outweigh the up sides… but writing off security by obscurity (plus other security) in all cases is the wrong approach to take

well i mean NZ is in K and has pretty tame wildlife, but also a lot of the nasty aussie wildlife is up north… and also our wildlife is only really dangerous if you don’t respect it… ain’t nobody treating wildlife with the respect it’s due dying from it

ah! sorry i misread/misunderstood privacy to mean security in your comment :)

you sir/maam have not seen the netflix talk on using IPv6 for their full internal stack because of inefficiencies allocating IPv4 ranges i’m guessing

many “unused” IP addresses are unused because they’re kinda like having spare parts: if you’re planning on extending your network in the futures, your IP block kinda should reflect your end state (ie the parts you need over time to replace or “build” new hosts)

or for blue/green deployments where it’s likely that at least half the IP range will be used in terms of process, but unused most of the time in terms of reachability

and then there’s weird things with splitting up IP blocks into subnets with a division of 3 (the minimum needed for dealing with net splits etc) - eg across availability zones… there are always “waste” IPs because you can’t divide multiples of 8 cleaning into 3

Of course you can do IPv6 magic that hides IPv6 from the end device, but nobody understands how that magic works.

it’s not magic… it’s a firewall, and it works pretty much exactly the same as a NAT: a whitelist of IP and port combinations

there are duplicate machines that share programs

yes… that’s why every machine has its own IP address… so that they can both use the same port and you don’t have to connect to crazy bullshit like https://myhomerouter.example.com:8443/

no instead you yell the IP address and they spend 30min trying to debug why they can’t ping it or even get ICMP packets through and then you realise you yelled the private IP address and they were on the wrong side of the NAT

publicly addressable does not mean publicly routable… your router would still not arbitrarily connect untrusted external devices to internal hosts

NAT has the property of a firewall only as an implementation detail. replacing NAT with an IPv6 firewall in the router is an upgrade in every conceivable way

i kinda love that this explanation is so much more complex not because it adds nothing but precisely because it adds a lot of realism: NAT is actually just far more complexity and processing

in the real world we actually use distribution centers and loading docks

because we can pass packages in bulk between large distances… in routing, it’s always delivery boys: a single packet is a single packet: there’s no bulk delivery, except where you have eg a VPN packing multiple packets into a jumbo frame or something…

the comment you’re replying to is only providing an analogy: used to explain a single property by abstraction; not the entire thing

we can have staff specialise in internal delivery

but that’s not at all how NAT works: its not specialising in delivery to private hosts and making it more efficient… it’s a layer of bureaucracy (like TURN servers and paperwork - the lookup tables and mapping) that adds complexity, not because it’s ideally necessary but just because of limitations in the data format

routers still route pretty much exactly the same in IPv6 direct or NAT, but just at the NAT layer public IP and port is remapped to internal addresses and ports: the routing is still exactly the same, but now your router has to do extra paperwork that’s only necessary because of the scheme used to address

NAT is not much different to a firewall though… just because the address space is publicly routable does not mean that the router has to provide a route to it, or a consistent route

NAT works by assigning a public port for the outgoing stream different to the internal port, and it does that by inspecting packets as they go over the wire: a private machine initiates a connection, assign an arbitrary free port, and sends that packet off to the router, who then reassigns a new port, and when packets come in on that port it looks up the IP and remapped port and substitutes them

that same process can easily be true in IPv6 but you don’t need to do any remapping: the private machine initiates a connection, and the router simply marks that IP and port combination as “routable” rather than having to do mappings as well

assume the allegations are true when interacting with the woman, and assume they’re false while interacting with the accused

id also add to assume they’re at least somewhat plausible when interacting with people around them who may be effected in the future

putting people on guard, as long as it doesn’t negatively effect anyone involved is useful: it’s not a good outcome to have information, keep it to yourself to protect people, and then for someone new to get hurt

it’s incredibly tricky, and imo false reports are just as bad as true reports: false reports hurt real, and future victims significantly