4 ms·
You are also forced to use a seat belt. Calling it authoritarianism when we want to enforce a standard is absurd.
by Kelteseth 2y ago
You 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?
- pessimizer 2y agoBeing forced to use a seat belt isn't a standard, it's actually authoritarianism. And largely used as a pretense to pull people over without probable cause, rather than for any other purpose. Mandating that manufacturers have seatbelts in cars is the regulation of commerce. Mandating that ISPs provide ip6 is also the regulation of commerce. Ip6 itself is a standard. A standard is something that people have to adhere to in order to measure things in a portable way, or for general interop. It's not anything that one is told to do by a government.