i_am_not_a_robot @ i_am_not_a_robot @discuss.tchncs.de

Posts

0

Comments

318

Joined

2 yr. ago

Freedom of speech? Yes and no. The government has freedom of speech, but American TikTok clones do not. If TikTok users are successfully forced to use YouTube Shorts instead, they'll get stuck with YouTube's censorship and content control for corporate friendliness and user engagement. People like Elon give "free speech" a bad name, but it is actually a problem if for most people "the internet" is controlled by a small number of big technology companies and those companies use their positions, intentionally or not, to suppress ideas and control public discourse. TikTok users will still need to use words like "unalive" on platforms owned by American corporations.

Constitutional protections for your home and property? Not really. Many people are renting and protections for renters vary by state. Property can be stolen by police through civil asset forfeiture.

The opportunity to improve your socioeconomic standings, ie The American Dream, is largely a myth. Recently, the poor get poorer. Real estate values and cost of living are climbing much faster than wages for those at the bottom. If you're at the bottom, it's even more difficult than usual to get the four year degree and years of prior job experience required for many entry level positions with better pay.

America has legal slavery enshrined in the constitution. If somebody is convicted of a crime, they can be sent to private prisons to do slave labor for somebody else's profit. This disproportionately affects poor people and minorities.

My favorite is when IT deploys software that replaces all the links in your e-mails with https://example.com/phishing/YiCdMdsY so you can't tell whether the e-mail is phishing or not, frequently sends you very obvious fake phishing e-mails that interrupt your work by going straight to your priority inbox, and punishes anyone caught clicking on phishing e-mails. Then HR sends out e-mails that have all the indicators of low effort phishing and you're supposed to click on those.

When was AI first announced? What kind of rules could the government have put in place to effectively prevent people outside their jurisdiction from using freely available technology on their own computers?

Isn't puppeteering, aka self botting, a bannable offense one some of these networks?

https://support.discord.com/hc/en-us/articles/115002192352-Automated-user-accounts-self-bots This article is only half true. Bot accounts do not have full access to all API routes, but you can still be banned for botting regular accounts.

They're competitors.

If you're already using systemd, do not switch to Docker. Use Podman instead. Docker runs all your services under the Docker service. Podman can both run the same containers as systemctl services.

Does he have any popularity with the younger generation? The kids I know are smart enough to realize their options are bad and worse.

They say they won't block apps because of their content, but that they will protect users that use too much energy, which seems like a loophole for blocking emulators and alternative browsers.

This whole document is disturbing. Apple tries to frame it as all about protecting users by removing their choices and skimming profits. They even start including e-mails from users begging Apple not to let them use their expensive phones.

Normally this is bad advice, but if you already have CGNAT you'd be going from double NAT to triple NAT and it probably won't make anything worse. At least it shouldn't make things worse for IPv4. If you have 5G internet with CGNAT there's no excuse for your ISP not giving you proper IPv6. Putting a second router between will complicate your IPv6 setup.

There are some tricks you can do for IPv4 in the precense of hostile DHCP servers. Serious OSes should allow you to configure a second IP address on the same physical interface, so you could have a dynamic 192.168.0.x assigned by the ISP's DHCP server and a static 192.168.1.y assigned statically by you, and then you should be able to set up an additional route table entry to access 192.168.1.0/24 using the source address 192.168.1.y. As long as the ethernet/wifi switching between devices doesn't filter ARP packets based on IP subnet, you should be able to communicate between your machines using fixed IPs on the second subnet.

That sounds kind of like CWE-836.

That's complicated to do correctly. Normally, for the server to verify the user has the correct password, it needs to know or receive the password, at which point it could decrypt all the user's files. They'd need to implement something like SRP.

You're not OK. Not all forks are labeled as forks.

I don't know the details. My modem that I purchased exposes a management interface to the cable operator. I have a read-only view of the connection status and can't change anything meaningful. In the US if you buy the modem you loan it the ISP for free while you're a customer, as opposed to the ISP loaning you a modem for a monthly fee.

Doesn't that make it worse? If he abuses power for the good of the country, at least he has some principals. Abusing power to hurt people he's personally unhappy with is just childish.

Supporting PPP does not make something a modem. It's a hardware capability that the device does not have.

Asus TUF-AX4200 is a router/AP, not a modem/router.

Openwrt/ddwrt are used for routers.

In the US you usually need to use your ISP's modem. Even if you buy the modem, it needs to be one that the ISP supports and the ISP will have more control of the device than you do. Even if it were running openwrt or ddwrt, you would not have access to use it.

I have an Arris modem and it works fine now, but for months there was a bug where it would randomly crash. I don't know when the bug was fixed, but firmware updates are controlled by the ISP so I had to just reboot it when it would crash. In other words, even if you have good modem hardware, whether it works correctly is up to your ISP.

And the licensing that's supposed to ensure that everything is kid-friendly.

Google shouldn't have to pay. Whatever I may have posted on Reddit was public information. Nobody should need to pay Reddit to read it.