| ▲ | unethical_ban 6 hours ago | |
I get the idea, but this isn't necessarily useful as advice and toys with definitions. It's ESPN levels of conversation-baiting. Lots of assumptions can be reasonably made about residential LANs without being true of enterprise LANs/DMZs. If a residential LAN is RFC1918 and has no NAT, then it is still a LAN... without internet access. Then the "A & !A" fallacy of "MAC addresses can’t be changed. MAC addresses can be changed." Just kind of a mess. Would be more interesting to explore the edge cases rather than throw out half-truths and 0.05% instances. I like the GNOME 2006 era though. | ||
| ▲ | aduwah 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |
Read it as chain of thoughts not as a list | ||
| ▲ | mitxela 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
Both A and !A can be fallacies if sometimes A. The biggest fallacy here, though, and not stated, is that "LAN" is a meaningful concept. | ||