When you look less of a badass and more ridiculous carrying a semi-automatic rifle, you have failed at life. And these goobers, my friends, have failed.

As I mentioned the other day to my partner, the only advantage to having a bunch of idiots running around in public with guns is that if I ever need one, I can just take it as I doubt those types have any real idea how to prevent that from happening. I don’t even have to carry my own in case of alien invasion, etc.

Of course, that benefit is greatly outweighed by having a bunch of festering nincompoops with military-grade weaponry walking around looking like the army that the rejects’ rejects rejected.

And that’ s lot of rejection.

The problem with IPv6 is that it was not designed to be backwards-compatible with IPv4. Like a lot of systems designed by engineering tech-heads, the perfect is now the enemy of the good.

If IPv6 had been designed to be compatible with and inter-operate with the older standard, IPv6 adoption would’ve largely occurred already.

Yes, yes, I understand the current incompatibilities very well, but I am talking about when IPv6 was designed way back in 1996.

That would have given plenty of time for all routers, switches, operating systems and any other device to use the better, compatible standard.

It’s funny when I see people complain about IPv6 adoption being so slow, and I say, “Well, if the engineers of the standard had cared anything about compatibility, it wouldn’t have happened this way.”

And they say, “But IPv6 is not compatible with IPv4.”

And I say, “It could have been if it had been designed that way back in the 1990s.”

And then for some reason they say, “But IPv6 is not compatible!”

And I say, “I know that. But my point is that it could’ve been more transitional and been designed to be compatible, and still have been 128 bit, and saved us all this hassle.”

And then they say, “But it’s not compatible! It’s great like it is!”

And then I don’t say anything else because what’s the fucking point.

I’m pretty good at IT work. I’m quick, perceptive, and can hold a lot of that sort of info in my head at once.

There aren’t many people who can troubleshoot complicated systems as quickly as I can. That’s not bragging; that’s just fact.

But I’d be just terrible at jobs that executive and operations assistants do. I don’t have the engineeritis-caused belief that because I am good at one thing I am good at all of them, nor do I think I am any better than people who rely on “soft” skills.

If I had to do any of these things, much less all of them at once, the building would burn to the ground and the company would go out of business: schedule meetings with and for multiple important people; arrange travel; coordinate corporate events; greeting visitors and answering phone calls, and solve problems related to all of them and more.

I’ve known people with those skillsets, who are impressively good at those things, and I have no illusions about it. I simply could not do what they do, even if I wanted to.

I’m glad there are IT jobs for people like me, because if there weren’t I wouldn’t even be living in a van down by the river. I’d be huddled in a drainage culvert, licking grease off a McDonald’s wrapper.