> Celsius (159.8 degrees Fahrenheit) and as low as -32 degrees
pfft... -32C is a cold day in Montreal, but not unheard of at all... Last winter the pleather case for my raybans shatterred when I got my sunglasses out of it in the morning. seems like *military specs* doesn't include the arctic (and Montreal is south of Seattle, not even close to arctic.)
I would worry about such a display if it we ever left overnight in the car.
Not a dupe, but highly correlated issue. Where the lifespan of equipment that can be responsibly used is limited by it's software support lifespan:
https://ask.slashdot.org/story...
Someone builds a 100K$ piece of equipment using a windows 7 workstation as a front-end, and in 2020 it's a paperweight?
machines are big these days, and there is a lot of code that doesn't need performance, but say we take you at your word, it's still not python's fault: you designed it wrong. Python makes it as easy as possible to implement algorithms, and the result is readable, so they can be discussed and changed. If it doesn't go fast enough for your needs, then you did not figure out an appropriate solution. I have replaced C code with python, where the python ran 10x faster. This happens because people writing in more difficult languages spend a lot of time sweating the details, so they don't have as much time on the bigger picture. A nearly ideal way to approach a lot of problems is to figure out the algorithms in python, even while you keep C in the back of your head. Once you have something that works, you can replace the performance critical bits in C, but likely >90% of the code will still be OK in python.
the guy lost power during a trans-atlantic sailing race. I'm a bit puzzled as to why that was a huge problem, but he does seem to be somewhat aware of the method. He also uses as his base hull, a former transatlantic racing sailing catamaran. I don't understand why people think that something other than sailing will be magically more efficient than, well, sailing... I would think they should have put a large vertical axis wind turbine near where the mast would be, it would likely provide a lot more power than the solar cells, and would be complementary. I say vertical axis because putting a large weight at the top of a tall tower has issues in a boat.
CASB - Cloud Access Security Brokers. but regardless of checklist items, I think the post is mostly addressing the wrong problem. Good practices in new deployments is good, but how often are deployments new?
As someone most involved in operations, I think you fail to appreciate how hard the basics are. Just try to keep ALL of a reasonably size organization's internet facing thingums patched. I haven't heard of a anyone being successful at that. Software and systems are thought of like consumer goods: you buy them, they have a natural life, and you repair for a while or replace before that gets too costly.
For internet facing services, it's more like fruit. You expect to put fresh fruit out there every week, because no-one is going to buy two month old watermelon. Acquire fresh fruit, qa them for damage, for ripeness, etc... and put them on the shelf, in a day or two. And a week later, you need new fruit.
That's the thing people aren't really grasping. When they contract out development, and they accept delivery from something. A week later, they either have support or it starts going bad and needs to be thrown out within a few months. You can't really buy software, or it's a really bad deal if you do, because a *perpetual license* is good for a week or two.
companies have a financial motivation to MITM their staff, because they might pay for the proxy's cost in saved bandwidth alone, and they could easily frame it as a compliance measure to avoid data exfiltration and that sort of thing. But doing that makes the entire network untrustworthy in many (most?) people's eyes.
The likely result: people use other channels with less surveillance because they don't trust the network. If I don't trust my employer's network, I'm going to Starbucks at the coffee break to do my banking (and my data exfiltration.) Employer loses employee productivity and visibility into traffic.
but that isn't the bad thing... If their web cache ever gets hacked... holy crap what kind of liability do you think there will be for intercepting EVERYONE's banking/medical/personal information, as well as ALL TRANSACTIONS of the company including all relevant secrets? The bad people can impersonate the corporation and/or any employee in any way whatever to whatever outside entity in a way that is undetectable to employees. And the company did it. The company made trust of their web cache, where I can't tell the difference between legit and compromised connections, a condition of employment. To me, if my employer puts in an MITM web-cache, and they get hacked, and someone drains my bank account, that company is liable.
I agree, they can't so don't use it for anything where such tampering is likely to be valuable.
but satellite imagery, weather radar scans, public domain movies, if there is little value in tampering with it, and it is available from other sources anyways, then there is little harm.
Also, you could have a secondary channel, which is SSL secured, and pass data checksums over that other channel, while keeping the data channel in the clear.
If you have a web site that has only public data and a very wide audience, then you want people downstream to be able to share downloading using proxy caches, which is good for everyone, the source servers and their networks, organizations where the data is popular save on bandwidth also. Labelling http as always bad is... well villifying what in certain cases is the best option... well that sucks.
It's fine to prefer https when available, but there should be a way to say: this site really is intentionally https, and not have it flagged as having cooties.
It's just a real shame that the power that comes from a complete surveillance state invariably results in oppression and tyranny. Makes the occasional stabbing seem more tolerable than the endless face-stomping of jackboots.
The thing about people in Jackboots is that they will be surveilled also. The key is always *who watches the watchers*, and I think the only solution is that everyone has the option of watching anyone. The guys with jackboots would be caught and punished. Besides, Jackboots are so 20th century. I expect something like Chinese social networking points style oppression in this century. The government will just assign you demerit points, and folks will be graded based on the company they keep, so you will get gradually ostracised by *right* thinking people. It will be awful, but it won't be sooo bad that people rise up en masse. Why get folks riled up?
I don't think saying *yeah people get stabbed a bit* will be an answer that will convince. There will always be those who believe in the perfectibility of man.
I wonder, if an AI was watching this guy's internet posts, could it have predicted the likely outcome, and been able to alert police, say, when he bought an airline ticket, to have them ask some questions? So is this an argument for big brother as a force for good? The alternative being we arm everyone to the teeth, and lose a couple of thousand a year to firearms accidents, and a likely increase in violent crime. Dunno, not liking my choices here.
not real thrilled with the choices, but given what it is... I think I prefer big brother... just sayin'
in most countries criminals lie and accuse cops of all manner of misdeeds. Yeah, crooked happens, but anarchy and mob rule isn't the antidote, it's worse than the disease.
you're really sticking it to the man... that all powerful evil mastermind cop that had a 250k mortgage with his wife, he was really living high on the hog, all that privilege. Yeah... That guy's wife and their four kids DESERVED it! Vigilante B.S.
Cops aren't anonymous. Film the cop beating someone up, and he gets brought up on charges, and the law happens.
Well, that's not bile... that actually important speech, and if you speak up, you should be protected. There are whistleblower laws, Companies are often not free to punish people ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ) legally, but if you remain anonymous, and they figure it out, they can find an excuse to fire you and get away scot-free. One of the things Snowden did was ensure that exchanges with journalists were gpg encrypted. That meant the source of the messages had the gpg key, because he didn't want someone else impersonating him. Now if you leak something *anonymously* and then someone impersonates you and leaks fake news that discredits you to the journalist, embarrasses them, or has them *meet* you and get ambushed... How far ahead are you?
If the scum can be anonymous, reprisals are cost-free. If you are wearing some updated version of google glass, and someone approaches you, they are videod, and id'd, and the database brings up the scum's real name, it raises the cost a bit.
but yeah... whistleblowers are good case for real anonymity, but that is a far narrower case, and it should be a special one, not the default that allows the casual cost-free reprisals we see today.
Threatening people is illegal, Swatting is illegal, and are usually done anonymously. It's way higher cost to do that if you must take responsibility for it. It should be far safer to speak up if others are held responsible for their speech.
Free speech is about anonymity as well -- you should have the ability to spew bile without your employer, school, etc (non-governmental entities) punishing you for it.
Thats the point isnt it. When you spew bile, it brings disrepute on those associated with you, and they may not appreciate it. The answer is: dont do that. Society gets no benefit from you hurling mysogynist epithets at your teacher anonymously, That isnt free speech, its just abuse and/or defamation, and if its bad enough, someone will care and they will track you down. And they should.
Furthermore, people have been physically threatened by non-governmental actors for unpopular views (i.e. criticism of foreign governments by disapora, anti-war, etc).
Edward Snowden would be dead if he were anonymous. Anonymity is no protection. If it ever matters, they will find you, and no-one knowing your name will not protect you.
Of course, with enough effort, any handle can be traced to a real identity. The point is that it isn't worth it to unmask every "anonymous" Internet user, so people are relatively safe speaking anonymously. With everything under a real name, this safety will disappear.
Better anarchy than a suburbanized, boring Internet.
My point exactly... people howling about privacy and anonymity are trying to protect something that doesnt really exist. It is, at best, a polite fiction. Countries and large companies have nicely trained cyber warfare units to identify, troll or hack any target. Does this trivial fig-leaf do anything good for us? I very much doubt it.
Its called a cell phone. You are tracked. Phone companies track you, Apple or Google track you, and in most countries, including Germany, the government can track you ( https://www.reuters.com/articl... ). You dont want to be tracked? Dont carry a cell phone. Could police ordered with enforcing a court order for someone to stay a certain distance from their ex be granted access to phone company records? Since catching the guy AFTER hes killed is ex would look bad, would the phone company be asked to produce *live* results, rather than after the fact records? I think so... Thats where we are going.
but these laws only affect the little people. If someone has sufficient resources and connection, they can track anyone. All *privacy* laws do is prevent the little people from tracking big people. I dont want this to be true, but wishing doesnt make it so.
The trick is figuring out what criteria merit promotion in the hierarchy, making sure the higher-ups have values that we can agree to. That sounds suspiciously like a functioning democracy.
Note that I said *functioning*... in practice, lets just say there are issues.
You pay for something on the internet? Youre using a card, that card traces to a bank account. You dont want to type it in every time? the account is linked to your here. Tracking you? If you have a cell phone, you can be trivially tracked, period. If a government wants to spy on people, there are some barriers in western democracies (although little, as Snowden revealed) and none at all in more authoritarian ones, but the barriers are low enough that it doesnt really stop anyone in authority.
So when people want to be *anonymous*, they just require companies and governments to investigate in a little extra metadata tracking, and they can get the job done. If someone cares, they will track you. All that current anonymity does is give a false sense of security to those emit bile on the internet. It is consequence-free because tracking is hard for normal people. Some of that bile is from state actors. surprise. Free speech is about not being punished for frankly stating a view. It is not about *anonymity.*
Believing that you are untraceable because you called yourself a silly name is silly. If anyone cares, they will track you down. Believing that internet anonymity is real is dangerous because if you start saying things that are of interest to authorities, they will find you. Its a false sense of security, and one that gives the governments and large corporations that make the investment power over all of us by giving them exclusivity over the ability to track.
Real identities are better for all of us, and more transparency will get us more than security by obscurity. Make it easier for everyone to track everyone so that that power is democratic. Yeah spousal abuse... ok, but isnt it a heck of a lot easier to enforce a court order if everyone is wearing a tracking device, that anyone can see and report?
I actually hate that future is ubiquitous tracking, but just as arguing that water isnt wet does not make sense, the technology makes it very easy to track people, and people will be tracked, the only thing we can realisticially do is track the people doing the tracking. It sucks, but calling yourself doofus doesnt do a thing.
73% of US dairy farmers' revenue is from subsidies.
https://www.realagriculture.co...
so, fine to get rid of them, but get rid of crop insurance, Price Loss Coverage, Agricultural Risk Coverage, Stacked Income Protection Plan, Margin Protection Program for Dairy Producers, Dairy Product Donation Program. Then there is below cost (aka subsidized) water for irrigation, subsidized electricity to pump it.
"The total value of irrigation subsidies provided by state and local government has been estimated
at between US$10 billion and US$33 billion"
so pot? meet kettle!
Slashdot Mirror
> Celsius (159.8 degrees Fahrenheit) and as low as -32 degrees pfft... -32C is a cold day in Montreal, but not unheard of at all... Last winter the pleather case for my raybans shatterred when I got my sunglasses out of it in the morning. seems like *military specs* doesn't include the arctic (and Montreal is south of Seattle, not even close to arctic.) I would worry about such a display if it we ever left overnight in the car.
still open to improvement: I was looking for the *suck-up* mod option for the above post. nope.
Not a dupe, but highly correlated issue. Where the lifespan of equipment that can be responsibly used is limited by it's software support lifespan: https://ask.slashdot.org/story... Someone builds a 100K$ piece of equipment using a windows 7 workstation as a front-end, and in 2020 it's a paperweight?
machines are big these days, and there is a lot of code that doesn't need performance, but say we take you at your word, it's still not python's fault: you designed it wrong. Python makes it as easy as possible to implement algorithms, and the result is readable, so they can be discussed and changed. If it doesn't go fast enough for your needs, then you did not figure out an appropriate solution. I have replaced C code with python, where the python ran 10x faster. This happens because people writing in more difficult languages spend a lot of time sweating the details, so they don't have as much time on the bigger picture. A nearly ideal way to approach a lot of problems is to figure out the algorithms in python, even while you keep C in the back of your head. Once you have something that works, you can replace the performance critical bits in C, but likely >90% of the code will still be OK in python.
the guy lost power during a trans-atlantic sailing race. I'm a bit puzzled as to why that was a huge problem, but he does seem to be somewhat aware of the method. He also uses as his base hull, a former transatlantic racing sailing catamaran. I don't understand why people think that something other than sailing will be magically more efficient than, well, sailing... I would think they should have put a large vertical axis wind turbine near where the mast would be, it would likely provide a lot more power than the solar cells, and would be complementary. I say vertical axis because putting a large weight at the top of a tall tower has issues in a boat.
As someone most involved in operations, I think you fail to appreciate how hard the basics are. Just try to keep ALL of a reasonably size organization's internet facing thingums patched. I haven't heard of a anyone being successful at that. Software and systems are thought of like consumer goods: you buy them, they have a natural life, and you repair for a while or replace before that gets too costly.
For internet facing services, it's more like fruit. You expect to put fresh fruit out there every week, because no-one is going to buy two month old watermelon. Acquire fresh fruit, qa them for damage, for ripeness, etc... and put them on the shelf, in a day or two. And a week later, you need new fruit.
That's the thing people aren't really grasping. When they contract out development, and they accept delivery from something. A week later, they either have support or it starts going bad and needs to be thrown out within a few months. You can't really buy software, or it's a really bad deal if you do, because a *perpetual license* is good for a week or two.
Patching is hard.
The likely result: people use other channels with less surveillance because they don't trust the network. If I don't trust my employer's network, I'm going to Starbucks at the coffee break to do my banking (and my data exfiltration.) Employer loses employee productivity and visibility into traffic.
but that isn't the bad thing... If their web cache ever gets hacked... holy crap what kind of liability do you think there will be for intercepting EVERYONE's banking/medical/personal information, as well as ALL TRANSACTIONS of the company including all relevant secrets? The bad people can impersonate the corporation and/or any employee in any way whatever to whatever outside entity in a way that is undetectable to employees. And the company did it. The company made trust of their web cache, where I can't tell the difference between legit and compromised connections, a condition of employment. To me, if my employer puts in an MITM web-cache, and they get hacked, and someone drains my bank account, that company is liable.
I've seen that implemented in one project.
yes... I want my bank impersonated by any random operator of a web cache. sounds peachy.
It's fine to prefer https when available, but there should be a way to say: this site really is intentionally https, and not have it flagged as having cooties.
If those cheap people are competent, then it should work out fine, and the sites should flourish. It sounds like they all died. why?
It's just a real shame that the power that comes from a complete surveillance state invariably results in oppression and tyranny. Makes the occasional stabbing seem more tolerable than the endless face-stomping of jackboots.
The thing about people in Jackboots is that they will be surveilled also. The key is always *who watches the watchers*, and I think the only solution is that everyone has the option of watching anyone. The guys with jackboots would be caught and punished. Besides, Jackboots are so 20th century. I expect something like Chinese social networking points style oppression in this century. The government will just assign you demerit points, and folks will be graded based on the company they keep, so you will get gradually ostracised by *right* thinking people. It will be awful, but it won't be sooo bad that people rise up en masse. Why get folks riled up?
I don't think saying *yeah people get stabbed a bit* will be an answer that will convince. There will always be those who believe in the perfectibility of man.
not real thrilled with the choices, but given what it is... I think I prefer big brother... just sayin'
Begone then, leave the 'fucking orderly and boring' world then, move to Ethiopia or Afghanistan... lots of anarchy and excitement there.
in most countries criminals lie and accuse cops of all manner of misdeeds. Yeah, crooked happens, but anarchy and mob rule isn't the antidote, it's worse than the disease.
Cops aren't anonymous. Film the cop beating someone up, and he gets brought up on charges, and the law happens.
Well, that's not bile... that actually important speech, and if you speak up, you should be protected. There are whistleblower laws, Companies are often not free to punish people ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ) legally, but if you remain anonymous, and they figure it out, they can find an excuse to fire you and get away scot-free. One of the things Snowden did was ensure that exchanges with journalists were gpg encrypted. That meant the source of the messages had the gpg key, because he didn't want someone else impersonating him. Now if you leak something *anonymously* and then someone impersonates you and leaks fake news that discredits you to the journalist, embarrasses them, or has them *meet* you and get ambushed... How far ahead are you?
but yeah... whistleblowers are good case for real anonymity, but that is a far narrower case, and it should be a special one, not the default that allows the casual cost-free reprisals we see today.
Threatening people is illegal, Swatting is illegal, and are usually done anonymously. It's way higher cost to do that if you must take responsibility for it. It should be far safer to speak up if others are held responsible for their speech.
Free speech is about anonymity as well -- you should have the ability to spew bile without your employer, school, etc (non-governmental entities) punishing you for it.
Thats the point isnt it. When you spew bile, it brings disrepute on those associated with you, and they may not appreciate it. The answer is: dont do that. Society gets no benefit from you hurling mysogynist epithets at your teacher anonymously, That isnt free speech, its just abuse and/or defamation, and if its bad enough, someone will care and they will track you down. And they should.
Furthermore, people have been physically threatened by non-governmental actors for unpopular views (i.e. criticism of foreign governments by disapora, anti-war, etc).
Edward Snowden would be dead if he were anonymous. Anonymity is no protection. If it ever matters, they will find you, and no-one knowing your name will not protect you.
Of course, with enough effort, any handle can be traced to a real identity. The point is that it isn't worth it to unmask every "anonymous" Internet user, so people are relatively safe speaking anonymously. With everything under a real name, this safety will disappear.
Better anarchy than a suburbanized, boring Internet.
My point exactly... people howling about privacy and anonymity are trying to protect something that doesnt really exist. It is, at best, a polite fiction. Countries and large companies have nicely trained cyber warfare units to identify, troll or hack any target. Does this trivial fig-leaf do anything good for us? I very much doubt it.
but these laws only affect the little people. If someone has sufficient resources and connection, they can track anyone. All *privacy* laws do is prevent the little people from tracking big people. I dont want this to be true, but wishing doesnt make it so.
privacy is a dead illusion. anyone in authority who cares can burst that bubble.
The trick is figuring out what criteria merit promotion in the hierarchy, making sure the higher-ups have values that we can agree to. That sounds suspiciously like a functioning democracy. Note that I said *functioning*... in practice, lets just say there are issues.
So when people want to be *anonymous*, they just require companies and governments to investigate in a little extra metadata tracking, and they can get the job done. If someone cares, they will track you. All that current anonymity does is give a false sense of security to those emit bile on the internet. It is consequence-free because tracking is hard for normal people. Some of that bile is from state actors. surprise. Free speech is about not being punished for frankly stating a view. It is not about *anonymity.*
Believing that you are untraceable because you called yourself a silly name is silly. If anyone cares, they will track you down. Believing that internet anonymity is real is dangerous because if you start saying things that are of interest to authorities, they will find you. Its a false sense of security, and one that gives the governments and large corporations that make the investment power over all of us by giving them exclusivity over the ability to track.
Real identities are better for all of us, and more transparency will get us more than security by obscurity. Make it easier for everyone to track everyone so that that power is democratic. Yeah spousal abuse... ok, but isnt it a heck of a lot easier to enforce a court order if everyone is wearing a tracking device, that anyone can see and report?
I actually hate that future is ubiquitous tracking, but just as arguing that water isnt wet does not make sense, the technology makes it very easy to track people, and people will be tracked, the only thing we can realisticially do is track the people doing the tracking. It sucks, but calling yourself doofus doesnt do a thing.
73% of US dairy farmers' revenue is from subsidies. https://www.realagriculture.co... so, fine to get rid of them, but get rid of crop insurance, Price Loss Coverage, Agricultural Risk Coverage, Stacked Income Protection Plan, Margin Protection Program for Dairy Producers, Dairy Product Donation Program. Then there is below cost (aka subsidized) water for irrigation, subsidized electricity to pump it. "The total value of irrigation subsidies provided by state and local government has been estimated at between US$10 billion and US$33 billion" so pot? meet kettle!