I do know from experience that networks are complicated and users are dumb, but I still think that if someone with barely any knowledge and without malicious intent can mess with your network then something’s wrong with the setup.

But if the bio or art major can seriously affect your network then is that even their fault? What if someone had skill and malicious intent?

If someone deploys their router using a uni network as wan then I don’t see how that could affect other uni network users? I can imagine some internal services might not work behind such a router but it would be illogical of the user to blame anyone but themselves.

Can you give some examples of issues you mention?

It is undoubtedly a new piece of research, but the cause is always the same: corporations exploit people because they are taken out of government and democratic control effectively everywhere.

Some corporations employ more people and have bigger budgets than some countries and they often influence people’s lives more than the government. Yet they’re effectively electoral monarchies where electors and monarchs are just a bunch of rich assholes who respond to nobody.

Only when we change that system then those headlines will stop.

I’m genuinely curious where their penny picking went? All of tech companies shove ads into our throats and steal our privacy justifying that by saying they operate at loss and need to increase income. But suddenly they can afford spending huge amounts on some shit that won’t give them any more income. How do they justify it then?

Drives are usually encrypted with symmetric ciphers (usually AES) and these are reasonably secure against quantum attacks with a key big enough.

And with the vast majority of crimes you just need to wait until the statute of limitations, which in cryptography and quantum fields is quite short period.

No more secrets.

Post-quantum cryptography enters the chat

In most jurisdictions you can’t give away copyright - that’s why CC0 exists. And again most open-source and CC licences require attribution, if you use those licences you have a right to be attributed

CC (not sure about MIT) virtually always requires attribution, but as GitHub Copilot showed right now open-“media” authors have basically no way of enforcing their rights.

Data caps are simply false advertising - if your infrastructure can only handle X Tb/s then sell lower client speeds or implement some clever QoS.

There are plenty of users for whom 1.5TB is quite or very restrictive - multi member households, video/photo editors working with raw data, scientists working with raw data, flatpak users with Nvidia GPU or people that selfhost their data or do frequent backups etc.

With the popularity of WFH and our dependence on online services the internet is virtually as vital as water or electricity, and you wouldn’t want to be restricted to having no electricity until the end of the month just because you used the angle grinder for a few afternoons.

Many websites prevent providing aliased Gmail address, how you’re planning to address that issue?

That looks… surprisingly promising

How strong that cloth and attachment would need to be to survive gusts from a storm that’s capable of generating such big hail?

I like Lemmy for exactly this - whenever someone incorrect makes a statement they’re factchecked.

Thank you kind person for finding and sharing that source.