My landlord recently told me about his other tenants have 600$ power bills before swapping to a locked rate. I wonder if the lad with the epic gaming PC is running a 4090.
Right. So when the house somehow burns down and it turns out the fella's super rig had one of the first 4090's; am I supposed to go "Oops. Sorry landlord. I knew this GPU had issues, and you asked me how much power these sorts of things use, but I decided to ignore the possible consequences; just to keep my nose out of others business?"
How about the families of the 5 people in that house? What should they be told?
"Sorry folks. I knew this GPU has issues and could possibly cause a fire, but people on the internet decided I was a bad person for doing the right thing, so I ignored the potential issue and didn't let the landlord know."
Yeah, no. Every gamer with a nosy neighbor does not need to be “protected” by people like you telling the landlord they’re going to burn the house down.
Except it was made my business when the landlord asked my opinion on why their house was using so much power, and he told me they had a high end gaming rig, multiple fish tanks, and Air conditioners going.
Nope, what your neighbors do in the privacy of their own home is none of your business even if the landlord asks. I don’t know why that isn’t obvious to you.
Except they aren't my neighbor. It's a completely different household. As I stated pretty clearly... "My landlord recently told me about his other tenants"
So, I have been involved via the landlord asking my opinion due to my knowledge of technology being a bit better than his.
But here people are, acting like they are somehow 'teaching me a lesson' while acting holier than thou, when they aren't. lol
And for the record. I did offer to go do a quick check with him to help rectify the situation so that everyone is being treated fairly, since he isn't that great at calculating things like power usage.
But instead he said no, cause he figures he can do the job well enough on his own. But now that this news has come up, I thought about the situation again, and figured I would leave my comment.
Clearly a mistake. I clearly should have just done what I thought was right, and not ask a bunch of people on the internet their opinion. That was dumb of me.
I'm proposing the difference between the house full of 5 people potentially burning down, over the possibility of saving them all that trouble by letting the landlord know that the newest GPU's have a problem with their cabling if the owner of said GPU is not careful.
One of these things is called 'being a responsible person'
But what I do know is the landlord said the fella is having a hard time not tripping the breaker with his new rig, and that their power consumption went up ever since he got the rig. So I figure that maaaybe he got the newest Nvidia GPU.
You all who are reacting the way you are, are over reacting. I haven't done anything yet. I asked a simple question, and you're all losing your mind.
If you read correctly the first time, you would notice that I said my landlord had asked me about the situation once already, but in regards to power usage.
So I am already involved. I was not being nosey. That's just your attitude being put out of place, and your ego showing.
And at this point, I don't care if I am breaking the rules of this site, because if it harbors people like you, then its trash.
I'm upvoting you, because calling it disturbing really doesn't make sense unless egotism is involved. IMHO.
If someone can explain why it's not just egotism, please go right ahead. Otherwise, it really does seem like it. To me at least.
Other comments try to sort of deal with this problem in their explanations about soft and hard quotes, but they don't really deal with the part about it being disturbing.
What's so disturbing about using a feature available on your device? Especially when it does nothing harmful to the user, or recipients of that users communications?
A good-faith interpretation would be that "disturbing" is meant more lightly than that. It's more like saying use of tabs (or spaces) is "disturbing". It is a cultural disagreement on surface level, but not _really_ a disagreement if you were to probe further (I doubt the author thinks people are literally disturbed if they use soft quotes).
Further, if you check my sibling comment you'll see that it is a common mistake for beginner/intermediate coders to paste these quotes into code. This is the source of the "cultural debate" in this instance. They are making a judgement about how this common copy/paste problem shows up in practice. Not a judgement about "proper usage".
It's honestly a little surprising that you took this so personally. It reads rather playfully in my opinion.
Cause it's shaped like a simple boat. Or sort of is. Kind of like how 'soft quotes' are considered soft because they aren't in a very hard like up and down position, and are instead positioned like a feather softly falling. (or so I guess)
> taking an axe to the things that keep the lights on at Twitter: effective content moderation and talent.
I have experienced the 'effectiveness' of Twitters moderation team on multiple occasions where they were very ineffective at upholding the very clear cut rules surrounding things like doxxing on their website. I had my personal information made public, and they ignored me. Multiple times. I even created a new account with no way for there to be any publicly available personal info; and yet I was still doxxed somehow, and they still ignored me.
So, in the spirit of HN's rules, I just want to say this, since end user experience should be allowable to share (I hope.).
Effective moderation at twitter is a myth as far as I see it, and their only talent is making it look like they have effective moderation when they care.
P.S. I also was doing nothing wrong in any case where this happened. It was all conversations which should have been considered civil (mostly) and one situation where it had nothing to do with politics or philosophy at all. Yet they did nothing.
I agree that Twitter's content moderation is mostly a vibe, and not really effective. Musk purchasing Twitter is already killing that feeling that content moderation works at Twitter, and I wouldn't be surprised if advertisers put a freeze on their plans the day the purchase went through (hence Musk's panicked-sounding tweet to advertisers).
Honestly, if what they though Twitter was before was fine to advertise on, despite the lack of actual coherent moderation; then we are all blessed by the lack of those advertisers.
And if that makes Elon panic, then we are blessed doubly in that way as well, because he might either actually do something useful to make it a nicer place to be; or he might burn it to the ground.
Not really, since the other poster was saying Elon would be axing things like moderation. I'm saying essentially it doesn't matter if he does or doesn't, because it barely exists at all anyways.
So axe away I guess, cause there is no wood to chop. The tree is hollow, from all the woodpeckers eating the grubs.
Except they still charge the same anyways, or more.
I'm with Telus up here in Canada. You pay the same old rates as per the usual for 5G speeds. If however you go with their subsidiary (Koodo) using the older infrastructure, you can pay a little less for similar packages.
Check it out yourself. Mind you, I use prepaid, cause I don't want to be on a contract, so I buy my own phone and use it. Koodo even charges more for bringing your own phone, since they aren't collecting on having leased one to you.
Simply put, if I want to save money while still having enough data for what I actually need data for; I can either spend about 35-40$ with Koodo for 2-4GB of data at 3 & 4G speeds; or 40-50$ for 2.5-4.5GB at 4 & 5G speeds. I round things this way by the way, because of taxes. Also, auto-top up also tends to give some extra data too. 500MB more. So generous of them (/s).
And also, this is new packages. They just updated them with the new promo on Telus with that whole 1GB extra data and 10$ one time credit. I'm gonna have to call them and get that I guess. Unless they auto gave it to me? Who knows with them. Ultimately, I only need 500MB though, since I use Spotify in offline mode, and only download music via my wifi at home; and the only other thing I tend to use is Google Maps which can also be downloaded ahead of time to save on data.
Edit: I should also note that they do actually state 4G on the Telus website, but my phone says I am getting 5G speeds. Hence why I state 5G. I could care less what they claim on their website. End user experience is truth.
The government folk want it gone from theirs, but they want the rest of us to have it. Thus the claim "Our users want it" is true, in a tongue in cheek way.
> When you get right down to it, the people that got mesothelioma from asbestos pretty much universally directly worked with it (usually in the form of doing things like blowing it in loose form for insulation).
Yeah, cause they often (as I understand) were not using proper protective measures to keep from inhaling the dust particles. A common thing I have seen on construction sites of all sorts, is the workers refusing to use some thing or the other, because it makes them uncomfortable, or harder to see (but still can) or harder to breath (but still can) or some other jackanapes idea like that.
> Yet we spent an ungodly amount of money and time stripping asbestos from buildings that had been there for decades not causing any problems. Ironically, directly exposing people to asbestos in the process (more than you'd ever be exposed to it was left undisturbed).
This is where things get real fun. When moist or absolutely damp/wet, asbestos is basically harmless (to the lungs) because it's almost impossible to breath it in at that point. If you somehow manage to breath that in, you have to basically be trying to do it. When it is dryer than chalk on a hot summers day with 0% humidity though, then yeah it can cause all sorts of problems. But even then, people removing it tend to do the thing that the other prior mentioned construction workers (often) won't do.
They wear gloves, have masks on; and even are running some form of proper ventilation. And so much of the issue is averted.
Then comes the media and government. They take edge case scenarios like these, and hype them up; whilst mixing in the prior construction workers into the data. This makes things look worse than they really are.
It's not just Asbestos you can find this sort of thing with them. You can find media and government doing this with many things if you look carefully.
But that being said, none of this is to say that Asbestos isn't a problem at all. It's just to say that Asbestos gets the treatment it does for the same reason we have warning labels on nearly everything.
The problem is that mesothelioma (the worst case) is a particularly nasty cancer, and the more common things it causes, like lung cancer and asbestosis aren't fun either. We still get people contracting these diseases decades after doing home renovations here in Australia because it was in so many building materials for decades here. They just didn't know about the danger (despite massive publicity campaigns).
And for what? In 99% of the uses of asbestos domestically and commercially there are safe products that can do just as good a job, perhaps just requiring things to be slightly thicker to get the same insulating value... Sure there are some niche industrial and scientific applications where it's still potentially the best performing option but so much of what it was used for, it just didn't need to be...
People have always done that, but down votes don’t actually matter so why worry about it?
I make plenty of comments knowing people will downvote them based on content and still ended up so much positive karma it would take serious effort to burn it all.
I think the overall vibe is quite different from what it was in 2010 say? It used to be 'post erlang' when there was too much off topic posting, but these days discussions seem to be highly dominated by people who are 'tech adjacent' and have no idea how to code or build products, and no experience outside of big, crappy, late-stage 'tech' companies.
downvotes cause you to be essentially a lite-shadow ban if they happen enough, especially if in a flagged thread/comment. You get rate limited, which means only 5 comments per day allowed. Max.
So, sorry, but while I didn't downvote you, I do disagree with you; entirely. Validly.
That's a sign that your account is rate-limited. We rate limit accounts when they repeatedly get involved in flamewars or regularly break the site guidelines or post lots of low-quality (for HN) comments. It's a crude tool but one of the few we have to prevent such things from overrunning the site.
The thread also has interesting discussions on other mod tools: shadowbanning, IP bans, and the like.
Apparently the way to un-rate-limit an account is to send in an email and mention that you will "stick to civil, substantive comments that scrupulously follow" https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. Some amount of convincing prostration may be required, as a sort of high-level turing test. There does not seem to be a way to do this while not giving away your email address (which was not required at signup).
The moderator mentioned something about repeated, human-written warnings before rate-limiting, but this does not seem to be the case now (2020) - rate limiting seems to be a milder, less-known variant of the shadowban.
Look. All I know is what I looked up, and have read in the past; and that I wasn't rate limited until after I commented on a thread that suddenly got mega-flagged and I deleted my comment to try to be safe. Wasn't fast enough I guess, cause either an auto-bot just rate limited everyone in it; or a mod did.
Prior to that, I wasn't rate limited. After that, I was. Make of it what you will.
So, upvoted cause ultimately we do need to do something with it...
But I used to work in a industry that would bundle its used plastic and burn it to get rid of it... (I know, I know... terrible)
Let me tell you. That stuff doesn't burn easily unless there is already a damn good fire going, or some helper combustibles. Sure, it will burn just fine when you put a few in a fire, etc. But once you get to the kinds of loads that occur with bails of plastic...
It's going to mostly smolder and offgas from my experience. It got so bad they stopped burning it, and started selling it to some company that found a way to recycle it. Ironically enough.
It should not be "burned" as in a bonfire (like is done in many places). It needs to be burned in an electric arc furnace or mixed with coke for steel at temperatures in excess of 1000k.
OH, for sure. I agree. But that is what most people tend to do when they do this sort of thing. Even the 'furnace' they had was just a bonfire essentially in a enclosed can with vents. And that was specially bought from a company that sold it for that purpose. I forget the name though, sorry.
I have an idea I want to pass by you, since you seem to understand the importance of this better than some others. (At least as far as my under educated opinion on network security goes) (I'm a hobbyist, self taught most things.)
So lets say you are going to be running a home server to be setup as a read only server to the outside world, but write capable through a separate port connected only to a laptop that has no internet access (or very restricted) which also has the nicety of being so obsolete it doesn't have IME or any other intel idiocy backdoors attached to it.
Would you still put a hardware firewall between each of these connections? And if so, would you also run it through a VPN on the read side of the server?
I personally don't trust VPN's, since I see them as middlemen you pay to pretend they don't keep logs of anything. Of course there is always the whole argument of 'not having anything to hide, so no worries'; but I see it as false, since the whole point of using a VPN is to hide your bits from attackers and snoops. Even if it's legitimate/legal data.
So, what would you do to avoid using a VPN, provided you can't own the VPN instance somehow somewhere due to being a bit of a cheapskate? Would some basic OpenWRT firewalled routers be enough for your purposes (and thus mine possibly) or would you go with some more complex setup where a person has to trust yet another company to not be trying to hijack data somehow?
Server intended:
Opteron build, DDR3 tech. 6 cores, hyperthreading (if any) disabled. All forms of speculation turned off. All that jazz.
1 nic port is to be setup to be downloaded data only, no upload allowed.
Other nic port is access point for SSH via old laptop setup for security purposes.
Everything running on linux, as much as possible. No windows allowed.
"Write/Read-only" doesn't really make sense to me in this context. What services are you running? Are you just trying to lock SSH behind a single laptop? That seems like overkill to me.
If your laptop and your server are on the same network, which presumably they'd have to be if the laptop has no internet access, you shouldn't need any kind of firewall or VPN.
I would be hosting an FTP service for my files for my own use in other locations. So that would require some 'read' access from a network. So that network connection would have to have internet access somehow, thus the firewall and possibly VPN. These are not incriminating files in any way mind you. I just am wary about things like packet injection, and other sneaky practices that miscreants use.
I would also be hosting a webpage or two, for blog and possibly web-shop purposes. The blog would again be "read-only", but the web-shop would require some semblance of 'write' permissions available for users. So the blog would share the 'read-only' connection ideally. The Web-shop would share the write capable connection instead.
Finally, the laptop being able to SSH into the server solely is for security purposes due to not wanting to use any form of IPMI due to some security concerns over it. I would instead being using a dedicated network card for just its purposes only. This laptop would not connect to the internet through anything, even the server. No shared connections between the network nics at all.
And I realize it may seem overkill to some people, but I don't care if it is overkill. It's when people get sloppy and cut corners that backdoors and security vulnerabilities arise. IMHO.
If I had a million dollars, I would have the most secure server in the world, lol.
The firewalls/VPN's are essentially there to act as a stop-gap measure just in case anyone decides to poke their nose in where it doesn't belong. Partially to catch them in the act, partially to stop them in the act. Ideally.
Here is a simple text explanation of sorts of my setup I have in mind.
- Nic 1: Blog/FTP, Read only. No copying files to the FTP, just copying files from it. You can only read the blog, not comment, or anything like logging in. The only person who ever needs to 'log in' is me, from my laptop.
- Nic 2: Web-shop and maaaybe a game server for testing purposes.(Considering making a simple game that will need some net code tested in the future.) This will have full read and write capability, since it will need to. This is the network that will require all the extra firewalls and VPN connections, if I use them at all. The other one might be able to get away with not having them, but this one will need them in my mindset on the matter. Logging in is definitely a thing on this part of the server.
This server will have (and maybe I should have mentioned this before) a virtualized instance for each service. This way I can sandbox each, and kill each sandbox if ever needed due to whatever malicious actions some dingus decided to do.
The laptop is essentially going to be my monitor, keyboard, and mouse; so I don't need to run multiple of each for yet another machine. (I have 2 desktops, and another laptop. I need to simplify things down a bit, even if this seems more complex, lol.)
All of this is getting its own intranet essentially, completely separated from my main internet connection. It will also be getting its own business connection instead with a static IP address for any sort of connections to the outside world. The only way my two networks will ever talk to each other, is either through the internet itself, or via a firewalled connection between the intranet I have setup, and my other computers. In this way, it will act like a local NAS for my other computers, but also for when I am out and about, and need a certain file suddenly.
I should also mention I tend to live with roommates, so I like having an extra layer of security here and there when doing so, since you never know when your roommate is going to try to do something sneaky. Like my current one who decided to give our password to the neighbors downstairs... and across the wall... Why? Because they lied to him and said they pay for the internet here too.(They don't.) Or so he claims. Quite frankly, I have found out rather recently because of this and some other things that he has a habitual need to lie and deflect. Fun stuff.
Again, this may all seem like overkill to some people, but I have long learned from experience that what one person considers overkill, another considers underkill. I would much rather do things to a point where people go "jeezus" than be the one going "ah damn".
With that note, there will be absolutely zero windows operating systems on this machine, and any machine that directly connects to it, like my laptop; will also be running non-windows environments.
The machines that do need to run windows, due to things like my capture card from Avermedia not supporting linux basically at all... they are going to be locked behind the firewalls, and allowed to connect only to the basic internet connection I already have setup. Everything else is linux. Everything. Even my 'other' laptop that currently has windows on it, only has it, because it came with it. That changes, very soon.
And besides, you wanna see real overkill?
I'll be setting up my own version of Kali essentially on the first laptop for SSH and stuff into my server, so I can also do security audits. But it's either going to be Arch based, or Gentoo based. Why?
Because I don't trust the folk who made Kali, otherwise used to be known as Backtrack. Why?
Because they still use torrents, and not magnet files, to start. And while even Arch has a way to be used on Windows now; I can at least install it via Bash on my own without needing to use some pre-made packaged installation. Hence why I might move on to Gentoo.
And I realize that no OS is perfect, and security flaws exist everywhere.
That's why I am going overkill. Also, this is how I learn things. By doing them. And I basically want to learn how to make some of the most redundantly secure servers, so that people who come to me for my services get something they can trust isn't going to be easily hacked by some script kiddie.
Should I tell him this is a possibility if he is?