Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | nslsm's commentslogin

Yes, in his texts Cleisthenes was pretty clear that AI cameras weren't acceptable in a democracy.

A lot of people seem to attribute voter decisions they don't like with != democracy. I don't think people realize that democracies can also be surveillance police state dystopias if that's what the people vote for. It doesn't make it less of a democracy

It’s a democracy when people vote for what I want.

So, like ipv4, but you lose the protection and privacy afforded by the NAT?

What protection? What privacy? Smoke and mirrors, mostly.

NAT is a firewall with extra steps. IPv6 reduces complexity. Privacy (illusion of it, anyway, just like in ipv4 NAT) is handled by private addresses.

…and if you really want to, NAT for ipv6 just works.


NAT is not a security device. A firewall, which will be part of any sane router's NAT implementation, is a security device. NAT is not a firewall, but is often part of one.

Any sane router also uses a firewall for IPv6. A correctly configured router will deny inbound traffic for both v4 and v6. You are not less secure on IPv6.


IPv4 requires a DHCP server. It requires assigning a range of addresses that's usually fairly small, and requires manual configuration as soon as you need more than 254 devices on a network. The range must never conflict with any VPN you use. And there's more. Compare to IPv6: Nothing. All of these just go away.

And concerning the NAT: That's just another word for firewall, which you still have in your router, which still needs to forward packages, and still can decide to block some of them.


The dhcp server is in the router, just like you need a router for slaac.

Now compare average income to see how much this matters.

Depends what you are selling and to whom. Meanwhile, India wanted to get a lot of people online and this appears to suit their needs.

I'm confused. What's your point?

Obviously economies that rely largely on second hand technology are going to have old technology. Much of Africa is in this bucket. But looking past the extremes, India is at nearly 80% right alongside Germany. They fall in very different average income brackets. So the correlation isn't tight.

I can't see any value in pointing out vague correlation between income and proliferation of a new technology. It's the most obvious of observations.


This has nothing to do with income.

The problem here is that India alone would be consuming 20% of the IPv4 address space.


very transparent.

what has _that_ got to do with ipv6 adoption/usage ?

afaics, it probably has more to do with large indian-isp’s f.e. jio adopting ipv6.


>Born into a working-class Jewish family and raised in New York…

Being jewish is not the same as condoning Israel's war crimes (which shouldn't even have to be clarified, but here we are...)

Because the next one won’t bend the knee to Israel.

It looks like they are proud of their country and want to keep it as is. They’ve seen what limitless immigration did to other countries and want none of it. Respect to them.

Switzerland has a fertility rate of about 1.4 and decreasing, unless they do something, there won't be much of a country left in a few generations. Solutions can involve immigration or natalism, but something has to change.

Japan is worse.


Or significantly increasing life-expectancy. Or new fertility technologies. A few generations is a long time.

The birth rates of the immigrant waves would presumably just plummet quickly anyway as they join the culture. Since that seems to have happened with all our other health problems.


I don’t know anything about Switzerland, but immigration isn’t a solution to the prospect of Japan “not having a country left in a few generations.” There might be more or fewer people living on the islands, but “Japan” will be gone either way.

Nowadays Japan’s fertility rate is higher than most of its neighbours. We are just used to pick it as an example because it started aging earlier than most other countries.

Japanese population is still over 120 million. Forecasts put it falling below 100 million at some point in the second half of this century.

Things will have to change in order to keep population stable in the long term, but the Japanese approach seems IMHO more sensible than that of other countries.

Cohesive democratic societies are fragile.


I can’t parse this statement. I’m not sure if this about culture changes or about climate threat.

[flagged]


Your idea of “racism” arose in a western historical context and simply has no application to Japan. Japan didn’t bring a bunch of people to their country by force and then enslave them and deny them political rights for hundreds of years.

Nation-states not only exist, the UN recognizes their existence as a human right in the The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The UN recognizes a right of “peoples”—groups of people bound together by culture, ancestry, language, etc.—to self determination. I was born in a country named after one ethnocultural group (Thailand) and my family is from another country named after our ethnocultural group (Bangladesh). Japan is the homeland of Japanese people, just as Thailand is the homeland of Tai people, and Bangladesh is the homeland of Bengali people.


Non-Japanese people don't be weird about Japan challenge (difficulty: impossible)

“Don’t think the whole world is America challenge” (difficulty: impossible)

Not sure why you keep on repeating that when nationalism is a thoroughly modern concept and not something that God handed down to us thousands of years ago. It's frankly bizarre for a Bengali born in Thailand and living (presumably, based on timezone) in North America to be so invested in defending the honor of the Japanese ethnostate on the orange hacker website.

Also, I don't know what you would call the historical (and even current) treatment of Zainichi Koreans other than "racism" (as well as the current treatment of immigrants from places like Bengladesh).


> Not sure why you keep on repeating that when nationalism is a thoroughly modern concept

The desire for cultural groups to form their own communities isn’t modern, it’s ancient. What arose in the 20th century—in the aftermath of colonialism—is the global recognition that these groups have a right to form nation-states. The recognition that right was a driving force across the world in the 20th century: Pan-Arab nationalism, Indian nationalism, Bengali nationalism, etc.

> It's frankly bizarre for a Bengali born in Thailand … to be so invested in defending the honor of the Japanese ethnostate on the orange hacker website.

Because your criticism of Japan undermines the legitimacy of the existence of countries like Bangladesh as well. My uncle didn’t get shot at by Pakistanis to establish a multicultural economic zone.

> Also, I don't know what you would call the historical (and even current) treatment of Zainichi Koreans other than "racism" (as well as the current treatment of immigrants from places like Bangladesh)

If Japan allows immigrants into the country then mistreats them, then that’s wrong. But that’s not what this article or my post is talking about.


How do you define "Japan"?

The nation state located on the islands of Japan populated with almost exclusively Japanese people.

Good news then: it's still going to be there in a hundred years!

It won't be if they start importing immigrants by the tens of millions.

they're islands mon ami, it's not hard to define them -- the borders are fairly straightforward

you can piddle around about a few tiny islands elsewhere, e.g. okinawa, but the main islands are undisputedly "japan"


Sounds like it will still exist then, barring climate catastrophe.

The standard way. The same way you define “Thailand” or “Bangladesh” or “Vietnam?”

It seems like "Japan" will very much still exist in either of your scenarios then.

The solution to a low fertility rate is to… destroy the country? What’s the difference?

[flagged]


This is the most divorced-man comment I've ever read.

And the most correct.

Idk why people who hate women can't resist telling on themselves like this. What makes you think this line of thinking is acceptable, or even rational?

The first paragraph in the GP comment makes a lot of sense. Just today I was listening to a program on NPR about birth control in Uganda - women were complaining about their husbands want more and more children. These women in Uganda were getting their contraceptives discreetly without their husbands knowledge.

When women are empowered they choose to have less kids.

(Another example of this is closer to home. Project 2025 wants to curtail contraceptives distribution and usage with the same goal: more kids. It is the same logic - diminish women’s power have re: pregnancy in order to increase birth rate)


A lot of people would rather live in their own aged society than a slightly younger foreign one.

Emphasis on slightly younger. Fertility is declining basically everywhere. Much of the developing world is now below replacement including India and China.


'A lot of people' usually means the predominately older strata of society. Japan has been having issues with the younger generation being locked out of employment and advancement because of older generations needing to hold onto their career with a death grip and retirement ages going up.

The aged society scam can only persist as long as they can exploit the younger generation. When that collapses, the end result is either going to be leaving the elderly to die or things start collapsing in new and interesting ways

The only reason why people 'prefer' this is for the same reason 'prefer' to believe climate change doesn't exist. Eventually reality catches up.


You've completely missed my point.

Immigration is not a long term solution to an aged society. The societies of target countries are aging as well and not far behind.

What you advocate is to bolster the work force of a country with a fertility rate of ~1 and falling, with people from a place with a fertility rate of ~2 and falling.


Africa has fertility rate 4.02 in 2025. Do you want Switzerland look like Africa?

There are numbers in between 1.4 and 4.02. There's no reason Switzerland would need to swing to the complete opposite end.

Africas fertility rate is declining massively as well.

Yes, by 2091 Africas fertility rate should be 2.1

This is the correct reality. If there would be public vote in surrounding countries, ie mosques would be banned there too (btw those standing and having permit before the vote keep functioning).

But none of the german, french, italian etc politicians have the balls to let society decide for themselves, controversial topic or not. And people then wonder why in extremely left-leaning country like France there is high popularity for extreme right parties.

Maybe british with their one self-kneecaping brexit vote cured them, but public voting in general was never on the table.

Swiss are the most free nation globally. At least I havent hears of any on similar level. They vote responsibly, heck they have 3x the amount of immigrants per capita then next top country in Europe, but they want only people who can find work there, plus they host tons of refugees. And yes they dont want to lose their unique identity, they have enough examples around them to be wary and smart. I'd say they do their share and some more


[flagged]


I'm not saying you should ban mosques but when they do the whole call to prayer thing at 2am, I understand. Guessing you've never had to sleep any extended period of time near a mosque. If church bells rudely woke me up at 2am I'd understand the church banners too.

Well maybe molesting children and covering it up should be more of a reason to ban churches.

But I agree that should come under noise ordinances. I don’t care who someone chooses to worship as long as it doesn’t interfere with me.


It's a numbers game as to why, not an argument being raped isn't worse. Relatively fewer people have been raped by a priest. Easily 100+x have been sent into a rage by the fucking call to prayer at 120 decibels. People tend to get more upset about things they have actually experienced.

This discourse feels like you are deliberately pretending not to understand things.

My opinion should be obvious - all religion is illogical and does more harm than good.

Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.

Please don't fulminate...

Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes.

Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html


That means you need an account?

> It kills me to think that the bad parts of Apple are so interwoven into Android through cultural assimilation.

It’s more like Android is worse so they don’t want to use it. Dogfooding is good, of course, but if they don’t force them to do it, they will naturally choose the best phone. Which is not an Android.


The sad thing is, I started with Android believing it more than Apple's ecosystem, and after my first Android phone, I quickly jumped ship to iPhone.

My parents use Android devices and I manage them. With every iteration, Apple went to the way of PalmOS' refined flows as much as possible, and Android became what Windows CE aspired to be. A complex multi-layer wafer you can't understand which layer comes from where, and it's all different and non-standard between vendors.

Not the least, Android is mobile land of mini tools you have to install to be able to have a power-user friendly platform. Reminds me my old Windows days where I had to install utilities half day to be able to make the installation usable the way I want.


This is some damn irritating writing. This writing irritates me more than a broken backpack seam would.

The trend of making articles out of sequences of pithy three-word soundbites rather than proper sentences is infuriating. It's super LLMy, yes, but it feels like even human-written content is like that these days.

Pure LLM, and it's a shame. The message and the content they are trying to pass are good and should be read by everybody out there. But god, the LLM writing, it feels like an Apple PR applied to a critique of capitalism.

I am highly confident this article was AI generated

I don't really see what the issue is here? Someone with access to the URL (either the freelancer or the client) leaked it to Google, Google crawled it. How is this Fiverr's fault? I mean, okay, they could sign URLs, but it's not like they left a folder with directory listing on. Someone with access to the URLs, not them, willingly made the URLs public.

Users should have to be authenticated to access the resource, not just rely on the URL being a secret.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: