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

My Chromecast Ultra would not start until I began answering 8.8.8.8

mailarchive.ietf.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 519 posts

Re: My Chromecast Ultra would not start until I began answering 8.8.8.8

#461

Post by jhayward »

dang wrote: post #436
jhayward wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should perhaps consider if you are modeling the behavior that you want to see others adopt. They don't know your relationship status, they only know that you find it acceptable to be rude and dismissive in a professional environment. Newcomers, outsiders, and others will take that experience to heart.

Speaking of newcomers, could you please be more polite to newcomers here? From the HN guidelines: " Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. " https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Ah, I see my mistake - I confused one participant on the list with another. My apology to Jared. Thank you for the correction, Dan.

Re: My Chromecast Ultra would not start until I began answering 8.8.8.8

#462

Post by sjwright »

_bxg1 wrote: post #399
johnchristopher wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This should bother people here more than it does. The last thing the Internet needs is even more dependence upon Google. They've made it quite clear through their actions that they're not supporters of a free and open Internet: https://theintercept.com/2018/09/14/google-china-prototype-l... . Which reminds me of: > Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Thursday called for uncensored Internet access around the world…

But her emails

Don't worry, Russia found them

Re: My Chromecast Ultra would not start until I began answering 8.8.8.8

#463

Post by _asummers »

rossjudson wrote: post #448
pishpash wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're missing the part where 8.8.8.8 is a Google service for which an open, internet service already exists. If whatever Google's data centers are providing (besides 8.8.8.8) for the device's features also already had open implementations, then yes, the same complaint could be levied. By replacing parts of the internet that were open with non-open solutions, the intent and the consequence are clear. But I will say t…

Why do multiple DNS implementations exist? Why do multiple entities run different implementations? Does every DNS contain the same information, and do they all respond the same way? You might find Google's DNS privacy policy to be of interest: https://developers.google.com/speed/public-dns/privacy

This is the same question ask asking why multiple companies make maps. Yes, some may be better, but having multiple means that if someone starts to misbehave (being inaccurate, slow, whatever), a user has alternatives. Regardless of Google not connecting to your personal IP or other PII per your link, DNS is still a business endeavor for them and gives them a considerable advantage to their search rankings. Some people are not okay with that. Note also that it does not suggest they can't use that traffic to show you ads in some capacity.

To be clear, I use 8.8.8.8, but I understand the aversion. Google is a data vacuum, and being forced to give them more data than they are entitled to is a valid concern.

Re: My Chromecast Ultra would not start until I began answering 8.8.8.8

#464

Post by srcmap »

kllrnohj wrote: post #344
calibas wrote: post #170

This should bother people here more than it does. The last thing the Internet needs is even more dependence upon Google. They've made it quite clear through their actions that they're not supporters of a free and open Internet: https://theintercept.com/2018/09/14/google-china-prototype-l... If people don't push back against these kinds of things, Google will continue to abuse their power. There shouldn't be an army o…

> The last thing the Internet needs is even more dependence upon Google. This doesn't change that? It's a google streaming device that in order to function at all requires a connection to google's data centers. Why does it matter if that connection happens via 8.8.8.8 or some other IP resolved by a different DNS server? What is the actual, practical difference of that? It's still connecting to Google in order to prov…

"Why does it matter if that connection happens via 8.8.8.8 or some other IP resolved by a different DNS server?"

By controlling the DNS server, user can early point doubleclick.net, google analytic to 0.0.0.0. That might be why google wants to control that in the Chromecast.

It is a continue war between Jedi the Hackers and the Empire. The young Anakin Skywalker - Do no evil Googlers have felt the (share holders) power of Dark Side. The power felt stronger as the G stock price kept going up.

BTW, one can also config a raspberry pi / openwrt device to have subdomain ip of 8.8.8.8 and still resolve the doubleclick.net or all other tracking websites to 0.0.0.0.

May the source be with you.

Re: My Chromecast Ultra would not start until I began answering 8.8.8.8

#465

Post by fonosip »

lostlogin wrote: post #251
pexaizix wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. People who care about not hitting 8.8.8.8 simply do not own a Chromecast.

I own one and have bought three. Cloudflare DNS for me (via a Pihole).

You have to masquerade at your router. Or at the vpn. For example https://ba.net/adblock/vpn/roku-chromecast-fix.html

Re: My Chromecast Ultra would not start until I began answering 8.8.8.8

#466

Post by m463 »

reaperducer wrote: post #188
calibas wrote: post #170

This should bother people here more than it does. The last thing the Internet needs is even more dependence upon Google. They've made it quite clear through their actions that they're not supporters of a free and open Internet: https://theintercept.com/2018/09/14/google-china-prototype-l... If people don't push back against these kinds of things, Google will continue to abuse their power. There shouldn't be an army o…

The last thing the Internet needs is even more dependence upon Google Watching Big G's actions over the last few years, I've sometimes wondered if it's laying the groundwork to fork the internet. People talk about China and Russia's actions balkanizing the internet. But I have a sense that Google could do it, as well, and bring us back to the days when people didn't know the difference between the real internet and A…

Trying to use the california department of motor vehicles website logs you into google. This is not analytics. You also cannot make an appointment with google services blocked (you get "server unavailable")

Re: My Chromecast Ultra would not start until I began answering 8.8.8.8

#467

Post by anfilt »

ryandrake wrote: post #232
darpa_escapee wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. In many places in the world, the internet is Facebook/WhatsApp/YouTube and whatever portal each of your apps allows you to peer into.

This is no different than the late 90s, when the Internet was AOL for a huge number of people. In 20 years it'll surely be some other platform, too, as long as the relatively open "Internet" foundation persists.

The concern is those foundations though since google obviously has influence when it comes to it.

Re: My Chromecast Ultra would not start until I began answering 8.8.8.8

#468

Post by slededit »

mrweasel wrote: post #305
ChuckMcM wrote: post #296

Gotta love Paul's approach. Amazing to see things that break when you run a black hole DNS server on your inside network. I have a Samsung TV that won't complete boot until it has verified there aren't any firmware updates at Samsung. I finally resorted to copying the http response traffic and having an a bit of code on my RasPi return it when the TV asks (it says "no new firmware for you"). Of course these sorts of…

The extend to which modern appliances feel a need to be internet connected is getting ridicules. My TV isn't going to be internet connected, even if it's able to. It simply have no reason to. Smart TVs in particular should not be a thing. The TV manufactures have proven themself incapable of writing and maintaining software, so at this point they should accept defeat and just produce the TVs with enough HDMI connecti…

A lot of people I know are specifically shopping for smart TVs. They want a Netflix box with a screen.

Re: My Chromecast Ultra would not start until I began answering 8.8.8.8

#469

Post by tiew9Vii »

angusp wrote: post #243
pexaizix wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. People who care about not hitting 8.8.8.8 simply do not own a Chromecast.

Not really, before you could firewall it off from the rest of your network - though now you can just masquerade 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 to your DNS server of choice

I run an OpenBSD router with PF:

pass in quick on { $lan $wireguard } proto udp to { 8.8.8.8 8.8.4.4 } port 53 rdr-to 192.168.2.1

Locally I run Unbound for caching, local dns zones and ad/malware domain blocking[2]. I have a DNS forwarder in Unbound configured to a local Stubby[1] instance that does dns over tls to Cloudflare.

Having done "big data" contract work for the largest telco in my current country of residence who are some of the worst skilled people I have ever work with, your local ISP is highly likely abusing your DNS history profiling your household for various questionable things just as much as Google. At least with Cloudflare they have a clear privacy policy[3] and I have faith their technical skill to anonymize data and use it can't be as bad as my ISP.

[1] https://dnsprivacy.org/wiki/display/DP/DNS+Privacy+Daemon+-+... [2] https://github.com/StevenBlack/hosts [3] https://developers.cloudflare.com/1.1.1.1/commitment-to-priv...

Re: My Chromecast Ultra would not start until I began answering 8.8.8.8

#470

Post by ehsankia »

calibas wrote: post #411
ehsankia wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with most your points, but trying to make a connection between "exploration of bringing Google services to China" and "supporting free and open Internet" feels like a huge stretch to me. Let's ignore the fact that every other tech company such as Microsoft and Apple are in China, and the fact that Google already does censor content in most other countries. Let's also ignore all the other things Google does fo…

You can't create tools for censorship in China and support a free and open Internet. Those things are completely opposed to each other. Pointing out the actions of other companies, the good things Google has done, or the fact that they censor content in most countries doesn't negate that fact. Those are just mediocre argumentative tactics to try and downplay a public relations disaster. We're not even dealing with th…

> You can't create tools for censorship in China and support a free and open Internet

What does following local laws of one specific country have to do with the open global internet? You do realize that Chinese internet is already behind a firewall, and is not open, right?

> Google went out of it's way to protect Chinese dissidents

And we have absolutely facts about what they were working on with Dragonfly, except leaks from a source which was very clearly biased against the project. For all we know, they were coming up with new tech that allowed them to provide services to Chinese citizen while still protecting them.

That to me makes much more sense as to why they were considering re-entering, than the baseless "they were only doing it for the money" reasoning.

Post reply on HN