I'd like to make this into a full-featured post at some point, but for now I'm just writing down the essentials for getting a working ipv4 openvpn setup to work using ipv6\. There are two steps: 1\. Use IPv6 as the protocol to communicate between client and sever 2\. Use IPv6 addresses for the clients I had particular challenges with this because I'm using Cloud at Cost as my VPN server, and they provide a really small subnet. openvpn assumes you'll have a /64 or /112 netmask, but mine is /120 and I gave /124 to my vpn subnet.
I love thinking about human psychology. In particular, I love thinking about things humans do that are non-obvious, but pervasively drive their behaviour.
I can think of two general principles that drive a great deal of human behaviour, yet are non-obvious.
I have to start this post with some self-reflection. It's easy to believe that only stupid people get swept up in cults. I heard a few years ago, however, that in fact intelligent people are in fact more likely to join a cult (article, reference).
As a practising Christian, I've therefore spent a lot of time considering whether I'm just another naive cult member.
I used to come across linear algebra problems in math class that seemed impossible to solve. Consider trying to find the value of x, y, and z given this set of two equations:
4x + 3y + z = 8
x + y = 2
If I plug this into Wolfram Alpha, all it can tell me is "y = 4 - x". That doesn't solve for x, y, and z like we want. The problem is intractable.
When I was younger I believed in the Internet. I believed the Internet was a brave place, where knowledge and culture was disseminated freely. I saw it as a place where you could tap into unparalleled knowledge and improve yourself.
I love the feeling of reading a great Bible passage and having that chilling realization that I've still got so much to learn in life. It's called being "convicted". I associate it with positive feelings by now, since I know that if I follow the train of thought, and make some changes in my life, I'll feel so much better later.
I am a dishonest debater.
I remember being around 7 years old and arguing with my brother. Some adult had told us in the past not to run when crossing the road, and I agreed. My brother, a little older and a little more rebellious, still wanted to run across the road. One day, he did, and I confronted him.
"Don't run across the road" I (proudly) stated.
"Why not?" he (reasonably) asked.
At some point in my life, I started going to meetings, and slowly started gathering good and bad experiences. Also, for some reason, during university I actually studied how to have productive meetings, and I’ve kept a few tidbits of wisdom from that course.
I hold this truth to be self evident: most meetings are a waste of time.
But there’s a corollary: it’s also hard to identify which of your meetings are a waste of time, and why. It’s hard to predict in advance whether a meeting will be productive.
Consider the "strawman" logical fallacy (wonderfully illustrated in video here):
- Person A presents her argument (call it A).
- Person B voices his disagreement with argument S (an exaggerated or incorrect version of A).