Twitter has obviously gotten WAY away from being a Common Carrier in any sense, since they are constantly cherry-picking what is and is not allowed to be seen.
Someone needs to file a lawsuit over this and soon, so Twitter can go back to being a platform.
Nah. I'd prefer Twitter just get more anal and retarded so people just stop using it entirely. Silly thing is silly anyway.
Or if you're going through the effort to remove it, you might just unhook the tiny little connectors that connect the antennas to it.
Frankly, this is probably the only way to be sure. Newer laptops I'm not sure about, but many older ones, the wifi mini-board is easily accessable. Less than 5 minutes to pop it in or out.
Alternatively, if you trust Windows.. airplane mode perhaps?
One more thing, DO NOT USE TAR, ZIP, OR PAR files! They add a point of failure. You will not find a un-rar program in 20 years, because you used the coolest, best thing out right now that turns out not to be supported past the 2029 update.
Can't agree with this. tar hasn't been changed in what, 30 years? 40 years? Zip format also hasn't seen any significant changes in a few decades either. These formats are probably pretty safe, especially tar. Just be careful of which compression algorithms you use, use old common ones if you're worried about future accessability.
And additional thing I do with large repositories of data is make sure to put any relevant 'readers' on the drive with all the data: A copy of a popular archiver, source code to tar, etc.
I use TrueCrypt too, and to ensure I never am without a copy, I am sure to copy it's installers and source code to everything. Hell, even my phone and dashcam sdcards have a copy of TrueCrypt, just in case.
I like this slashdot question. But I'd like to expand it. Because like the OP, I have a couple terabytes of crap I'd prefer not to lose. I currently employ a manual mirroring of the drive to an offline drive of equal size and store that drive away from my computers.
My problem is portability though. Currently, both my drives (the online and offline copy) use NTFS for the filesystem. I choose NTFS because I want the drive to be accessable from both Linux and Windows machines. Like for example, I like to take the drive with me when I travel so I can watch my videos whereever I go should I get bored.
So my expanded question is: Which filesystem is the best for data retention and portability across Windows and Linux?
As an additional, if anyone wants to bite, how come there are no decent third party file system drivers for Windows? It seems like long past due for some good third-party filesystem drivers to be out there and usable.
ps. Never experienced any form of bit rot on standard spinner HDDs. Only time I've ever had issues with data loss on media is with recordable CDs and DVDs which I've long since stopped using for any purpose due to their proven unreliability. USB flash drives are also similarly unreliable as long term storage. I've multiple times gone to use a USB flash drive and discovered it's blank or scrambled and unusable.
It's really moot anyway, what little net neutrality rules we had were barely being enforced, rather obviously.
Prepare yourselves for the tiered internet!
Since the Government basically wants to disengage from the issue, guess we as consumers will have to vote with our wallets. Let's hope sanity prevails, against all odds.
Someone told me Verizon is offering unlimited again. I see up there it says $80 for unlimited from Verizon, but strangely enough, when I look at my Verizon account with my phone, they want $65 for unlimited. So what the hell? Get some accurate numbers people.
Attacking SMB is retarded. SMB services should -never- ever be exposed to the internet, under any circumstances. Anyone who does expose SMB to the internet deserves to get hacked. Bury that crap in a VPN, use a firewall, and disregard this silliness.
They could at least zip up the archives and post them to the torrents for posterity. On the basis of killing off the comments, in my estimation, they've cut out a huge reason for me to visit their site.
Agree with this 100%. Definitely should leave the forums intact, with write permission turned off, for at least a year or two, then possibly an archive after that, that users can download. It would definitely be a shame if much useful information was needlessly deleted.
Maybe someone can whip up a forum scraper and siphon off the entire forum into an archive before the 2 weeks are up.
You missed Fidonet which was pretty popular prior to the internet really starting to take off, which is when usenet really took off. So things a little out of order there, but close enough. Fidonet still deserves mention.
You're probably right and the additional capacity is a good thing, however that doesn't change that it is a stupid model. Advancement and adaptation is a good thing for business and these are businesses highly resistant to change. Their requirements for laws and constructs like the DMCA to sustain their business model instead of evolving to 21st century business conditions just shows that their business model is obsolete.
Can't say I agree with this either. I personally believe the streaming model is very good, it achieves a balance the MPAA wants, without hindering the customers needlessly. We can all agree DRM is usually an annoying obstacle to doing what we want to do, but the stream model's DRM is pretty much invisible to the customer. The content creators get their stuff 'protected', we get to watch what we want, when we want. So yeah, I don't see a problem with this arrangement.
Sorry you feel otherwise, but in all truth, other the saying 'its horrible" you really haven't pointed out real issues with this model other than to say it's horrible. You tried to make an argument for the excessive bandwidth usage, but backed down when I challenged your only actual point. I don't see how DMCA is even relevant here.
Why, because media companies are too stupid to come up with a better model so they bog down the net with streams of moronic shows.
Not so sure spewing all the video streams over the 'net is a bad thing. It creates demand for capacity, which is naturally increased. More capacity is pretty much always a good thing IMHO.
If it's possible to do by a robot arm, it should be possible to do by faking the input from the stylus system. All you'd need is something like a finite element model of the physical system involving the robot and stylus (in the very worst case).
It was my thinking, the 'robot' could be as simple as a usb device that appears to the computer to be a mouse. I'd think one could easily enough program such a simulated mouse to jiggle and wiggle like a human using the mouse would.
not too far removed from negotiating with terrorists
There's an enormous gulf between locking someone's data and blowing them up. We tend to be a lot harder on people who murder innocents than those who just steal money (well, as long as its somebody else' money of course.)
Yes and no. Yes, it's a far worse crime to blow things and people up, than is it to ransom their data. However, the way we deal with these two types of crime really should be the same. No deals. The more times we cave in to ransomware the worse this type of attack will get. If criminals can make money off it, they are definitely going to try to infect more computers. If no one will pay, the crime will simply go away since it's not profitable.
Third - and this ties back to second - libraries in general don't have a budget for public IT. They can't afford the expertise to implement FOSS when the vast majority of the people who will maintain and use the provided services are not trained to use it. Even on their web presence, ease of implementation (which probably contributed to this problem) equals lower TCO for them.
I'm not so sure this is accurate. I would think the library system's computer needs would be handled by the City's IT department (and cities have these now.) But really depends on the locality, I suppose. But libraries are generally administered by the city government they reside in which would in turn mean they should be under the control of the city's IT department, which definitely has a budget.
It's mostly used for illegal stuff anyway, and we have plenty of ways to transfer money that are traceable. We don't need bitcoin, or any cryptocurrency.
Mostly illegal? How about almost entirely? Bitcoin has been a boom for criminal enterprises, which in my opinion is the only widespread use case they have presently.
I'm aware some people think having this semi-anonymous, decentralized, ungoverned currency around is somehow cool and/or beneficial, but is it really necessary? And given the fact it's main use is for criminal behavior, do we really need its perceived benefits when it's main use is for crime?
Sadly, the scarcity of Bitcoins which have a perceived value and their decentralized nature makes them very difficult to just 'ban.' Hell, by outlawing them, you probably increase their perceived value.
Like many of the genies we've let out of the bottle in the modern information age, this one is not so easy to put back in.
PS: I might be incorrect about Sweden having extradition with US. I remember there being something about Mr. Assange trying to sneak to the airport and failing. Britain had (still has?) police stationed around the embassy to try to catch him attempting to sneak out. So the whole issue might be Britain wanting to arrest him on sight and extradite. That's why he can't even leave the embassy.
BTW he is not wanted in the US, he is wanted in SWEDEN
Obviously you don't know all the particulars of Mr. Assange. He is wanted in Sweden for question regarding some rape accusations. He is also wanted in the US for publishing US Government secerts. Very bad. This is why he refuses to leave the embassy, because if he does, Britain will arrest him and extradite him to the USA. Sweden would probably also do the same thing after they were finished questioning him. That's the whole thing. Mr. Assange is TERRIFIED of the fact the USA has captial punishment and worries they may execute him.
There now you and anyone else should have the short version!
I'm sure you knew and were expecting this answer: The majority of the sheeples pay attention to what the media tells them to pay attention to. And I guess the media has decided the actors are far more interesting than the actual issues brought up.
I wish people would pay attention to the issues at hand, too, but.. I guess that requires too much independent thinking for sheeple to be bothered with.
Slashdot Mirror
Twitter has obviously gotten WAY away from being a Common Carrier in any sense, since they are constantly cherry-picking what is and is not allowed to be seen.
Someone needs to file a lawsuit over this and soon, so Twitter can go back to being a platform.
Nah. I'd prefer Twitter just get more anal and retarded so people just stop using it entirely. Silly thing is silly anyway.
Are we still onboard with TC (7.1a) or is it out of favour?
I'm still using 7.1a.
Is there a replacement, yet?
VeraCrypt is supposedly it's replacement, but given that 7.1a was given a pass during analysis, I'm wary of migrating to an unknown.
Always Notify is the default setting.
oops i was mistaken, my bad.
Come on guys. It even says it right in the script:
if($ConsentPrompt -Eq 2 -And $SecureDesktopPrompt -Eq 1){
"UAC is set to 'Always Notify'. This module does not bypass this setting."
exit
Always Notify is the default setting.
I like this solution, probably a little too un-'user friendly' for most though.
https://www.passwordstore.org/
Or if you're going through the effort to remove it, you might just unhook the tiny little connectors that connect the antennas to it.
Frankly, this is probably the only way to be sure. Newer laptops I'm not sure about, but many older ones, the wifi mini-board is easily accessable. Less than 5 minutes to pop it in or out.
Alternatively, if you trust Windows.. airplane mode perhaps?
One more thing, DO NOT USE TAR, ZIP, OR PAR files! They add a point of failure. You will not find a un-rar program in 20 years, because you used the coolest, best thing out right now that turns out not to be supported past the 2029 update.
Can't agree with this. tar hasn't been changed in what, 30 years? 40 years? Zip format also hasn't seen any significant changes in a few decades either. These formats are probably pretty safe, especially tar. Just be careful of which compression algorithms you use, use old common ones if you're worried about future accessability.
And additional thing I do with large repositories of data is make sure to put any relevant 'readers' on the drive with all the data: A copy of a popular archiver, source code to tar, etc.
I use TrueCrypt too, and to ensure I never am without a copy, I am sure to copy it's installers and source code to everything. Hell, even my phone and dashcam sdcards have a copy of TrueCrypt, just in case.
I like this slashdot question. But I'd like to expand it. Because like the OP, I have a couple terabytes of crap I'd prefer not to lose. I currently employ a manual mirroring of the drive to an offline drive of equal size and store that drive away from my computers.
My problem is portability though. Currently, both my drives (the online and offline copy) use NTFS for the filesystem. I choose NTFS because I want the drive to be accessable from both Linux and Windows machines. Like for example, I like to take the drive with me when I travel so I can watch my videos whereever I go should I get bored.
So my expanded question is: Which filesystem is the best for data retention and portability across Windows and Linux?
As an additional, if anyone wants to bite, how come there are no decent third party file system drivers for Windows? It seems like long past due for some good third-party filesystem drivers to be out there and usable.
ps. Never experienced any form of bit rot on standard spinner HDDs. Only time I've ever had issues with data loss on media is with recordable CDs and DVDs which I've long since stopped using for any purpose due to their proven unreliability. USB flash drives are also similarly unreliable as long term storage. I've multiple times gone to use a USB flash drive and discovered it's blank or scrambled and unusable.
It's really moot anyway, what little net neutrality rules we had were barely being enforced, rather obviously.
Prepare yourselves for the tiered internet!
Since the Government basically wants to disengage from the issue, guess we as consumers will have to vote with our wallets. Let's hope sanity prevails, against all odds.
Someone told me Verizon is offering unlimited again. I see up there it says $80 for unlimited from Verizon, but strangely enough, when I look at my Verizon account with my phone, they want $65 for unlimited. So what the hell? Get some accurate numbers people.
How does that work? I would think a robot would not be affected by radiation.
Left flash enabled? Gah, that's like the worse plugin of all. Should disable it and leave everything else alone.
This is why one should block outbound SMB traffic as well.
As I said, firewall. Keep that junk contained to a intranet/VPN. SMB does not belong on the internet, in the clear at least.
Attacking SMB is retarded. SMB services should -never- ever be exposed to the internet, under any circumstances. Anyone who does expose SMB to the internet deserves to get hacked. Bury that crap in a VPN, use a firewall, and disregard this silliness.
They could at least zip up the archives and post them to the torrents for posterity. On the basis of killing off the comments, in my estimation, they've cut out a huge reason for me to visit their site.
Agree with this 100%. Definitely should leave the forums intact, with write permission turned off, for at least a year or two, then possibly an archive after that, that users can download. It would definitely be a shame if much useful information was needlessly deleted.
Maybe someone can whip up a forum scraper and siphon off the entire forum into an archive before the 2 weeks are up.
You missed Fidonet which was pretty popular prior to the internet really starting to take off, which is when usenet really took off. So things a little out of order there, but close enough. Fidonet still deserves mention.
You're probably right and the additional capacity is a good thing, however that doesn't change that it is a stupid model. Advancement and adaptation is a good thing for business and these are businesses highly resistant to change. Their requirements for laws and constructs like the DMCA to sustain their business model instead of evolving to 21st century business conditions just shows that their business model is obsolete.
Can't say I agree with this either. I personally believe the streaming model is very good, it achieves a balance the MPAA wants, without hindering the customers needlessly. We can all agree DRM is usually an annoying obstacle to doing what we want to do, but the stream model's DRM is pretty much invisible to the customer. The content creators get their stuff 'protected', we get to watch what we want, when we want. So yeah, I don't see a problem with this arrangement.
Sorry you feel otherwise, but in all truth, other the saying 'its horrible" you really haven't pointed out real issues with this model other than to say it's horrible. You tried to make an argument for the excessive bandwidth usage, but backed down when I challenged your only actual point. I don't see how DMCA is even relevant here.
Why, because media companies are too stupid to come up with a better model so they bog down the net with streams of moronic shows.
Not so sure spewing all the video streams over the 'net is a bad thing. It creates demand for capacity, which is naturally increased. More capacity is pretty much always a good thing IMHO.
If it's possible to do by a robot arm, it should be possible to do by faking the input from the stylus system. All you'd need is something like a finite element model of the physical system involving the robot and stylus (in the very worst case).
It was my thinking, the 'robot' could be as simple as a usb device that appears to the computer to be a mouse. I'd think one could easily enough program such a simulated mouse to jiggle and wiggle like a human using the mouse would.
not too far removed from negotiating with terrorists
There's an enormous gulf between locking someone's data and blowing them up. We tend to be a lot harder on people who murder innocents than those who just steal money (well, as long as its somebody else' money of course.)
Yes and no. Yes, it's a far worse crime to blow things and people up, than is it to ransom their data. However, the way we deal with these two types of crime really should be the same. No deals. The more times we cave in to ransomware the worse this type of attack will get. If criminals can make money off it, they are definitely going to try to infect more computers. If no one will pay, the crime will simply go away since it's not profitable.
Third - and this ties back to second - libraries in general don't have a budget for public IT. They can't afford the expertise to implement FOSS when the vast majority of the people who will maintain and use the provided services are not trained to use it. Even on their web presence, ease of implementation (which probably contributed to this problem) equals lower TCO for them.
I'm not so sure this is accurate. I would think the library system's computer needs would be handled by the City's IT department (and cities have these now.) But really depends on the locality, I suppose. But libraries are generally administered by the city government they reside in which would in turn mean they should be under the control of the city's IT department, which definitely has a budget.
It's mostly used for illegal stuff anyway, and we have plenty of ways to transfer money that are traceable. We don't need bitcoin, or any cryptocurrency.
Mostly illegal? How about almost entirely? Bitcoin has been a boom for criminal enterprises, which in my opinion is the only widespread use case they have presently.
I'm aware some people think having this semi-anonymous, decentralized, ungoverned currency around is somehow cool and/or beneficial, but is it really necessary? And given the fact it's main use is for criminal behavior, do we really need its perceived benefits when it's main use is for crime?
Sadly, the scarcity of Bitcoins which have a perceived value and their decentralized nature makes them very difficult to just 'ban.' Hell, by outlawing them, you probably increase their perceived value.
Like many of the genies we've let out of the bottle in the modern information age, this one is not so easy to put back in.
PS: I might be incorrect about Sweden having extradition with US. I remember there being something about Mr. Assange trying to sneak to the airport and failing. Britain had (still has?) police stationed around the embassy to try to catch him attempting to sneak out. So the whole issue might be Britain wanting to arrest him on sight and extradite. That's why he can't even leave the embassy.
BTW he is not wanted in the US, he is wanted in SWEDEN
Obviously you don't know all the particulars of Mr. Assange. He is wanted in Sweden for question regarding some rape accusations. He is also wanted in the US for publishing US Government secerts. Very bad. This is why he refuses to leave the embassy, because if he does, Britain will arrest him and extradite him to the USA. Sweden would probably also do the same thing after they were finished questioning him. That's the whole thing. Mr. Assange is TERRIFIED of the fact the USA has captial punishment and worries they may execute him.
There now you and anyone else should have the short version!
I'm sure you knew and were expecting this answer: The majority of the sheeples pay attention to what the media tells them to pay attention to. And I guess the media has decided the actors are far more interesting than the actual issues brought up.
I wish people would pay attention to the issues at hand, too, but.. I guess that requires too much independent thinking for sheeple to be bothered with.