Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | otabdeveloper4's commentslogin

If you'd bothered to read the Original Post, you'd know that the author already answered that.

ASN addresses are public information.

An ASN with a /32 allocation (the smallest for ISPs) is four billion /64s. It takes dozens of yottabytes of traffic to exhaustively scan one single /64. The entire v4 space takes 0.00000001 yottabytes, or about 110 GB/port in more understandable units.

There's a ton of things you can do to cut down on the scan space for v6, but it's still far huger than v4 can be.


> cue 500 replies of people telling you to eat your vegetables and wear the IPv6 hair shirt

Gee thanks, network experts, for solving a problem I don't have and making me pay for it!


AI is absolutely rock-bottom shit at all that.

Iran is le bad. Oceania has always been at war with ~Venezuela~ Iran, citizen.

"Bad thing" is an understatement.

Sorry dude, I don't want you guys vibecoding my kernel modules while spouting cargocult platitudes that "it can't have bugs, it's written in Rust".

If you're capable of auditing the LLM’s outputs and doing a decent code review then you don't need an LLM.

Nobody who was writing code before LLMs existed "needs" an LLM, but they can still be handy. Procfs parsing trivialities are the kind of thing LLMs are good at, although apparently it still takes a human to say "why not using an existing library that solves this, like https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/prometheus/procfs"

Sometimes LLMs will give a "why not..." or just mention something related, that's how I found out about https://recoll.org/ and https://www.ventoy.net/ But people should probably more often explicitly prompt them to suggest alternatives before diving in to produce something new...

> Procfs parsing trivialities are the kind of thing LLMs are good at

Have you tried it? Procfs trivialities is exactly the kind of thing where an LLM will hallucinate something plausible-looking.

Fixing LLM hallucinations takes more work and time than just reading manpages and writing code yourself.


Claude code can read manpages too

If I'd ever feel the urge to misengineer a rube goldberg contraption to manage my vibe coder LLM output I'll get back to you.

But at the moment I feel like all that sounds suspiciously like actual work.


It cant "read" anything. It can include the man page in the prompt, but it can never "read" it.

If the output is working code I don't really care whether it's reading, "reading", or """reading"""

Neither do you need and IDE, syntax highlighting or third party libraries, yet you use all of them.

There's nothing wrong for a software engineer about using LLMs as an additional tool in his toolbox. The problem arises when people stops doing software engineering because they believe the LLM is doing the engineering for them.


I don't use IDEs that require more time and effort investment than they save.

You mileage may vary, though. Lots of software engineers love those time and effort tarpits.


I don't know what “tarpit” you're talking about.

Every IDE I've used just worked out of the box, be it Visual Studio, Eclipse, or anything using the language server protocol.

Having the ability to have things like method auto-completion, go-to-definition and symbol renaming is a net productivity gain from the minute you start using it and I couldn't imagine this being a controversial take in 2025…


> I don't know what “tarpit” you're talking about.

Really? You don't know software developers that would rather futz around with editor configs and tooling and libraries and etc, etc, all day every day instead of actually shipping the boring code?

You must be working in a different industry.


right, we don't need a lot of things, yet here we are

need and can use are different things.

A monetary economy can't function without advertising or money.

You're tilting at windmills here, we can't go back to barter.


It can't function without advertising, money, or oxygen, if we're just adding random things to obscure our complete lack of an argument for advertising. We can't go back to an anaerobic economy, silly wabbit.

> our complete lack of an argument for advertising

It's literally impossible to start or run a business without advertising your products or services.


> “*nix” means a Unix-like OS just generally

"Unix-like OS" isn't a thing that has existed for two decades. Only Linux and Darwin survived, so don't do the "*nix" thing, please.


BSD would like a word.

They can't be heard over the faint booing from the Solaris crowd.

For that matter, if we're including the proprietary OSs, HP-UX is still kinda a thing and AIX is going strong. Of course, IIRC those are actual certified UNIX™ instead of unix-like... though I'd call that a subset, so still in scope IMO.

TIL AIX is still in development and they had a release this month

https://community.ibm.com/community/user/blogs/sanket-rathi1...


We don't talk about BSD here.


Very confident.

The people who do the "*nix" cargo cult thing have never seen a SunOS machine and don't even know what a HPUX is.


The linked trends suggest a revival of the term though.

> The people who do the "*nix" cargo cult thing have never seen a SunOS machine and don't even know what a HPUX is.

The meaning of words evolve over time though. Text is still broken into lines by "carriage return/line feeds" and is written on "hard disk" split up in "sectors".,. Over time people using these would not have seen a typewriter or even know what a platter is but may still use it to communicate effectively.


Illumos is still actively developed, open source, and can trace its lineage back to actual unix.

For that matter, we've had new members joining the family over the years; https://www.redox-os.org/ is, in their own words, "a complete Unix-like microkernel-based operating system written in Rust, with a focus on security, reliability and safety."


For anyone wondering, OpenSolaris -> illumos (e.g. OpenIndiana). Good times!

Not to mention that Version 4 UNIX source code was just released!

Well, yes, but that's not exactly a modern OS, just historically interesting.

Darwin is not UNIX (nor is XNU). But macOS technically is certified UNIX.

XNU literally stands for “X is Not Unix”

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: