When you organize so many bits you are fighting the very nature of the universe.
There is no safe place or method, you just have to keep making copies of everything, multiple zfs NASes in different locations is a start, but you can't trust just that, you have to update storage methods. Make tape and disc copies, have them in HDDs and SSDs, print whatever you can. Hopefully, when you try to access it, the universe will not have ruined one of your copies.
I doubt adding more people, companies and laws to it will be of any help.
Thanks for the read and you are right about this not being wikipedia, sorry. On the other hand, I met a few North Koreans while in China and the internet was not new to them. Maybe they were all high official's daughters and sons (I was in a Chinese university). It still seems strange that they go through so much trouble censoring it for just over a thousand people. Unlike in China, this doesn't make sense.
The North Korean media reports on US troops attacking North Korean soil and being repelled.
Care to point for a source? Considering how everything NK's government do or say gets lots of coverage, I think that if it was happening, they would shove that in our faces daily.
they don't know that there is an "internet"
Really impressive that such bold claims with no source got modded 5, insightful. Specially if we consider that we have little information about how people are over there.This kind of news (about the internet being down over there) and all the other ones about how the internet is censored indicate that they usually do have access to it.
From the announcement in the quoted article:
"A consortium of six global companies announced that they have signed commercial agreements to build and operate a new Trans-Pacific cable system to be called “FASTER” (...) The six-company consortium is comprised of China Mobile International, China Telecom Global, Global Transit, Google, KDDI and SingTel."
The OP gives the wrong idea that Google backs up the project and the others are involved only in management, which seems incorrect from the original announcement in NEC's page.
Thanks for the tip, I'll try it. I didn't like when that option of allowing adds came up, but assumed it would be ok to just leave it off. I wonder if that's why disconnect and kaspersky are blocking some stuff, maybe now I'll find out.
"Pretty pointless" is way too harsh. The internet really sucks with all the ads, 80% good is better than nothing.
I meant care about privacy. If you consider the tradeoff good, then you do not care a lot about privacy. At least we can say that you care less about privacy than you care about the goods or services you can get by giving it up.
I don't assume that default = bad either, I even gave an example that default isn't necessarily bad (Tails), but that being said, there were very few cases where I checked and the default was the best/safer/more honest option.
So are you 100% google free? No Android, no Google browser, no Gmail?
People who care doesn't use the defaults on almost anything, the big exception being Tails.
I don't agree with your point as everything falls between 0% and 100% and those numbers are actually very hard to get. To dismiss people just because they don't do 100% of something they are preaching is a fallacy to avoid the actual argument. Chrome does leak your data and it is not a choice for those who value their privacy even a little bit.
Just by using firefox with adblock plus and duckduckgo, will make you much less monitored than people using Chrome, even if you use google services.
I'm at least 95% google free. Firefox with adblock plus, disconnect and kaspersky ad blocking, search with duckduckgo or startpage in the few times when I really need google. Rooted android with no google apps and adblocking, never connecting to wifi or data networks (it is still a tracking device but, as far as we know, not for google), can't wait for a firefox phone. The weak link are the few youtube videos I watch now and then, always on a private tab to erase the cookies as soon as I get out (so they only get me by my dynamic IP, assuming they are keeping a log of that).
We do, it's not universal but it's used worldwide, it's called international units system (also called metric system), the length unit is the meter. 800 kilometers are 800 thousand meters, no comparisons needed. It's really easy to learn how big a meter is.
I don't know how people under the British system convert from miles to an easy to understand unit. I guess they just have to know how long a mile is and that's why they are always coming with these weird/funny comparisons (because most people don't really know how long a mile is since it's too long to feel or see).
I was under the impression TOR was explicitly designed to allow others to break the law
Not really, in some places even what is legal still might get you into trouble. In the US people are detained indefinitely without accusation, mostly because of religious reasons, but for other reasons as well. You might be selected for further surveillance for accessing legal things like a religious website, a linux forum, and news websites like Wikileaks or CNN (link to Jacob's presentation: to protect and infect part 2, it's long but I'm sure you can find that info in other places). Even if you think you are not under detention risk, you might want to read stuff without being selected for indefinite surveillance and infection, without being profiled as a criminal and getting in a list of people that can possibly be framed.
Another good example of tor use is if you share a house and don't want other people seeing the ads that are targeted to you (like a dick growing something, pheromones perfume, gay dating website, Russian brides website or too expensive shoes).
The BND can't spy on Germans, and the NSA can't spy on Americans, but they CAN spy on each other
Except that it is illegal for anyone to spy on Germans, the NSA CAN'T do that from anywhere in the world without violating the German constitution. When they do it on German soil the Germans have the legal authority to arrest the criminals and they should do so. Not doing so is to disobey their laws and law enforcement duties. When the crimes against their citizens are committed from other countries, the appropriate thing to do would be to ask for the criminals extradition.
It is the BND's job to keep their people safe from foreign criminals who violate their constitution, specially on their own territory. They are not doing their job properly and even if they claimed it as "leaked" information, they still would have to investigate if there are indications that the constitution is being violated.
What other country is ACTUALLY KILLING THOUSANDS OF FOREIGN PEOPLE based on oil interests and using it's spying network to determine the targets????
What other country is fighting against democracy in Latin America and Europe (by making coups like the recent one in Paraguay and subverting justice like in Sweden)?
What evil could Chinese spying do to an American citizen? I'm not talking about stealing trade secrets, I'm talking about real harm. Will an American be detained indefinitely without accusation due to Chinese spying? No. Just American spying do real harm to both Americans and foreigners.
The USA exercises military coercion against none of its trading partners.
They finance and give tactical support to the military coercion against the people of it's trading partners.
Did you forget about Latin America a few years ago and about Pakistan nowadays?
Both the number and severity of wars has decreased dramatically in the last few decades.
Even though this is true, it's still very disrespectful to the over 100k Syrians killed thanks to the US (Leaked Stratfor email) and to the 60k Iraqis that were killed because of weapons that didn't exist (and making up new justifications to why that war happened is bs).
Talking about how humanity was worst in the past is a way of distracting and making little of very serious current issues.
It is silly to blame America for problems in North Korea or Somalia.
Except that North Korea is not disrespecting every other nation's laws and people.
As a Latin American, I don't feel any threats from North Korea. My constitutional rights and my human rights (from the international agreement) are not being violated by North Korea, only by the US.
Thanks for the post. I've always assumed there was EE people involved with Radio Muda.
I'm not sure there's anything that would help to get the permit though. They might try to get it now that they are being seized constantly, we'll see if the university will be of any help.
It's actually very bad that they are coming up with this kind of "international news", tying unrelated things to try to make our government look hypocrite when that's not the case (although they are on other issues).
I never got involved with them, but from distance they used to look decent before, like a political group that wouldn't lie like this.
Gosh, I'm gonna go protest them next time I go there.
In Brazil laws come in effect after a period of time after being published (this must be the case with most laws in most countries).
Art. 32 of the new law says it will start counting 60 days from being officially published, that will be on June 22th. Here is the link for the law in the government website: L12968, just go to the very end, it's the last one.
Also, art. 15 states that internet applications (websites/services?) providers that are organized as companies, and provide the application in an organized, professional and for profit way, are required to keep the 6 months logs (that should have only ip and connection times). I don't believe that's Radio Muda's case, but we'll find out after the law comes in effect.
I'm against the seizure, always liked the people from the radio, am against the communications regulating agency in Brazil, do think radios should be free to operate without being related to the oligarchies controlling the country. But this has nothing to do with the new law.
There's an agency that regulates communications in Brazil and to have a working radio you need a permit (long history of oligopoly here, they don't give the permit). Radio Muda doesn't have the permit, that's the problem. The seizure is also happening on any other non registered radios in the city.
Also, the prosecutor is claiming security issues with interference on airplanes. They are a radio inside Brazil's #2 university with top engineers saying there's no way they are causing any safety problems, so that's a blatant lie from the prosecutor.
Eight other radio stations were seized in February. As much as it's a terrible thing and it just shows how the State is used against the people, this is really not related to Marco Civil or the fact that they are not logging anything.
No you really weren't following (and I'm not the AC from before). It is the government's obligation to provide the free healthcare, not the doctors, they will never have to work for a rate they disagree. It is a free market. The government sets it's price, which is actually pretty good. Doctors who agree to the price do work for the government. Doctors who don't agree work for themselves or insurance plans (that pay pretty close to the government's prices).
Doctors expect to be well paid, so when they are not working for the government they charge really abusively (otherwise they could be working for the decent government prices). Brazil is a third world country, with free market and huge social abyss, that means there is a lot of doctors who want to work for themselves but fight for a very small share of the population who can afford their really abusive prices. Since that competition is harsh and the government prices are quite decent, many freely decide to go with the government. If the government rates "go down" (doesn't go up with inflation), doctors stop doing government paid work and start working more for themselves in their offices (they can do that at any time because they are free), the free service becomes worst and the people complain with the government about not having their rights respected, and this leads the prices up again, maybe after a government change. Logically the system would require more tax money with time, so far that has been achieved through economic growth and by reducing tax evasion (it is a huge problem here). The taxes are already really high, so reducing evasion makes up for any increased costs. Eventually the system's cost will hit a plateau when it becomes decent everywhere and increase proportionally to the economic growth.
You are inventing the slavery where it doesn't happen, your hypothesis is just not happening and like Flavianoep said, we do not enslave people with a degree here.
About the notion of "free healthcare", the whole system is paid through taxes, but everybody (even those who can't afford to pay or to pay taxes, or even foreigners) have free access to it. When people say free healthcare they mean free access to healthcare, you are not charged to get treatment. We all know that it does cost somewhere, the notion here is that everyone has the right to medical treatment. Saying "it's not actually free" doesn't make a difference to a fellow human being who is being treated and would die if it wasn't for free.
You have the right to life for example, you do not have the right to eat steak every day. Do you disagree with this?
Yes, in the USA, people can legally lose the right to life so while legally murdered people were alive and had right to live, they had it because it was granted by others (but later taken away). People agreed on granting the right to life for most people most of the time, but sometimes that's not the case, like in the US with death penalty or in China with abortion. Yours is a convenient opinion to have because you will always be correct in any jurisdiction no matter what anyone else thinks or even how society works.
Why does your argument says "steak"? So that it is not weakened by the fact that in some societies the right to food is/was granted? If we change "steak" for "rice and beans" or "food", this would be simply wrong in Cuba until a few years back. People had a right to it and no one could disrespect that right without legal punishment.
That some government recognize rights and some do not is clear, but you cannot just make them up as you please, it doesn't work that way.
No, it actually works exactly that way. You seem offended by the use of the word "rights" but there are different uses to the word, and laws do create rights and obligations and they are made up as the legislators please up to the limits of their constrictions. In the beginning they might feel like privileges, but with time, as people consider it more and more as a right it becomes so.
Pretending that things are rights that clearly are not in fact cheapens those things that are rights.
So you are saying that people shouldn't have right to access to information because it cheapens right to life?
That is a terrible argument and the only use to that reasoning is to protect some people's interests against the interests of other people, changing the text of every law and constitutions from "rights" to "privileges" serves only the purpose of making it easier to take away.
On this case I even believe it would be better to have it the other way: Right to access to information for those that are alive.
Slashdot Mirror
A list of their clients must be worth a lot. It's people who would pay a fortune for every inch of anything you can put in their houses.
When you organize so many bits you are fighting the very nature of the universe.
There is no safe place or method, you just have to keep making copies of everything, multiple zfs NASes in different locations is a start, but you can't trust just that, you have to update storage methods. Make tape and disc copies, have them in HDDs and SSDs, print whatever you can. Hopefully, when you try to access it, the universe will not have ruined one of your copies.
I doubt adding more people, companies and laws to it will be of any help.
Thanks for the read and you are right about this not being wikipedia, sorry.
On the other hand, I met a few North Koreans while in China and the internet was not new to them. Maybe they were all high official's daughters and sons (I was in a Chinese university).
It still seems strange that they go through so much trouble censoring it for just over a thousand people. Unlike in China, this doesn't make sense.
The North Korean media reports on US troops attacking North Korean soil and being repelled.
Care to point for a source? Considering how everything NK's government do or say gets lots of coverage, I think that if it was happening, they would shove that in our faces daily.
they don't know that there is an "internet"
Really impressive that such bold claims with no source got modded 5, insightful. Specially if we consider that we have little information about how people are over there.This kind of news (about the internet being down over there) and all the other ones about how the internet is censored indicate that they usually do have access to it.
It was Bolivia's president that was detained, Evo Morales. Nice (?). See: Evo Morales, Bolivia President, Leaves Europe After Flight Delayed Over Snowden Suspicions
The following occur with all privacy options enabled -- including disabling analytics (i.e., Diagnostics and Usage Data).
and then it lists the stuff they are reporting back. Why such a lengthy post without bothering to read the original link?
Note that this is coming from the country where public employees are paid to spread lies on the internet. How Covert Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive, and Destroy Reputations, GCHQ’s “Chinese menu” of tools spreads disinformation across Internet
Maybe someone stole 15 million accounts and are trying them out (way less than 1200 million and way more than normal on their website).
From the announcement in the quoted article:
"A consortium of six global companies announced that they have signed commercial agreements to build and operate a new Trans-Pacific cable system to be called “FASTER” (...) The six-company consortium is comprised of China Mobile International, China Telecom Global, Global Transit, Google, KDDI and SingTel."
The OP gives the wrong idea that Google backs up the project and the others are involved only in management, which seems incorrect from the original announcement in NEC's page.
Thanks for the tip, I'll try it. I didn't like when that option of allowing adds came up, but assumed it would be ok to just leave it off. I wonder if that's why disconnect and kaspersky are blocking some stuff, maybe now I'll find out.
"Pretty pointless" is way too harsh. The internet really sucks with all the ads, 80% good is better than nothing.
I meant care about privacy. If you consider the tradeoff good, then you do not care a lot about privacy. At least we can say that you care less about privacy than you care about the goods or services you can get by giving it up.
I don't assume that default = bad either, I even gave an example that default isn't necessarily bad (Tails), but that being said, there were very few cases where I checked and the default was the best/safer/more honest option.
So are you 100% google free? No Android, no Google browser, no Gmail?
People who care doesn't use the defaults on almost anything, the big exception being Tails.
I don't agree with your point as everything falls between 0% and 100% and those numbers are actually very hard to get. To dismiss people just because they don't do 100% of something they are preaching is a fallacy to avoid the actual argument. Chrome does leak your data and it is not a choice for those who value their privacy even a little bit.
Just by using firefox with adblock plus and duckduckgo, will make you much less monitored than people using Chrome, even if you use google services.
I'm at least 95% google free. Firefox with adblock plus, disconnect and kaspersky ad blocking, search with duckduckgo or startpage in the few times when I really need google. Rooted android with no google apps and adblocking, never connecting to wifi or data networks (it is still a tracking device but, as far as we know, not for google), can't wait for a firefox phone. The weak link are the few youtube videos I watch now and then, always on a private tab to erase the cookies as soon as I get out (so they only get me by my dynamic IP, assuming they are keeping a log of that).
I don't know how people under the British system convert from miles to an easy to understand unit. I guess they just have to know how long a mile is and that's why they are always coming with these weird/funny comparisons (because most people don't really know how long a mile is since it's too long to feel or see).
I was under the impression TOR was explicitly designed to allow others to break the law
Not really, in some places even what is legal still might get you into trouble. In the US people are detained indefinitely without accusation, mostly because of religious reasons, but for other reasons as well. You might be selected for further surveillance for accessing legal things like a religious website, a linux forum, and news websites like Wikileaks or CNN (link to Jacob's presentation: to protect and infect part 2, it's long but I'm sure you can find that info in other places). Even if you think you are not under detention risk, you might want to read stuff without being selected for indefinite surveillance and infection, without being profiled as a criminal and getting in a list of people that can possibly be framed.
Another good example of tor use is if you share a house and don't want other people seeing the ads that are targeted to you (like a dick growing something, pheromones perfume, gay dating website, Russian brides website or too expensive shoes).
The BND can't spy on Germans, and the NSA can't spy on Americans, but they CAN spy on each other
Except that it is illegal for anyone to spy on Germans, the NSA CAN'T do that from anywhere in the world without violating the German constitution. When they do it on German soil the Germans have the legal authority to arrest the criminals and they should do so. Not doing so is to disobey their laws and law enforcement duties. When the crimes against their citizens are committed from other countries, the appropriate thing to do would be to ask for the criminals extradition.
It is the BND's job to keep their people safe from foreign criminals who violate their constitution, specially on their own territory. They are not doing their job properly and even if they claimed it as "leaked" information, they still would have to investigate if there are indications that the constitution is being violated.
What other country is ACTUALLY KILLING THOUSANDS OF FOREIGN PEOPLE based on oil interests and using it's spying network to determine the targets???? What other country is fighting against democracy in Latin America and Europe (by making coups like the recent one in Paraguay and subverting justice like in Sweden)? What evil could Chinese spying do to an American citizen? I'm not talking about stealing trade secrets, I'm talking about real harm. Will an American be detained indefinitely without accusation due to Chinese spying? No. Just American spying do real harm to both Americans and foreigners.
The USA exercises military coercion against none of its trading partners.
They finance and give tactical support to the military coercion against the people of it's trading partners. Did you forget about Latin America a few years ago and about Pakistan nowadays?
Both the number and severity of wars has decreased dramatically in the last few decades.
Even though this is true, it's still very disrespectful to the over 100k Syrians killed thanks to the US (Leaked Stratfor email) and to the 60k Iraqis that were killed because of weapons that didn't exist (and making up new justifications to why that war happened is bs).
Talking about how humanity was worst in the past is a way of distracting and making little of very serious current issues.
It is silly to blame America for problems in North Korea or Somalia.
I didn't see him mentioning NK or Somalia.
Except that North Korea is not disrespecting every other nation's laws and people. As a Latin American, I don't feel any threats from North Korea. My constitutional rights and my human rights (from the international agreement) are not being violated by North Korea, only by the US.
Yes, let's try to scare the few people that are still talking about the need to do something. That will make the world better.
Thanks for the post. I've always assumed there was EE people involved with Radio Muda. I'm not sure there's anything that would help to get the permit though. They might try to get it now that they are being seized constantly, we'll see if the university will be of any help.
It's actually very bad that they are coming up with this kind of "international news", tying unrelated things to try to make our government look hypocrite when that's not the case (although they are on other issues). I never got involved with them, but from distance they used to look decent before, like a political group that wouldn't lie like this. Gosh, I'm gonna go protest them next time I go there.
In Brazil laws come in effect after a period of time after being published (this must be the case with most laws in most countries). Art. 32 of the new law says it will start counting 60 days from being officially published, that will be on June 22th. Here is the link for the law in the government website: L12968, just go to the very end, it's the last one.
Also, art. 15 states that internet applications (websites/services?) providers that are organized as companies, and provide the application in an organized, professional and for profit way, are required to keep the 6 months logs (that should have only ip and connection times). I don't believe that's Radio Muda's case, but we'll find out after the law comes in effect.
I'm against the seizure, always liked the people from the radio, am against the communications regulating agency in Brazil, do think radios should be free to operate without being related to the oligarchies controlling the country. But this has nothing to do with the new law.
There's an agency that regulates communications in Brazil and to have a working radio you need a permit (long history of oligopoly here, they don't give the permit). Radio Muda doesn't have the permit, that's the problem. The seizure is also happening on any other non registered radios in the city.
Also, the prosecutor is claiming security issues with interference on airplanes. They are a radio inside Brazil's #2 university with top engineers saying there's no way they are causing any safety problems, so that's a blatant lie from the prosecutor.
Eight other radio stations were seized in February. As much as it's a terrible thing and it just shows how the State is used against the people, this is really not related to Marco Civil or the fact that they are not logging anything.
No you really weren't following (and I'm not the AC from before). It is the government's obligation to provide the free healthcare, not the doctors, they will never have to work for a rate they disagree. It is a free market.
The government sets it's price, which is actually pretty good. Doctors who agree to the price do work for the government. Doctors who don't agree work for themselves or insurance plans (that pay pretty close to the government's prices).
Doctors expect to be well paid, so when they are not working for the government they charge really abusively (otherwise they could be working for the decent government prices). Brazil is a third world country, with free market and huge social abyss, that means there is a lot of doctors who want to work for themselves but fight for a very small share of the population who can afford their really abusive prices. Since that competition is harsh and the government prices are quite decent, many freely decide to go with the government.
If the government rates "go down" (doesn't go up with inflation), doctors stop doing government paid work and start working more for themselves in their offices (they can do that at any time because they are free), the free service becomes worst and the people complain with the government about not having their rights respected, and this leads the prices up again, maybe after a government change. Logically the system would require more tax money with time, so far that has been achieved through economic growth and by reducing tax evasion (it is a huge problem here). The taxes are already really high, so reducing evasion makes up for any increased costs. Eventually the system's cost will hit a plateau when it becomes decent everywhere and increase proportionally to the economic growth.
You are inventing the slavery where it doesn't happen, your hypothesis is just not happening and like Flavianoep said, we do not enslave people with a degree here.
About the notion of "free healthcare", the whole system is paid through taxes, but everybody (even those who can't afford to pay or to pay taxes, or even foreigners) have free access to it. When people say free healthcare they mean free access to healthcare, you are not charged to get treatment. We all know that it does cost somewhere, the notion here is that everyone has the right to medical treatment. Saying "it's not actually free" doesn't make a difference to a fellow human being who is being treated and would die if it wasn't for free.
You have the right to life for example, you do not have the right to eat steak every day. Do you disagree with this?
Yes, in the USA, people can legally lose the right to life so while legally murdered people were alive and had right to live, they had it because it was granted by others (but later taken away). People agreed on granting the right to life for most people most of the time, but sometimes that's not the case, like in the US with death penalty or in China with abortion. Yours is a convenient opinion to have because you will always be correct in any jurisdiction no matter what anyone else thinks or even how society works.
Why does your argument says "steak"? So that it is not weakened by the fact that in some societies the right to food is/was granted? If we change "steak" for "rice and beans" or "food", this would be simply wrong in Cuba until a few years back. People had a right to it and no one could disrespect that right without legal punishment.
That some government recognize rights and some do not is clear, but you cannot just make them up as you please, it doesn't work that way.
No, it actually works exactly that way. You seem offended by the use of the word "rights" but there are different uses to the word, and laws do create rights and obligations and they are made up as the legislators please up to the limits of their constrictions. In the beginning they might feel like privileges, but with time, as people consider it more and more as a right it becomes so.
Pretending that things are rights that clearly are not in fact cheapens those things that are rights.
So you are saying that people shouldn't have right to access to information because it cheapens right to life? That is a terrible argument and the only use to that reasoning is to protect some people's interests against the interests of other people, changing the text of every law and constitutions from "rights" to "privileges" serves only the purpose of making it easier to take away.
On this case I even believe it would be better to have it the other way: Right to access to information for those that are alive.