Ford E-Transit is an electric van for a lot of money. But it looks like Ford wants to stop making them, and 2 seat models look much easier to find. But you'd be able to fit your board no problem.
Tariffs are easy, just pay them. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards are harder... But maybe there's a loophole for commercial transport? or maybe they paid to have the testing done?
I'm not sure if you need an address to sign up for a private mailbox at places like UPS Stores.
But a lot of people might receive mail at a friends' address with permission. But, you still need to have a friend or family with a stable address who is willing to help.
In the past this was pretty lax (I've had a long-term box at a Mail Boxes Etc. that then became a private mail boxes place that then became a UPS Store) and they didn't really care when I first opened it. Now there's a push for KYC also; we got a sheet the other day asking to verify our physical street address, something I never personally got in the years I've been there. Apparently new regulations or something, they said.
> I'm just wondering what technologically happened to make universal /24 advertisements fine. I assume it's just that routers got better.
Routers had to get better (more tcam capacity) because there wasn't much choice. Nobody wants to run two border routers each with the table for half the /8s or something terrible like that. And you really can't aggregate /24 announcements when consecutive addresses are unrelated.
The small ISP that serves my home has six IPv4 prefixes and one IPv6 prefix.
The small hosting provider I use has I think 7 v4 prefixes, but could be one v6 prefix (if they supported v6 which they sadly don't). Maybe not --- a lot of their /22s are advertised as four /24s to allow for a DDoS Mitigation provider to attract traffic when needed; but it'd probably still be fewer prefixes with v6.
Not every ASN looks the same, but many of them would advertise a lot fewer prefixes if they could get contiguous addresses, but it's not possible/reasonable to get contiguous allocations for v4.
Since the routing table is organized around prefixes, if there is complete migration, the routing table will probably be smaller.
Amazon had a data deal for Kindles for a long time. If we're assuming nefariousness, the embedded SIM would only be used for analytics/telemetry not for content, so it shouldn't be too much data.
If Neilsen will give me $1 to have a journal of what I watch, they might give Samsung something to have actual logs.
If they don't provide an easy opt-out link then why not just block the sender and move on? Unlike the less legal operations I wouldn't expect a legitimate business to rotate domains or otherwise attempt to evade blocks.
I prefer to only report genuinely malicious behavior. As long as there's no active attempt at block evasion I figure reporting it is just increasing noise and generally making things worse for everyone. It's the active block evasion crowd that make any and every network communication protocol a pain in the ass to use at scale. It wasn't simpletons using a single static IP address that triggered such widespread adoption of Anubis overnight.
Look I'm just trying to distinguish "active circumvention of blocks" from pretty much everything else. Because the former is what destroys the usefulness of protocols while the vast majority of other things can be trivially resolved by blocking the offending party. Including { corporate service } that I don't use sending me { unwanted thing }.
If a bot that sends a fixed set of headers and is behind a single static IP is behaving poorly and slowing down your server you can block it and move on. Whereas when an abhorrently selfish operator with a client that actively hinders fingerprinting rapidly rotates through hundreds of thousands of IPs you end up with mass adoption of solutions like Anubis.
99.9% of spam is not active circumvention of blocks. It comes from so many sources you can't block them, but they are true different sources and not a block circumvention technique. That's why we decided to come down with the biggest hammer on every single source.
That doesn't match my experience at all. If I disable filtering what I see is a slew of ephemeral domains. Without DMARC I'm sure they would instead be official looking and fake.
> It comes from so many sources you can't block them,
Nonsense. If it were really countless fixed sources then a centralized domain blacklist would be sufficient. The issue is that the sources - both domain and IP - are aggressively rotated and even spoofed whenever possible.
At least in networks I've used, it's better for buffers to overflow than to use PAUSE.
Too many switches will get a PAUSE frame from port X and send it to all the ports that send packets destined for port X. Then those ports stop sending all traffic for a while.
About the only useful thing is if you can see PAUSE counters from your switch, you can tell a host is unhealthy from the switch whereas inbound packet overflows on the host might not be monitored... or whatever is making the host slow to handle packets might also delay monitoring.
Sadly, I'm not too surprised to hear that. I wish we had more rapid iteration to improve such capabilities for real world use cases.
Things like back pressure and flow control are very powerful systems concepts, but intrinsically need there to be an identifiable flow to control! Our systems abstractions that multiplex and obfuscate flows are going to be unable to differentiate which application flow is the one that needs back pressure, and paint too-wide brush.
In my view, the fundamental problem is we're all trying to "have our cake and eat it". We expect our network core to be unaware of the edge device and application goals. We expect to be able to saturate an imaginary channel between two edge devices without any prearrangement, as if we're the only network users. We also expect our sparse and async background traffic to somehow get through promptly. We expect fault tolerance and graceful degradation. We expect fairness.
We don't really define or agree what is saturation, what is prompt, what is graceful, or what is fair... I think we often have selfish answers to these questions, and this yields a tragedy of the commons.
At the same time, we have so many layers of abstraction where useful flow information is effectively hidden from the layers beneath. That is even before you consider adversarial situations where the application is trying to confuse the issue.
Parcel delivery is clearly not a natural monopoly; there are several carriers, including some that only have a limited footprint. I don't see why you couldn't expand from parcels to letters; although economics would probably be tough.
I've not used AI to write code, but everyone who I've spoken to who has says it actually takes a lot of work. It sounds like you get intern level work out of AI, but without the hope that your investment in time results in skills and personal development for the intern.
All of the fighting with the LLM to refine the results sounds tiresome. No thanks.
If it's fun for you, or it unblocks you, or whatever... Go for it. But it doesn't sound fun for me, so nope. I'll keep banging on rocks to write programs until that's not fun anymore. :p
reply