There are of course ways to "store" data so that nobody knows where it is (Freenet for example) but in that scenarios....
1) you never know when the data will drop out of storage 2) I suspect that when they can't *prove* that the data is out of the jurisdiction, then they will probably go with the last entity "receiving money to store it"
So while it might be a good way for people (and maybe even corporations) to store their *own* data, I don't see how they can make a business model storing other peoples data.
They can of course switch to not offering data storage for specific data, but maybe "1-Terra Freenet nodes", (where the customer running it has no way of knowing what data is stored on his node)
Once there were high priest, who divined the will of the Gods to the people that sacrificed to them, because the people were told they don't understand the will of the Gods.
Then the people thought "Bullshit, we don't need the gods, we make our own laws!"
Now there are high priest, who divine the will of the Laws to the people that sacrifice to them, because the people are told they don't understand the will of the Laws.
Funny, though, that it is about Disney, who is yelling for the Government to "Protect our Intellectual Property!!!" because of "Jobs!!!" all the time on the other end of the bargain. In a truly FREE market, without government imposed copyright, there would be no Disney as it is now.
You would use the fob the same way you use it with a computer. You enter your password, and you enter the number displayed on the fob to log in to the system the fob is configured for.
There is even an app that turns your android phone into an RSA key fob:
Of course you CAN do automation without the internet. You can even do automation without any "real" computers.
Heck, an old friend did some pretty cool stuff in the late 70s basically with electromechanical relays when he completely rewired his flat. Basically all lights, thermostats, radiator valves, electrical sun-blinds, etc... where wired directly into one central cabinet. And instead of normal light switches beside the doors he had 1-3 panels of 12 little sci-fi looking push buttons that even lighted up.
So in the filing cabinet he cold "re-program" each of the little buttons to activate something or other pretty quickly. Add a few timers, and light sensors, and aside from "being controlled it from some place far away" it pretty much did everything all those new-fangled solutions can do.
That's why I love doing mostly in-house development.
There you can just slap a "report this error to help desk" button in your application, that then generates a ticket with the complete relevant information in your ticket system.
That sounds a terrible lot like the behaviour of both Google and Microsoft, which people seem to accept without a problem. How exactly is this any different, except whereas Google also tries to gather other things like the contents of your emails and your social contacts?
To be fair, both Microsoft and Google will probably use better encryption while stealing your data, so that it is not discovered that easily.
In a way "designing your own website" might be a skill on the level of "write a letter to someone" was in the last century. Public education should prepare you to be able to do it in a pinch, but you can't really make living out of that.
Are there any promising browsers in the works? One that isn't developed by complete fucktards?
I like PaleMoon. Basically a "pre-Australis" fork of Firefox, where the developer pledged to leave the UI alone as much as possible ( And also to keep the existing extension model working. )
Have a read through the release notes to check the "level of fucktardness", which I personally would place at "very low";-) : https://www.palemoon.org/relea...
... you might as well worry about the AI replacing you. I switched platforms a few dozen times, depending on the job. Heck, I even switched from "electro-mechanical hard-wired logic" to do stuff to "software" and saw that most of the problem solving skills that a developer needs apply to both in the same way.
No, not if the system handles something really important (and/or highly visible like this). A system will occationally break, so you use sufficient redundancy. RAID avoids loss from disk breakage. Backups avoid loss from destruction of complete systems (fire) or griveous admin mistakes. (delete wrong database...) Logging transactions on another server makes sure you don't loose what happened between the last backup and the disaster.
I do all that. But in the event that a plane crashes right between our two server rooms which are ~500 metres apart (thus loosing all the RAID and Online-replication backups) I might still have to go back to an off-site backup, where the transaction log replication happens only every 10 minutes, so the backup might be "10 minutes old" in that case.
Which would prompt me to start up the system (that is, after I somehow got hold of new hardware, and if me and my co-workers didn't go up in the same ball of fire that the server rooms did, which would make it "someone else's problem") , and "have a look what the state of the system is" before activating any sort of batch-jobs.
A system crashing and having to restore from an "older" backup is something that could happen to almost anybody.
The one thing that got me in the article:
"As many of you may have just noticed, our system just generated a bunch of emails informing many of you that you are subject to removal because Microsoft does not have evidence of a qualifying audit on file,"
And that they then asked them to re-send the data....
1) If I restore from an older backup, and know I may have (for example) lost payment data, I don't activate batch-jobs that generate demand notes to customers that possibly have already paid, and I just lost the data.
2) Any "important" incoming data, (like for example payment data or SSL Audit data) should be backed once right when it enters the company, so that in the event of your system crashing (or your import-jobs wreaking havoc and losing it) you can re-populate it from that incoming data without having to ask your customers to supply the data again.
So the problem is not really the crashed system, it is the general data flow.
>"traditional forms of identification and databases that use them -- drivers licenses, voting records, social security numbers, medical records, and bank accounts --"
The one thing missing there is a government issued national ID. The System most European countries had up until about the start of the Millennium was pretty good in my opinion. Basically Name/Date/Place of birth/Photo on a "forgery-proof" piece of plastic or paper that you could show where your identity needed to be established beyond doubt.
In Germany that data was basically only "On file" in your local town hall, so no big central database to break/hack into either.
Of course after ~2000 the whole thing tilted into the central database / biometric data wanted / etc... angle that made the thing less and less desirable.
A virtual currency that really shouldn't even have any value at all, if it weren't for the idiots who decided it was worth something when it really isn't.
Since they gave up the gold standard that's pretty much true for every currency.
That's basically the main difference between "centralized administration of things" and "the cloud".
With "centralized administration of things" you still know what those things are, and who administers them. With "the cloud" you have something, somewhere, but you are never quite sure what you have and where you have it.
Of course not. Just like the peasants have been made liable for looking at the lord in the wrong way, the lord has never been made liable for screwing the peasants daughter.
Slashdot Mirror
Then they have lost it.....
There are of course ways to "store" data so that nobody knows where it is (Freenet for example) but in that scenarios ....
1) you never know when the data will drop out of storage
2) I suspect that when they can't *prove* that the data is out of the jurisdiction, then they will probably go with the last entity "receiving money to store it"
So while it might be a good way for people (and maybe even corporations) to store their *own* data, I don't see how they can make a business model storing other peoples data.
They can of course switch to not offering data storage for specific data, but maybe "1-Terra Freenet nodes", (where the customer running it has no way of knowing what data is stored on his node)
Once there were high priest, who divined the will of the Gods to the people that sacrificed to them, because the people were told they don't understand the will of the Gods.
Then the people thought "Bullshit, we don't need the gods, we make our own laws!"
Now there are high priest, who divine the will of the Laws to the people that sacrifice to them, because the people are told they don't understand the will of the Laws.
Or perhaps that BicMacs last longer before you need a new one. ;-)
Well. Glass windows are also an exploit vector. But most people would not like their landlord bricking them up.
Or, since they want to put them "just under the roof line", just stick access points to the roof?
( But, naw, that't not hip enough. )
Funny, though, that it is about Disney, who is yelling for the Government to "Protect our Intellectual Property!!!" because of "Jobs!!!" all the time on the other end of the bargain. In a truly FREE market, without government imposed copyright, there would be no Disney as it is now.
You would use the fob the same way you use it with a computer. You enter your password, and you enter the number displayed on the fob to log in to the system the fob is configured for.
There is even an app that turns your android phone into an RSA key fob:
https://play.google.com/store/...
Thank god I use a sane language then. Even when it's "not cool" anymore. ;-P
$ perl
print 0.2 + 0.4
^D
0.6
Of course you CAN do automation without the internet. You can even do automation without any "real" computers.
Heck, an old friend did some pretty cool stuff in the late 70s basically with electromechanical relays when he completely rewired his flat. Basically all lights, thermostats, radiator valves, electrical sun-blinds, etc... where wired directly into one central cabinet. And instead of normal light switches beside the doors he had 1-3 panels of 12 little sci-fi looking push buttons that even lighted up.
So in the filing cabinet he cold "re-program" each of the little buttons to activate something or other pretty quickly. Add a few timers, and light sensors, and aside from "being controlled it from some place far away" it pretty much did everything all those new-fangled solutions can do.
To be fair, Microsoft probably created the first non-hardware-vendor-specific GUI that was both "good enough" and "easy to pirate"
That's why I love doing mostly in-house development.
There you can just slap a "report this error to help desk" button in your application, that then generates a ticket with the complete relevant information in your ticket system.
That sounds a terrible lot like the behaviour of both Google and Microsoft, which people seem to accept without a problem. How exactly is this any different, except whereas Google also tries to gather other things like the contents of your emails and your social contacts?
To be fair, both Microsoft and Google will probably use better encryption while stealing your data, so that it is not discovered that easily.
In a way "designing your own website" might be a skill on the level of "write a letter to someone" was in the last century. Public education should prepare you to be able to do it in a pinch, but you can't really make living out of that.
And Yes... there was such a time as Before Google Maps, hard as it may seem to imagine.
Ah, someone else who remembers Mapquest. ;-P
Well, they just have to invent the high-tech autonomous pedestrian then to replace all the old models.
Are there any promising browsers in the works? One that isn't developed by complete fucktards?
I like PaleMoon. Basically a "pre-Australis" fork of Firefox, where the developer pledged to leave the UI alone as much as possible ( And also to keep the existing extension model working. )
Have a read through the release notes to check the "level of fucktardness", which I personally would place at "very low" ;-) : https://www.palemoon.org/relea...
... you might as well worry about the AI replacing you. I switched platforms a few dozen times, depending on the job. Heck, I even switched from "electro-mechanical hard-wired logic" to do stuff to "software" and saw that most of the problem solving skills that a developer needs apply to both in the same way.
No, not if the system handles something really important (and/or highly visible like this). A system will occationally break, so you use sufficient redundancy. RAID avoids loss from disk breakage. Backups avoid loss from destruction of complete systems (fire) or griveous admin mistakes. (delete wrong database...) Logging transactions on another server makes sure you don't loose what happened between the last backup and the disaster.
I do all that. But in the event that a plane crashes right between our two server rooms which are ~500 metres apart (thus loosing all the RAID and Online-replication backups) I might still have to go back to an off-site backup, where the transaction log replication happens only every 10 minutes, so the backup might be "10 minutes old" in that case.
Which would prompt me to start up the system (that is, after I somehow got hold of new hardware, and if me and my co-workers didn't go up in the same ball of fire that the server rooms did, which would make it "someone else's problem") , and "have a look what the state of the system is" before activating any sort of batch-jobs.
A system crashing and having to restore from an "older" backup is something that could happen to almost anybody.
The one thing that got me in the article:
"As many of you may have just noticed, our system just generated a bunch of emails informing many of you that you are subject to removal because Microsoft does not have evidence of a qualifying audit on file,"
And that they then asked them to re-send the data....
1) If I restore from an older backup, and know I may have (for example) lost payment data, I don't activate batch-jobs that generate demand notes to customers that possibly have already paid, and I just lost the data.
2) Any "important" incoming data, (like for example payment data or SSL Audit data) should be backed once right when it enters the company, so that in the event of your system crashing (or your import-jobs wreaking havoc and losing it) you can re-populate it from that incoming data without having to ask your customers to supply the data again.
So the problem is not really the crashed system, it is the general data flow.
>"traditional forms of identification and databases that use them -- drivers licenses, voting records, social security numbers, medical records, and bank accounts --"
The one thing missing there is a government issued national ID. The System most European countries had up until about the start of the Millennium was pretty good in my opinion. Basically Name/Date/Place of birth/Photo on a "forgery-proof" piece of plastic or paper that you could show where your identity needed to be established beyond doubt.
In Germany that data was basically only "On file" in your local town hall, so no big central database to break/hack into either.
Of course after ~2000 the whole thing tilted into the central database / biometric data wanted / etc... angle that made the thing less and less desirable.
A virtual currency that really shouldn't even have any value at all, if it weren't for the idiots who decided it was worth something when it really isn't.
Since they gave up the gold standard that's pretty much true for every currency.
The place where the editors don't know the "." is the thousands separator in several European languages. ;-P
Maybe. But one could also argue that burring your house in 142 tons of leaflets is also "fee speech".
That's basically the main difference between "centralized administration of things" and "the cloud".
With "centralized administration of things" you still know what those things are, and who administers them. With "the cloud" you have something, somewhere, but you are never quite sure what you have and where you have it.
Of course not. Just like the peasants have been made liable for looking at the lord in the wrong way, the lord has never been made liable for screwing the peasants daughter.