> Starlink offers two IPv4 policies, "default" and "public". The default IPv4 configuration uses Carrier-Grade Network Address Translation (CGNAT) using private address space from the 100.64.0.0/10 prefix assigned to Starlink clients via DHCP. Network Address Translation (NAT) translates between private and Starlink public IPv4 Addresses. Starlink supports native IPv6 across all Starlink routers, kit versions, and service plans. All IPv6 compatible Starlink router clients are assigned IPv6 addresses.
> The Starlink public IPv4 policy is an optional configuration available to Local and Global Priority customers. A public IPv4 is reachable from any device on the Internet and is assigned to Starlink network clients using DHCP. Although truly static IPs are not available, a reservation system retains the public IPv4 address and IPv6 prefix even when the system is off or rebooted. However, relocating the Starlink or software updates may change these addresses. Public IPv4 addresses are available to the Local and Global Priority service plans. The public IPv4 option can be enabled from the account dashboard, see instructions here. Note: Starlink WiFi routers do not support port forwarding or firewall rules for IPv4 or IPv6.
That last bit means you need to use your own router plugged into the ethernet port of the transceiver.
Also, 99%+ of RV internet users get by without static/public IPs, and millions of home internet users do too. I'm a hacker and network administrator, it's not a big deal for me. They give public routable v6 /56 everywhere, so if it's a huge issue for you, you could set up dyndns and use v6, or run an overlay network.
Oh I didn't know that. Yeah I currently only have ipv4 (which sucks) on my residential fiber and have to use dynamic DNS (Their static ipv4 prices are ridiculous). I have exactly the setup you're describing, where I just use the ISP's modem alongside my own router.
I can't find anything yet. I've considered using LTE as well. Maybe some sort of 5G-based internet plan (like verison) would work, but those are not great value and may be limited to a certain region. I currently just wireguard tunnel to my apartment, but I will eventually have to move out.
If anyone has any ideas I would love to hear. Another similar limitation is recieving snail mail.
It seems too centralized. At that point why not use a VPS? I have a free vps from oracle I already use to relay some unimportant services to a static IP. But it's extra latency
I also run monerod, p2pool, i2pd and tord nodes, the purpose of which is defeated by central infrastructure.
But yeah friends have reccomended tailscale I have just never gotten fuzzy feelings whenever I revisit it. If we want to build a NAT-less world then everyone needs to get a static ipv6 and run an eepsite or onion service, and we can just use pubkeys for addressing.
Not quite sure what your specific use case it if you've already got a VPS @ OCI (I do too, its great, and super low latency from home to it).
That said, another option not mentioned is cloudflare tunnels. I run cloudflared on a proxmox'd tiny PC. My internal services are accessible to me externally, but secure. Easy to set up the security layer (sign in through your google account, github account, IP restrictions, WARP and lots more).
I'm a long time network admin and Tailscale is my favorite network tool ever. It just magically lets you connect servers in a very secure way. The tools you mention are great for learning but miserable to actually use.
> the purpose of which is defeated by central infrastructure
Any ISP you use will also qualify as central infrastructure. You aren't making any sense. Just rent something that lives in a datacenter and get on with life.
My personal experience is that all of my female colleagues have found jobs quite easily (even some pretty unimpressive friends of mine), while all of my male colleagues are struggling to find work. There is a massive hiring bias in favor of women as I understand it.
The idea that maternity leave plays into this in any signifigant way is totally old-fashioned (in my opinion).
Women essentially have a higher effective charisma thanks to their greater sexual market value. There were some studies that showed women have an in-group bias to support women, but also men have a cross-group bias to support women. People naturally pefer women.
We're all here arguing the "hender pay gap", yet women have the single most amazing gift granted to them by the universe that men will never have. What I'd give to be the one to have given birth to my own children.
I have thought of that. Regardless, there is a pretty obvious discrepancy of supply/demand in heterosexual relationships, which only becomes more evident through my relations with women.
You could restart it, but it would not be as profitable as whatever they're doing now and it would eat into the market share of the rest of jeep's lineup. Even if you made a competitor, you're competing with a product that has better margins than you and more access to capital. It's competitive in terms of consumer demand, not in aggregate profit.
Company A netting $1 from 50 happy customers is nowhere near as profitiable as Company B netting $10 from 10 miserable customers. Consider that Company A and B also compete for capital and manufacturing capability and such, not just customers. The market has chosen Company B as the most efficient vehicle to extract wealth from customers.
In fact the more Company B (and companies like it) succeed, the more capital they collectively soak up and the fewer competitors they'll have. The less leverage these miserable customers will have.
It's like the market-driven spread of some technology, like shipping containers. Except instead of a cost-cutting technology it's a price-inflating technology. Like movie theaters choosing to add massive markups to their snack bar. If you're a movie theater and you don't extort your customers for snacks, you have to raise ticket prices or lower profitability and you can't make ends meet or be as capital efficient as competitors.
I think there is some solution to this that isn't just heavy-handed regulation that companies will shoot loopholes in and run laps around. Maybe some type of stakeholder capitalism where consumers have more power than shareholders. Crowdsupply is one such example.
Probably not very well if the drone is the typical (quad)copter type since the shield will likely obstruct the airflow from the propellers reducing lift. The added weight of the shield is also likely to be a problem in small drones as most are already weight constrained. Although in small electric copters like those used in Ukraine, I'm not sure how often thermal imaging is used as a primary detection vector (due to size, distance and daytime thermal delta from below).
Thermal is definitely a primary vector in detecting larger drones like the Reaper due to large combustion or jet engines, but in that case the challenge isn't cloaking the drone, it's cloaking the heat of the vented exhaust that's likely leaving a thermal 'contrail' across the sky.
They still are I think. If I had to guess what women want in a car, it's probably something easy to maintain, quiet.
I think what's unappealing to women about EVs is the unreliability with respect to range and charging availability. I struggled with my mom to charge an EV she rented for an inter-city trip and she swore off EVs for a while.
Slate truck is a good example, I saw that ad where it is like decal'd for a flower shop for example. It's pretty small and cute (I suppose electric cars are easier to customize aestheticially in terms of shape as long as you stick to the skateboard format), and the fact that it is quite different-looking than most trucks left some wondering who it's for. Mostly women I think.
Whereas men buy more trucks, and usually there is sort of a power aspect to it where they want something that feels and sounds powerful (and being a gas car is part of that), so they can race it or can pull a toy hauler or something. Women want more of a commuter, but not like a sedan, usually something more bulky like an SUV that makes them feel safe. And then like bachelors and gay guys want like a 2D coupe or a roadster or something.
But it is interesting how these niches influence the market.
It's like most of the money in every market these days is made by cornering the market a certain lifestyle and increasing markup rather than trying to produce some ultra-efficient everyman vehicle. The innovation is all in advertising and consumer control, that's how I feel about every market these days.
If GE cemented the electric car as a must-have for women of the time, then we would have seen advances battery tech and EVs decades earlier. It would eventually have become mainstream with men as well (think of how the wristwatch was originially seen as a women's accessory, back when men had pocketwatches). The real innovation is in controlling consumer sentiment.
Apparently electric cars are for women and men secure enough in their masculinity that they don't require a truck with its own zip code? This is some post.
And then some of us scratch both itches at the same time. I daily a Tesla M3P but I also bought an F150 Lightning. Which, ironically perhaps, my wife daily drives. I don't know that it qualifies for it's own zip code, but it has all the upsides of a truck with all the upsides of an EV.
Thats cool I think, the electric cars do have a lot more torque and I can see that being useful in a truck. But the F150 production was halted because it was a largely unsuccessful.
And now that it's out of production, the parts are gonna be scarce. Speaking as someone with a chevy volt that has a screwed up battery. Unless you go with a prius or a tesla something you're not gonna get a reasonably-priced battery replacement. There really ought to be a standard battery form factor for EVs...
I think if you look at something at aptera, it's really the lightest vehicles that can take advantage of electrification. I mean, they are proposing 1000-mile range, with solar panels on the back that can recover as much as 40 miles of charge a day. It would be incredible if they can pull it off.
> Seems unlikely to happen since the battery is part of a space optimization problem.
I agree, in general, but the Lightning is a counter example. It uses modules, which do not maximize usage of available space, but do make it way easier to replace just one part and not the whole pack. And it is way more plausible that replacements could economically be made in the future that fit the same footprint. Maybe using entirely different battery chemistry.
The F150 production was halted because Ford had a constraint on aluminum that capped how many F150s (of any variety) they could produce, and the Lightning had the tightest margins. It was the best selling electric truck when they pulled the plug. And Farley could see the writing on the wall -- we were headed into a (minimum) four year period where the federal government was going to actively punish anybody making technology perceived to be 'green'. Easier to switch over to something less of a political target and give over the future of cars to the Chinese. Farley drove a Chinese EV for some time as his daily driver and he knew the US manufacturers were cooked. Take a look at Australia now, that is where we are headed.
> chevy volt
Yes, GM screwed you over on that. Best case is it failing under warranty and them buying back the car. The nice thing about the battery in the Lightning is that it isn't really a bespoke pack. It's a big sealed case with 9 battery modules wired together inside. So they don't have to spin up a custom production line to make more, they just need to build boxes of the same dimensions and compatible voltages, or update the BMS calibration. This is a way easier lift than making a custom one-off battery pack for a Volt.
> if you look at something at aptera
I see a tricycle, not a car, with a small number of die-hard enthusiasts who are slowly recognizing that it is DOA. Best I can tell, it's just a grift at this point. They've been making big promises since 2006, been liquidated once already, and still haven't delivered anything. They've narrowed their definition of success to "up to 40 cars for the most enthusiastic customers", maybe in early 2027 ... if they get the funding. Riiiiight.
Well you would think so where I live. I'm the only guy I know who drives a hybrid let alone an EV, other than my friend who has a beater crz (mild hybrid).
Charging your own electric car from the wall is also a challenge here in the country unless you own your own house or are willing to pay higher-than-gas prices.
"here in the country" people don't already have outdoor 240 outlets for RV hookups and welders? "here in the country" people don't run power to their sheds and outbuildings? "here in the country" people aren't resourceful enough to run an extension cord from their dryer plugin out a window?
reply