3 ms·
Agreeing on a common standard is not authoritarianism.
by Kelteseth 2y ago
Agreeing on a common standard is not authoritarianism.
- x3n0ph3n3 2y agoGovernments _mandating_ it sure is.
- robocat 2y agoYou said "government-mandated" - do you think your words matter? That doesn't sound like agreement. Agreement is how we have arrived at the imperfect solution we have now... Agreement between various technical and non-technical parties.
- orangeboats 2y agoConversely, blindly categorizing all government mandation as authoritarianism sounds like a highway to all kinds of logical fallacies! Is mandating a fair market (by e.g. punishing monopolies) authoritarian? A sensible person would answer no. Similarly, mandating an Internet Protocol that doesn't require centralization (you know, NAT) and renting an address from the Big Boys (AWS etc) sounds like a perfectly sensible decision to me. > Agreement is how we have arrived at the imperfect solution we have now... I disagree. What we have now is not an explicit agreement, it's a status quo which can be broken by an external force.
- robocat 2y agoA sentence written by a pedant that doesn't help communicate. Followed by another sentence. Ending with a quote that implies a worldview that the government should use violence without any balance "it's a status quo broken by an external force".
- orangeboats 2y agoI don't think you understand what "pedant" means.
- kortilla 2y agoWe have agreed on a common standard. It’s IPv6. Forcing people to use it is authoritarianism.
- Kelteseth 2y agoYou are also forced to use a seat belt. Calling it authoritarianism when we want to enforce a standard is absurd.
- kortilla 2y agoSeat belts have a reason. If I want to communicate with some computers using IPv4 or IPX, that’s my choice. Putting laws on what I can put inside of Ethernet is absolute stupidity
- agubelu 2y agoI fail to see how mandating ISPs to implement and use IPv6 is equivalent to "putting laws on what you can put inside of Ethernet"
- kortilla 2y agoMaybe don’t talk about stuff you don’t have any experience with then. Many ISP products are carrying Ethernet frames (metro Ethernet, the fabric at an exchange) or are even just leasing fiber. In order to force IPv6 and ensure nobody is using IPv4, you absolutely are putting laws on what goes over those Ethernet frames.
- immibis 2y agoPresumably the proposed law is about normal Internet service. If you have Internet then you have IP6. If you don't then what you have isn't Internet. If your company cannot provide IP6 then you are not an internet service provider because you do not provide Internet service. Why do people immediately assume that any possible regulation will be the stupidest possible regulation? Corporate brainwashing?