Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We are under attack

en.greatfire.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 283 posts

Re: We are under attack

#271

Post by peterwwillis »

anaptdemise wrote: post #218
peterwwillis wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Patriotism is not a justification for violating the law. Granted, modern politicians and civilians use patriotism to justify literally anything they want to do as long as it's in the name of the Homeland (similar to religious martyrs justifying anything they do as in the name of their God). Usually patriotism is the last justification used by those who have nothing else to stand on, like the KKK trying to oppress Afr…

> Patriotism is not a justification for violating the law. Actually, it is. Patriotism, in being a Patriot, is a loaded word in the American (USA) context. Specifically, it is about doing what is good/right for the country and her citizens regardless of the law (i.e. British rule.) Or so says my recollection of American History. I mean... just look at the Patriots (rebels, in the british colloquialism) in the image o…

Patriotism isn't a word really, it's a neologism invented in the 18th century, probably attached to by the founders because the British hated the term. And while Patriotism's historical (and more ethical) definition might have been to defend the principles of one's country and the constitution given to the people, the modern definition is waaaaay different. At this point we should bring back the word Loyalist for the people who use Patriot to mean someone who blindly follows their government.

Re: We are under attack

#272

Post by secfirstmd »

For human rights, civil society and media working in difficult DDoS threat environments check out these guys, they are awesome ---> Equalit.ie https://equalit.ie/ who run a DDoS project called Deflect - which I think is free for people in those categories of people. https://equalit.ie/portfolio/deflect/

Re: We are under attack

#273

Post by logfromblammo »

1ris wrote: post #135
nathanb wrote: post #121

Should the Chinese government have the power to shield their citizens from information and monitor them electronically? Should a group of people in democratic, Western countries be able to subvert the will of a world superpower with impunity? Of the two scary worlds, I guess I'd rather choose the latter. But I don't even like having to choose. (I doubt Amazon like being asked to choose even less, and I would be surpr…

>Should a group of people in democratic, Western countries be able to subvert the will of a world superpower with impunity? Crazy time we live it that this is even possible.

I'd suggest that the ability to perform a subversion of the will of a foreign state is a necessary adaptation, preventing a nominally democratic state from sliding towards aristocratic, oligarchic, or plutocratic governance.

The ability to increase freedom in a foreign state is related to the ability to prevent a decrease of freedom in your own.

Inconvenient websites help uphold the duties of the fourth estate when mainstream media outlets have seemingly abandoned--or at least heavily de-prioritized--those duties. It is important for all governments, not just those with sketchy human rights records, to know that even the mightiest machine can be taken offline by a single wooden sandal.

Re: We are under attack

#274

Post by tracker1 »

MichaelCrawford wrote: post #262
MichaelCrawford wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been looking for work for a while, but I won't even respond to solicitations or job board posts that so much as mention the cloud, agile or scrum.

Rather than modding me down, perhaps you could explain why you disagree.

What you said adds pretty much no value to the conversation, I didn't mod you down, and I didn't look to see precisely what field you work in, just the same, cloud is pretty much an obfuscation for on-demand co-location and shared-hosting services.

While you may not like the trend, and some providers have better options than others, and you may require some operations over others... but very few businesses can afford to manage multi-site infrastructure that can dynamically scale. Most are probably served just fine with rented servers, traditional colocation, or don't even need more than one VPS...

That doesn't make the technology bad, and only makes you seem ignorant in your prior statement.

Re: We are under attack

#275

Post by MichaelCrawford »

tracker1 wrote: post #274
MichaelCrawford wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rather than modding me down, perhaps you could explain why you disagree.

What you said adds pretty much no value to the conversation, I didn't mod you down, and I didn't look to see precisely what field you work in, just the same, cloud is pretty much an obfuscation for on-demand co-location and shared-hosting services. While you may not like the trend, and some providers have better options than others, and you may require some operations over others... but very few businesses can afford…

I admit I could have explained why.

I'll go into it later, but for the most part I consider the cloud a really bad idea. I also regard most cloud companies as "buzzword-enabled" so as to attract investors.

My gripe with scrum and agile is not so much with the methodologies, but with companies that think they have a methodology when in reality they have a bureaucracy.

Re: We are under attack

#276

Post by dreamweapon »

grandalf wrote: post #264
dreamweapon wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's why they are created as firms instead of philanthropies. A false dichotomy.

> A false dichotomy. I'm curious about your reasoning behind this statement.

It seems like you're saying that private enterprises should either completely divest themselves from any commitment to social responsibility (defined broadly as: "doing the right thing because it's the right thing, even when it may seem to go against the bottom line") -- or they might as well thrown in the towel and become philanthropies. Yes?

In other words -- on the blackhat-whitehat scale, it's either black- (or at least very charcoal-y grey-), or whitehat. But I just don't see modern, large companies generally acting that way -- not because they're led by altruists (they're certainly not); but because that's just not human nature (across the board). Most of us are greyhats (somewhere on the scale); and the behavior most business leadership I've either read about, or seen directly (behind closed doors) seems to fall somewhere on the greyhat scale, also.

That is: large business definitely aren't philanthropies -- but in general, most of them (even many of the traditional "bad boy" players like banks, big pharma, etc) -- aren't straight-up moral nihilists, either.

At least that's the way I observe these things. I could be wrong.

Re: We are under attack

#277

Post by [deleted] »

mauricemir wrote: post #235
AYBABTME wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everyone desires to take part in geopolitics and become a tool of diplomacy. Some people just want to do their business and it's perfectly fine in my opinion. You can't force people to be patriotic or to feel a patriotic call.

Ah freeriders

[deleted]

Re: We are under attack

#278

Post by sdm »

wpietri wrote: post #192
hackuser wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "We don’t do anything to thwart the content restrictions in China or other countries," said Matthew Prince, chief executive of CloudFlare. "We’re a tech company and we comply with the law." There's a popular idea that businesses (and people) have no responsibilities to anyone but themselves, because what they have is theirs; they built it themselves. But if you think about it a little, it's obviously false. Here's…

Moreover, I'm not sure their argument makes sense even on its face. When they say they "comply with the law", which law do they mean? There are many thousands of lawmaking bodies. What if a small-town mayor passes a law outlawing the word "webinar"? What if China passes a law saying that DDOS protection is illegal worldwide? Or websites not properly registered with the Central Propaganda Department may not be carried…

> What if China passes a law saying that DDOS protection is illegal worldwide?

Jurisdiction.

Re: We are under attack

#279

Post by dragonwriter »

sdm wrote: post #278
wpietri wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moreover, I'm not sure their argument makes sense even on its face. When they say they "comply with the law", which law do they mean? There are many thousands of lawmaking bodies. What if a small-town mayor passes a law outlawing the word "webinar"? What if China passes a law saying that DDOS protection is illegal worldwide? Or websites not properly registered with the Central Propaganda Department may not be carried…

> What if China passes a law saying that DDOS protection is illegal worldwide? Jurisdiction.

The wonderful thing about sovereignty is that a country's law's jurisdiction is whatever the country decides they it should be.

The degree to which they can practically enforce that jurisdiction becomes a game of relative power and how willing others are to constrain it, of course.

Re: We are under attack

#280

Post by bsder »

creshal wrote: post #248
bsder wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real problem is that mega/giga/tera/peta have well established uses meaning "factor or 10" for EVERYBODY except people talking about memory. Disk space even obeys this now even though it was only done by marketing so they could reduce the amount bits delivered while charging the same.

Trick question: How many bytes are in a 1.44MB floppy? In a 700MB CD? A 4GB USB stick? And a 480GB SSD? How many bytes/s bandwidth for 10Gb Ethernet? I can't understand how people can be so delusional to think that randomly redefining prefixes is a good idea. It was never, ever used consistently, and JEDEC just should get rid of this idiocy.

Trick question in return: I'm selling a 256GB SSD. How many bytes am I legally required to deliver?

This is why there is a need for the two different prefixes. If I am selling a 256GiB SSD and you are selling a 256GB SSD, those are now differentiable on their face.

Post reply on HN