Trump Admin Deports 2-Year-Old Girl Who Is American Citizen
Saik0 @ Saik0Shinigami @lemmy.saik0.com Posts 1Comments 1,967Joined 2 yr. ago
Saik0 @ Saik0Shinigami @lemmy.saik0.com
Posts
1
Comments
1,967
Joined
2 yr. ago
If your neighbour can also get symmetrical internet with a residential contract, then that would be the better example to prove his point wrong.
Sure, but I don't get their bill now do I?
A business contract is not a good comparison because they usually are symmetrical for a premium price regardless of the quality of the residential internet in your area.
Which was the point of me bringing it up... my price is likely higher than my neighbor. But I know that the same speeds are available. Symmetric.
Once again though... Without more information we can't actually compare but at face value... I pay 5.89 times for for presumably 8-80 times more speed. EVEN ON MY BUSINESS CONTRACT. Hard to say that their service is categorically better than mine...
He provided details about his non-business internet being symmetrical and YOU compared it to your business contract line, that’s literally how it started.
To my residential house... of which my neighbor can get the same service, under a residential contract. Also they didn't say if their internet was residential or not.
The cost is to prove that Americans do not have easy access to the same level of internet his country has, which is his main point. You needed to purchase a business line to have it symmetrical, which is not accessible to the everyone.
No. My neighbor can also get 8/8, under a different SLA as residential. I only provided "under business contract" because that changes the price.
Just because you can pay 100 times the cost of healthcare in European countries to get high quality heathcare in America, it doesn’t mean the average American can afford to go to the hospital or that your healthcare system is just as good. The same thing applies to your internet.
You're not making a good look for your stance when you over hyperbolize the situation. I pay 5.89 times more... for what could be 8-80 times more speed. We don't know because THERE IS NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION.
There are. You have to apply for them. Which it's also entirely possible that the mother is currently doing.
You need to scroll up and pay attention.
Them:
My ISP offers symmetrical [...] glad I'm not American
Me:
As someone living in America, I have great internet
Them:
<Requests direct information about cost>
Me:
<I oblige>
Them:
<makes a comparison without qualifying anything about the comparison, claiming theirs to be superior>
Me:
<calls it out>
They provided no details at all... this whole engagement. We still don't actually know what speeds they even get for their mere 28USD. Could be 100mbps and it would be significantly worse by ever metric than my 8gbps. I can't compare my service to something that we have no details for.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.210781/gov.uscourts.lawd.210781.1.0.pdf
and
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.210781/gov.uscourts.lawd.210781.6.0_3.pdf
Indeed. If you read the actual response... no deportation occurred for the 2 year old.
From the petitioner's council:
The officer overheard and said that V.M.L. would not be deported and explained that V.M.L.’s mother and sister had deportation orders.
From ICE:
Should her mother decide to allow Petitioner Mack and the purported father to take custody of V.M.L., V.M.L. is not prohibited from entering the United States.
The claim is that the father didn't identify himself (likely because of his own immigration status), so they couldn't release child to him. Since he didn't want to identify himself, any claim that the mother wanted to take the child with her must be held, no "friend" can take custody at that point. The only identified parent isn't consenting.
It looks like there was an exhibit referenced in the ICE response document. That exhibit is likely the letter they reference that the mother wrote.
It's a shit situation... It's not good in the slightest, but it isn't "American Citizen deported".
Mother can easily state that she would like to give custody to the petitioning "friend" and V.M.L. can return.
Are you okay?
I didn't compare mine to yours at all. You're the one that said your 28 USD service was a better deal. YOU made the comparison. YOU asked for the details.
Not without additional context it's not... Is your service 8gbps? Do you have SLAs in place? Will your ISP send you hate mail after using a mere 10TB of data?
And yet most people will just type "facebook" into the omnibar in their browser and click the first result that google gives them.
Yes... A LOT, and I do mean a significantly plurality... have no fucking clue what a URL is.
Last time someone was worried about the security it was about knowing filenames of the stuff you host by brute forcing iirc
Knowing (guessing) the file path allows them to access and stream the content. Meaning worst case scenario... Sony (the people known for putting malicious stuff on CDs) can probe your server, and prove the content is there because your server will return the movie file itself.
$165/mo. Under business contract.
Edit: No caps either... Last 30 days 11TB download, 175TB upload.
https://blog.cloudflare.com/updated-tos
The proxy will auto-CDN content. You need to disable CDN in order to stay in line with TOS. You can use one of the available rules to "fix" this... but this will already be even more above the general person's head that it's just better to tell people to not proxy the plex/jellyfin domain at all.
Feels good not being American.
Weird, I live in America, have 8gbps symmetrical and am not CGnatted. Odd for you to so blindly exclaim what you did.
setting it up with cloudflare
don't proxy the jellyfin domain through cloudflare. They don't like transiting video and will kill your account for it, especially if you're just a free user.
I guess it is! Never saw that there... Bunch of clicks to get to it though. A link to a page is much simpler IMO...
My phone has that too... but only for the signed in network. Not for other networks that are saved on the device. I have a guest network that I shove guests on that have some restrictions (blocked from homelab network for the most part). I would need to swap to that network myself then click share...
You pull it up on another phone.
The owner pulls it up on THEIR phone, so you can just have the guest scan the QR code.
Edit: or my usecase would be to put it on a tablet that I have on a stand near the front door.
Trisquel
Eww Ubuntu.
The endpoint issue exists in all builds. It would just have a different path in windows because paths in windows start with drive letter.
https://github.com/jellyfin/jellyfin/issues/5415
The biggest issue is that the video stream endpoint is not auth'd. Meaning that if someone guesses the MD5 hash for a file in your library it will play. Sounds at first glance like it's unlikely to matter. Except that MD5 is generated based on the file's filepath. So if you use standard naming conventions on paths that are common (/movies/Big Bucks Bunny(2008)/Big Bucks Bunny.mkv for example being simple and easy), eg defaults for a docker container using *arr suites. Then it's possible for a precompiled hash list to check for file against your server.
So now add a company like Sony, they can generate all their library as a hash list, hit your server with millions of requests over the course of a couple of hours and map out how much of their content you have on your server. If any of it has never had a physical release (since you're allowed to backup your own content) you're completely fucked, and now will have to prove in court that you own ALL the content. And possibly... since it's open endpoint, it could be argued that you're even distributing openly (though unlikely argument... but do you really want to chance that?).
Ultimately if your setup is "Standard" you're asking for a lawsuit.
Answers to "fix" this:
Map your paths in weird folders. instead of /movies/
<movie>
add in a folder like a GUID, so /eH4i67ZwByjLao3z7nHWKdS5ogysm68x/movies/<movie>
. Make sure this occurs INSIDE your docker container if you're using docker. Will break any precompiled hashes... though possible to hit a collision and still be "found".Setup fail2ban or other brute force blocking technology on your reverse proxy.
Use a private network setup... whether VPN, SDN, whatever... tailscale, zerotier, etc... (This will break TVs that don't have vpn capabilities)
Add another auth in front of Jellyfin. (This breaks ALL Jellyfin apps)
The real answer would be the developers closing the unauth endpoints... But it's been an issue for over 4 years now... They're not going to fix it anytime soon as they don't want to "break compatibility", which is a pretty dumb excuse IMO.
There's another issue where you shouldn't give accounts to people you don't trust as one user can attack another user AFTER login. So make sure you trust everyone you let have access... they can screw with your profile and do stuff you might not expect.
This isn't quite true. You pay the difference of whatever local tax would cover. And foreign earned income exclusion is massive...(https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/foreign-earned-income-exclusion)... So even if you make 200k, you can exclude ~120k of it, and then the remaining 80k would have your local taxes deducted from it as well. You end up finding out that most people pay virtually nothing.
And if you don't intend on returning to the USA at all, there's not a lot of enforcement that can happen. The worst effect is that you can't renew your passport at a consulate from what I've seen.
I'm a dual citizen so I end up researching these weird topics a lot...