Although there is plenty that is disturbing in the paper, Sunstein and his co-author at no place recommend banning websites. The list a bunch of possible responses (including banning), most of which (including banning websites) they immediately reject.
Apparently the two compromised accounts were because of "access a system used to help Google comply with search warrants by providing data on Google users." I've blogged about this. And my source for all of that is from an article in Computer World.
Fire detection and prevention (with a gas like FM2000)
A big heavy door to avoid any access
Anti-static electrical installation
An employee that can access your server and replace parts (that you'd have in stock) when you go in holiday
No I did not. Because what I host doesn't require that degree of uptime and physical security. I listed many options that may or may not be appropriate to the original poster. The OP didn't make clear what his hosting needs were, so my suggestions were a bit of a shotgun approach.
Obviously there are things that hosting in a real data center can do that one can't do at home. You just need to figure out what your needs and your resources are.
If you have some reason that you haven't moved to a different provider, at least let the rest of us know who to avoid. Name and shame, please.
As others have pointed out
If they have physical access, you can make things a bit tougher for them, but never impossible
If all they wanted was access to your logs, then create a user for your providers that is in a group that can read your logs
Check with your local ISPs to see if you can get a business account (for a static IP address) and self-host. I'm fortunate enough to have FiOS where I live, and while Verizon is really confused about having a business account at a residence, the headache is worth it. I've got about an hour's worth of UPS at home.
At least consider the possibility that your diagnosis is wrong. Maybe you've been rooted maliciously and not by your provider. Or maybe what's going on is your own misconfiguration. At least be open to this possibility (and so give them access to your logs to assist in diagnosis).
I'm unable to understand the main post (too much legal and technical jargon for my largely forgotten Hungarian knowledge), but I can read many of the comments.
Someone specifically asked about docx and a comment reply said that docx would be allowed because of the ISO decision (in which Hungary supported making docx an ISO standard). Both the query and response were from ACs, but the response certainly seems plausible to me.
The story of Hungary's ultimate support for Microsoft in the ISO is a long and twisted tale which I was only able to partially follow.
Dude, all of your traffic are passing through your ISP already, what makes you think they won't log your DNS requests to Google if they found enough people are using it?
There is a big difference between keeping logs for a service you are running and doing deep packet inspection. And if our ISPs are doing that, then Google is the least of our worries with respect to privacy.
Google is datamining everywhere and everything already.
When I first read about this, I immediately thought about datamining. But after another second, I figured that I would prefer Google to have this information than Verizon (where my caching DNS server currently forwards to). It is true that Google is better at datamining, but do keep in mind that whoever is providing your DNS service has the information about your DNS requests.
Another difference between Google and your ISP is that your ISP knows who you are from your IP address. So they can link DNS resolution requests to specific, named, customers. Google can't do that directly.
Maybe they should head to Universities such as Brigham Young or more traditional christian schools
Porn consumption is higher (PDF) in the more religious states.
Re:They're both good. What are you doing?
on
OpenSolaris Or FreeBSD?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The subject line has it right. Without knowing what you plan to use the system for and in what kind of environment it will be in there is absolutely no way to advise you. Indeed the article itself reeks of flamebait.
That said, I can say that I am extremely happy with FreeBSD, but I haven't played with OpenSolaris so I can't make any claims that FreeBSD is better. One of the reasons that I moved to FreeBSD (from Linux) was the more coherent administration. Every Linux distribution that I tried always tacked on a set of system administration/configuration tools that could do 90% of what I needed, but not the rest. But if I tried to do things by editing configuration files manually, sometimes the system tools would step on what I did. With FreeBSD it's pretty much all done by hand editing configuration files (except for user management, where one should let pw(1) edit the files for you). So I find that much easier to maintain.
As mentioned, the ports system is great. I find this the best package management system I've used to date. And it is easy to add a port when needed; so if I need something that isn't in ports, I can create my own port for it (which will deal with dependencies for me) and submit it.
ZFS is now fully supported in FreeBSD8. I haven't used it. I was disappointed that ZFS was not developed for OS X because I was hoping to have a truly native common filesystem I could use both on my servers and desktop. (OS X can cope with UFS, but only in a limited way).
Another things that is nice about FreeBSD (and is presumably true about OpenSolaris as well) is that the base system and the kernel are maintained by the same team. That is, these are full operating systems instead of just a kernel in need of a distribution.
The parent provides some good argument for using OpenSolaris. I'm not disputing those, but the choice depends on your particular needs
there could have been a seperate issue and you are just falling into a logical fallacy.
I did some limited follow-up experimentation. (and remember, I had explored other possibilities before coming to my conclusion). So while I can't be certain that I ruled out every alternative, I am fairly confident with the broad outlines of my conclusion.
More experimentation would be needed to determine exactly what characteristics of encoding, compression, transfer, etc play a role. So I won't swear that bit rate is the crucial factor.
Most importantly the thing to remember is that my experience describes my ears and my gear. So I'm not disputing claims that many people don't hear a difference. On the other hand, the fact that I noticed an enormous difference even though I wasn't looking for one suggests that sometimes the quality differences can be substantial.
and certainly not in a typical house room, car, bus, or bike.
I had been buying things from iTunes (128kbps AAC) and noticed no problems in my car or with my cheap computer speakers (with various computer noises in the room). I had, however, burned a few disks from iTunes and played them on my low end component system. Again, all was reasonably well until I played classical music that way.
When I first played downloaded classical music on that system I thought that something was broken. It was truly and horribly unlistenable. It took me a while to isolate the problem, but after other disks played fine and this disk played "fine" in my computer and car I finally figured out what the problem was.
Between that time and the introduction of iTunes+ (256kbps AAC) I stopped getting compressed classical (and some jazz) tracks.
What was so surprising about this experience is that (a) I hadn't set it up as a test of my hearing, but I noticed the difference entirely spontaneously. Indeed it hadn't even occurred to me that this might be an issue. And (b) I don't at all consider myself to be an audiophile. My hearing really isn't all that good.
The lesson is that what matters is what you hear with your music in your listening environment. In my most common listening environments it's all good. And with most of my music it's all good. But with a small subset of my music in one of my listening environments, bit rates can make the difference between unlistenable to perfectly enjoyable.
Just so that we don't forget the names of Wolfgang Werlé & Manfred Lauber, convicted killers. I would like to mention that the names of the killers are Wolfgang Werlé & Manfred Lauber. If they, Wolfgang Werlé & Manfred Lauber, don't like it they (Wolfgang Werlé & Manfred Lauber ) can sue me.
Fanboy basically means "no matter if they do good or bad I'll follow them", which is just another way of saying "I'm a fucking idiot". Seriously, being called fanboy is a bad thing.
I think you've got it wrong. An Apple fanboy is anyone who is less critical of Apple than you are, while an Apple-hater is anyone who is more critical of Apple than you are. At least that's how I've seen the words used on/.
When your system comes with a backup utility that you can literally turn on and forget about until you need it, it's pretty damned stupid to not use it.
~Philly
Not especially useful when you only have about 100GB or so to play with.
I'm not sure where your 100GB number is coming from. You do have to buy a large enough back-up drive, but once you plug that in, you just turn on Time Machine and forget about it.
I'm not a big fan of the Time Capsule, Apple sells, but it would be the right tool if you had a MacBook Air (with its single USB port and no FireWire). For anything else, get a FireWire external drive. The first time you plug it in to your Mac, you'll be prompted to set it up as a Time Machine device.
Of course I'm not trying to dismiss this serious bug by talking about back-ups, but Apple should be credited with integrating a very decent backup system into the OS. There really is no excuse for not making backups.
our Apple drones are so upset over this, they are planing to buy another Mac, just in case one got erased.
That's me!
As an Apple fanboy, I find this bug very embarrassing. From what I read, I do fall into the "very small number of users" that this bug could catch. That is, I've had a guest account before upgrading to Snow Leopard. I guess that I've never been hit by this because I've never logged out of the guest account and then logged in to an admin account. In fact, the guest account and the admin account are both very rarely used. (My account is a "regular" account.)
The only reason that I've enabled the Guest account is because my Macs (that's plural, so you see I really am a fanboy) have a "phone home" system in case of theft. And I figure that having a guest account will allow the thing, if stolen, to stay in use longer before getting wiped.
As for back-ups, I don't really think the Time Capsule is something I'd recommend to most users. Instead just use Time Machine with an external drive. I do think that Apple should be given lots of credit for Time Machine. It really makes back-ups so easy there is no excuse for anyone not to make back-ups.
I've long since come to the conclusion that Richard Stallman and Darl McBride share the same crazy belief. Both are convinced that free software is an anti-capitalist plot. The difference between the two is that for RMS this is a good thing.
A consequence of this is that RMS sees anyone who supports capitalists as the enemy. I really don't know enough about the case with Mono, and I am certainly skeptical of any dealings with Microsoft, but I am also highly suspicious of RMS's judgement in these matters.
I moved to Fastmail before Gmail existed. But I remember all of hype about Gmail when it hit beta. Other than the quantity of storage space (which was much larger) it offered only a proper subset of the features that Fastmail already had. And it didn't fully implement IMAP so you couldn't get all the features it did offer in the mail client of your choice.
Fastmail runs the kind of system that I would have [liked] to design.
Why thanks:)
You are very welcome.
I designed a lot of the current system (Cyrus replication slots and stores plus the "10 minutes to reinstall any server" and "make -C conf install" to get config up to date on any server)
Bron ( sysadmin at FastMail )
Cool. Some day I would like to learn how IMAP service is distributed over several boxes. In the late 90s I thought about that problem and decided that I didn't have the sysadm skills to do it (so just threw more memory and faster disks at our IMAP server).
Slashdot Mirror
Although there is plenty that is disturbing in the paper, Sunstein and his co-author at no place recommend banning websites. The list a bunch of possible responses (including banning), most of which (including banning websites) they immediately reject.
Apparently the two compromised accounts were because of "access a system used to help Google comply with search warrants by providing data on Google users." I've blogged about this. And my source for all of that is from an article in Computer World.
As I true geek, I'm sticking with my LaTeX Companion.
With [hosting from home], did you install:
No I did not. Because what I host doesn't require that degree of uptime and physical security. I listed many options that may or may not be appropriate to the original poster. The OP didn't make clear what his hosting needs were, so my suggestions were a bit of a shotgun approach.
Obviously there are things that hosting in a real data center can do that one can't do at home. You just need to figure out what your needs and your resources are.
If you have some reason that you haven't moved to a different provider, at least let the rest of us know who to avoid. Name and shame, please.
As others have pointed out
Mi van?
Oh well. I always get "még" and "mar" confused. I was trying to say, "It already is", but I guess I got it wrong.
I think it's all a secret ploy to make Hungarian the default world language
Meg is van.
I'm unable to understand the main post (too much legal and technical jargon for my largely forgotten Hungarian knowledge), but I can read many of the comments.
Someone specifically asked about docx and a comment reply said that docx would be allowed because of the ISO decision (in which Hungary supported making docx an ISO standard). Both the query and response were from ACs, but the response certainly seems plausible to me.
The story of Hungary's ultimate support for Microsoft in the ISO is a long and twisted tale which I was only able to partially follow.
I've tried to take a look at it, but my ability to read Hungarian, particular legal documents, is limited.
What isn't clear to me is would this rule out MS-Word documents for government communication? What about PDFs?
Dude, all of your traffic are passing through your ISP already, what makes you think they won't log your DNS requests to Google if they found enough people are using it?
There is a big difference between keeping logs for a service you are running and doing deep packet inspection. And if our ISPs are doing that, then Google is the least of our worries with respect to privacy.
Google is datamining everywhere and everything already.
When I first read about this, I immediately thought about datamining. But after another second, I figured that I would prefer Google to have this information than Verizon (where my caching DNS server currently forwards to). It is true that Google is better at datamining, but do keep in mind that whoever is providing your DNS service has the information about your DNS requests.
Another difference between Google and your ISP is that your ISP knows who you are from your IP address. So they can link DNS resolution requests to specific, named, customers. Google can't do that directly.
Maybe they should head to Universities such as Brigham Young or more traditional christian schools
Porn consumption is higher (PDF) in the more religious states.
The subject line has it right. Without knowing what you plan to use the system for and in what kind of environment it will be in there is absolutely no way to advise you. Indeed the article itself reeks of flamebait.
That said, I can say that I am extremely happy with FreeBSD, but I haven't played with OpenSolaris so I can't make any claims that FreeBSD is better. One of the reasons that I moved to FreeBSD (from Linux) was the more coherent administration. Every Linux distribution that I tried always tacked on a set of system administration/configuration tools that could do 90% of what I needed, but not the rest. But if I tried to do things by editing configuration files manually, sometimes the system tools would step on what I did. With FreeBSD it's pretty much all done by hand editing configuration files (except for user management, where one should let pw(1) edit the files for you). So I find that much easier to maintain.
As mentioned, the ports system is great. I find this the best package management system I've used to date. And it is easy to add a port when needed; so if I need something that isn't in ports, I can create my own port for it (which will deal with dependencies for me) and submit it.
ZFS is now fully supported in FreeBSD8. I haven't used it. I was disappointed that ZFS was not developed for OS X because I was hoping to have a truly native common filesystem I could use both on my servers and desktop. (OS X can cope with UFS, but only in a limited way).
Another things that is nice about FreeBSD (and is presumably true about OpenSolaris as well) is that the base system and the kernel are maintained by the same team. That is, these are full operating systems instead of just a kernel in need of a distribution.
The parent provides some good argument for using OpenSolaris. I'm not disputing those, but the choice depends on your particular needs
there could have been a seperate issue and you are just falling into a logical fallacy.
I did some limited follow-up experimentation. (and remember, I had explored other possibilities before coming to my conclusion). So while I can't be certain that I ruled out every alternative, I am fairly confident with the broad outlines of my conclusion.
More experimentation would be needed to determine exactly what characteristics of encoding, compression, transfer, etc play a role. So I won't swear that bit rate is the crucial factor.
Most importantly the thing to remember is that my experience describes my ears and my gear. So I'm not disputing claims that many people don't hear a difference. On the other hand, the fact that I noticed an enormous difference even though I wasn't looking for one suggests that sometimes the quality differences can be substantial.
and certainly not in a typical house room, car, bus, or bike.
I had been buying things from iTunes (128kbps AAC) and noticed no problems in my car or with my cheap computer speakers (with various computer noises in the room). I had, however, burned a few disks from iTunes and played them on my low end component system. Again, all was reasonably well until I played classical music that way.
When I first played downloaded classical music on that system I thought that something was broken. It was truly and horribly unlistenable. It took me a while to isolate the problem, but after other disks played fine and this disk played "fine" in my computer and car I finally figured out what the problem was.
Between that time and the introduction of iTunes+ (256kbps AAC) I stopped getting compressed classical (and some jazz) tracks.
What was so surprising about this experience is that (a) I hadn't set it up as a test of my hearing, but I noticed the difference entirely spontaneously. Indeed it hadn't even occurred to me that this might be an issue. And (b) I don't at all consider myself to be an audiophile. My hearing really isn't all that good.
The lesson is that what matters is what you hear with your music in your listening environment. In my most common listening environments it's all good. And with most of my music it's all good. But with a small subset of my music in one of my listening environments, bit rates can make the difference between unlistenable to perfectly enjoyable.
Just so that we don't forget the names of Wolfgang Werlé & Manfred Lauber, convicted killers. I would like to mention that the names of the killers are Wolfgang Werlé & Manfred Lauber. If they, Wolfgang Werlé & Manfred Lauber, don't like it they (Wolfgang Werlé & Manfred Lauber ) can sue me.
Didn't Thomas Hobbes argue that in the state of nature "the wife of man is solitary, nasty, brutish, and short." Or have I misquoted somehow?
Fanboy basically means "no matter if they do good or bad I'll follow them", which is just another way of saying "I'm a fucking idiot". Seriously, being called fanboy is a bad thing.
I think you've got it wrong. An Apple fanboy is anyone who is less critical of Apple than you are, while an Apple-hater is anyone who is more critical of Apple than you are. At least that's how I've seen the words used on /.
If you don't like the Time Capsule, then you're not a true Apple fanboy.
Oh crap. Do I also have to tolerate Apple mice to maintain my fanboy status?
When your system comes with a backup utility that you can literally turn on and forget about until you need it, it's pretty damned stupid to not use it.
~Philly
Not especially useful when you only have about 100GB or so to play with.
I'm not sure where your 100GB number is coming from. You do have to buy a large enough back-up drive, but once you plug that in, you just turn on Time Machine and forget about it.
I'm not a big fan of the Time Capsule, Apple sells, but it would be the right tool if you had a MacBook Air (with its single USB port and no FireWire). For anything else, get a FireWire external drive. The first time you plug it in to your Mac, you'll be prompted to set it up as a Time Machine device.
Of course I'm not trying to dismiss this serious bug by talking about back-ups, but Apple should be credited with integrating a very decent backup system into the OS. There really is no excuse for not making backups.
our Apple drones are so upset over this, they are planing to buy another Mac, just in case one got erased.
That's me!
As an Apple fanboy, I find this bug very embarrassing. From what I read, I do fall into the "very small number of users" that this bug could catch. That is, I've had a guest account before upgrading to Snow Leopard. I guess that I've never been hit by this because I've never logged out of the guest account and then logged in to an admin account. In fact, the guest account and the admin account are both very rarely used. (My account is a "regular" account.)
The only reason that I've enabled the Guest account is because my Macs (that's plural, so you see I really am a fanboy) have a "phone home" system in case of theft. And I figure that having a guest account will allow the thing, if stolen, to stay in use longer before getting wiped.
As for back-ups, I don't really think the Time Capsule is something I'd recommend to most users. Instead just use Time Machine with an external drive. I do think that Apple should be given lots of credit for Time Machine. It really makes back-ups so easy there is no excuse for anyone not to make back-ups.
I've long since come to the conclusion that Richard Stallman and Darl McBride share the same crazy belief. Both are convinced that free software is an anti-capitalist plot. The difference between the two is that for RMS this is a good thing.
A consequence of this is that RMS sees anyone who supports capitalists as the enemy. I really don't know enough about the case with Mono, and I am certainly skeptical of any dealings with Microsoft, but I am also highly suspicious of RMS's judgement in these matters.
Would knowing that there aren't a thousand experts out there make me an expert?
Sorry, but I stuck to Gmail years ago...
I moved to Fastmail before Gmail existed. But I remember all of hype about Gmail when it hit beta. Other than the quantity of storage space (which was much larger) it offered only a proper subset of the features that Fastmail already had. And it didn't fully implement IMAP so you couldn't get all the features it did offer in the mail client of your choice.
Fastmail runs the kind of system that I would have [liked] to design.
Why thanks :)
You are very welcome.
I designed a lot of the current system (Cyrus replication slots and stores plus the "10 minutes to reinstall any server" and "make -C conf install" to get config up to date on any server)
Bron ( sysadmin at FastMail )
Cool. Some day I would like to learn how IMAP service is distributed over several boxes. In the late 90s I thought about that problem and decided that I didn't have the sysadm skills to do it (so just threw more memory and faster disks at our IMAP server).