With IPv4 scarcity, many carriers had to employ NAT (network address translation) so that many users are mapped behind a single IP at the same time. This of course makes impossible to put a personal server on a local home network because although connecting to external addresses is still doable, any incoming packet wouldn't know which one of the users it should reach without explicit rules that the users have no access to.
It also means you will frequently be blocked by services such as cloudflare if anyone else you're sharing an IP address with is infected with a spammy virus.
I’ve been behind CGNAT once. It was a miserable experience for this reason. (No idea how many people there were at the one IP address, but https://iknowwhatyoudownload.com/ reported on average ten or twenty hours of video per day being downloaded via BitTorrent from the address, none of which was from my endpoint.)
Carrier-grade NAT. Generally rolled out due to IPv4 exhaustion.
Under CGNAT Your router does not get an externally reachable IP address from your ISP, as it sits behind ISP-level NAT router that assigns addresses to subscribers much like your home router assigns addresses to your home machines.
So you can’t run any sort of externally reachable service at all.
Like... what ISP would go out of their way to do that? Call me cynical, but I doubt there's an ISP that uses CGNAT who would forward a port to you. Like, they all do the total absolute minimum necessary to get you Internet access. Why would they bother creating some way to let you forward a port to your computer? No average person needs to do that anymore now that everything is cloud-based. I could be way wrong on this, but I just have my doubts...
I have used a couple of OneDrive family accounts to host some media files that I wanted to preserve (yt video downloads, academic courses and papers collected from questionable soruces). What are the chances MS blocks access to my data in the next 1 year?
I'm guessing the main part of the content (for example the news story) is rendered server side, the client-side adds any personalisation if the user is logged in etc and adds panels for 'related'/most liked/read more news stories etc.
This means the content can be both crawled for SEO and cached (there's cache hit and fastly headers in their responses)
NPCI, the organization operating UPI, is owned by public and private banks. It is approved by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and is marketed by the government. About two years ago, RBI had concerns about NPCI having a monopoly and wanted more players to create and interoperate similar services, but it canceled that plan (reasons unknown).
If the universe is expanding outwards, are these voids also moving similarly? I just cant ever seem to reconcile the expansion theory with the theory of galaxies/voids merging or colliding.
From the perspective of any galaxy, most other galaxies are moving away from it, "outward". But some galaxies are close enough to form clusters that are gravitationally bound, which can cause them to orbit each other or merge.
We can say the visible universe is expanding outwards, because we see light from more and more distant things as the universe ages. But the actual (not just visible) universe may be infinitely large, we don't know what's beyond the range we can see (limited by the speed of light, unless we discover something radically new about physics we can never see farther). So if you look at the universe from a holistic point of view, not just from our perspective which makes us the center of the universe, expansion may not really be the best way to think about it. It's more like the size of the empty parts is increasing relative to the size of the not-empty parts.
We don’t necessarily see more light as the universe ages, nor do we see farther away. The universe is expanding, and the farther something is, the faster it is moving away from us. It can even be moving faster than the speed of light relative to us, because the space between us is growing, and more empty space between us, the more this extra stacks up. When this happens, something is beyond the visible universe - that light can never reach us.
So there are two ways we cannot see something - if the universe is not old enough for light to reach us yet, or if there is too much new universe being created in between us and the light for the light to catch up to us.
In a far enough future, there will be no other galaxies in the sky as all the matter will be too far away for light to reach us.
No really, by our current definition of 'void', does a void move or is its position and shape solely defined by the objects moving into and around it? Separately, is the void inside the universe the same as the void outside the universe, or is it fundamentally different somehow?
I don't expect we'll ever answer the second question, but the first is able to be answered by how we choose to define the term 'void'.
Voids are a description of an area that has relatively less matter density than the average of the universe, not objects themselves, so I'm not sure what you mean by a void "moving".
>Separately, is the void inside the universe the same as the void outside the universe, or is it fundamentally different somehow?
By definition they are different. Voids, as I said, are areas within the universe that have relatively less matter density. Key thing being that they are part of the universe, whereas 'outside the universe' is, well, not part of this universe.
> Voids are a description of an area that has relatively less matter density than the average of the universe, not objects themselves, so I'm not sure what you mean by a void "moving".
> Does a void move? No really, by our current definition of 'void', does a void move or is its position and shape solely defined by the objects moving into and around it?
That is, I think that they were not asking a factual question—"obviously voids can move, but do they?"—but rather a sort of ontological question—"does it even make sense to ask whether voids move?"—just as you are.
Some areas of space have a more matter than others e.g. galactic clusters, where the relative speed of the galaxies to each other is higher than the expansion. This video from the excellent Space Time series helps explain it: https://youtu.be/bUHZ2k9DYHY
Definitely too early in some respects - the LED boards were huge and clunky, advertisers weren't really interested despite the advantages (for a London bus, apparently, it took ~2 days out of service to replace vinyl adverts which is why you frequently see them with 6m+ outdated adverts), some questionable decisions were made re: software, etc.
There were rugged PC's available back then for automotive use (think cop cars and the like). To me it sounds like they did not spec the hardware properly or installed it improperly.
Yeah, there were two schools of thought - proper rugged industrial PCs or "whatever we can find cheap on $boxshifter.com". The latter cohort won (although not really because they were a constant nightmare of problems...)
