gwbas1c

One of the things that I'm curious about: How easy / hard is it to use the same NES game with higher resolution / color graphics, and sample-based sound?

Are there any emulators out there that let you swap in higher resolution assets so a game can be freshened without a complete port?

I'm more worried about my consumer-grade router.

It really depends on the kind of product you're working on. A lot of developers (and managers and business leaders) assume that their workflows will apply to other kinds of products; and are often very wrong.

For example: A few days ago I saw a quote that over 90% of current Y-Combinator startups vibecode their products. The problem is the author misunderstands context: Startups sacrifice quality for time to market. In other cases, if you're building something that isn't technically challenging, (because it's 80% similar to many other products out there,) you can probably vibecode it.

In contrast, if you're doing something technically challenging, it's to your benefit to be a lot more hands-on. I recently started getting excellent reviews from copilot of my hand-written code. (Or, I should say, the hand-written parts of an AI-assisted pull request.)

Considering it was a school, they could probably update their webpage.

The professional services that I work with give plenty of notice (years) before turning off services. Were you using an internet connection that's intended for hosting servers? (As in you were paying for a dedicated static IP.) If so, then you have a case.

Otherwise, your arguments about what "internet" is are flawed. IPv6 has been a thing for about 30 years, with a well-publicized problem with IPv4 address space and migration plan. I suspect that it's (IPv6) older than your hospital's contract. Even in the IPv4 world, your IP can change at any time and you can be put behind a NAT. That's why ISPs will sell you a static IP if you need one.

>> why do you need to stick with IPv4?

> To support devices and routes that do not have ipv6 support?

> Are they being removed from lower priority users in order to serve high priority usecases? If so is a hospital a low priority user?

After reading your response, I suspect the real problem is attitude and experience. The hospital should have IT staff that know to purchase a static IPv4 IP. This should be part of the contract with the ISP. If it wasn't, ultimately it's up to the IT staff to approach the ISP and arrange to purchase one.

The first thing you need to ask is: Why do you need IPv4?

I don't know much about your imaging servers: Do they accept incoming https connections, or is it some other kind of TCP or UDP protocol? Assuming it's https, why do you need to stick with IPv4?

> Hi, I’m helping a hospital in Buenos Aires that has lost their IPv4 due to their ISP moving to CGNAT, putting their on prem imaging servers offline for 7 days. (it’s ok for us though, we have a backup failover isp)

Two more things:

1: If you require IPv4, that needs to be part of the contract with your ISP. If they just arbitrarily turned you off, it means that you didn't contract for the services you thought you had.

2: IPv6 is supposed to solve a lot of these problems... So again, why can't you move to IPv6?

I believe that was proposed before IPv6.

That being said, we should take the time to understand why IPv4 is still hanging around when IPv6 has been around since before most people got internet access. What is really holding IPv6 back?

It's not the food, it's from holding farts in too long.

> If you would like to advance a theory that this is because of a specific environmental change

It probably is, but it could be anything. For all we know, (joke,) it could be a pesticide with traces present in salads and fresh fruit, or exposure to a cleaning chemical in public transportation.

But the bigger issue is that the people pushing these theories are pushing them on moral reasons; IE, making an unfair claim that colon cancer is on the rise because people have immoral lifestyles. IE, from eating poorly or the multitude of other holier-than-thou lifestyle claims at the tip of their tongue.

Personally, my money is that we find out that regularly holding in farts increases the probability of colon cancer, and that we need a public health campaign to fart in public.

I'd really like to know why it's taking Apple so long to ship a fix. Especially if they can explain how to update an existing computer, what's the general holdup? Is it their release process? Is there some underlying complexity that's poorly understood?

My dad kept a new Camry for ~15 years in the Northeastern US; no major problems. 20 years earlier he was lucky if he could get a car to go over 100k miles and last 10 years.

(In the winter, road salt corrodes the cars and the snowplows bear up the roads.)

To make a long story short, and because I'm not an expert: A similar thing kinda-sorta happens behind the scenes with retail investing anyway. When you buy and sell stocks online, often the real ownership of the stock, in the stock exchange, doesn't change hands. Instead, the stock is exchanged among customers of the same platform.

IE, if you buy and sell stocks on ETrade, most of the time the ownership with the dow doesn't change, instead the ownership within ETrade's database changes.

That is why Toyota is so popular in the US: They are extremely reliable.

(I personally don't drive them, but many of my family members love them.)

If you want to keep a new car 10+ years, they're generally a safe bet. Related: I had very little problems with my 2018 Tesla Model 3, but traded it in at 6.5 years because I needed a larger vehicle for my family.

The difference with Wikipedia is that additional articles can be added for more details; they don't all need to be crammed into a single article.

About a decade ago, I read the history of AIDS on Wikipedia. It was a very informative (and satisfying) 20 minute read.

Now it's pages and pages and pages of text: probably factual, but not a satisfying read. It feels like it's for a different audience, and it's not satisfying to read.

Is it AI generated? I don't know for sure, but it feels like either someone (or something)'s missing the point of who Wikipedia's audience is; or that someone is following an agenda, (or that there's an edit war going on between dueling agendas and the facts are added to drown out the "AIDS is a consequence of bad morals" agenda.)