feelin_googley

For example if it takes seven queries to resolve a name "A" versus two queries to look up a name "B", then in almost all cases, irrespective of the distance to a cache, looking up A is going to be noticeably slower than looking up B. Indirection is only one example. Even worse are configuations that knowingly trigger retries and wait for client timeouts in order to present a client with a particular nameserver.

Indirection and other "DNS tricks" come at a cost. IME, these are not compensated for via the proximity of a cache.

As always, too easy to be misunderstood in comments like these.

- Tom Wheeler, chairman of the FCC from 2013 to 2017, visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution and a fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School

Do you mean OpenDNS?

I dont use Chrome. Cant comment on that.

                <meta charset="utf-8" emacsmode="-*- markdown -*-">
                            **A warm welcome to DNS**

   # Hello, and welcome to DNS!

   This series of documents attempts to provide a correct introduction to the
   Domain Name System as of 2018.  The original RFCs remain the authoritative
   source of normative text, but this document tries to make this venerable
   protocol more accessible, while maintaining full alignment with all relevant
   and useful RFCs.

And Facebook has failed them, you know, across the board.

And the question now is not just what - you know, what can be done to ensure the security of that data. It's, how can we use this moment to ensure that we're having a broader cultural conversation about the data that we're all creating on Facebook, Google, Amazon, through our phones, et cetera and make sure that the companies are held accountable for it?"

Source:

Facebook co-founder, Chris Hughes

https://www.npr.org/2018/03/30/598208043/should-facebook-use...

...

I quit Facebook a year ago, and when people ask me why, I tell them candidly: I don't want to look in people's windows anymore to see what they're doing. Even if they want me to. Especially if they want me to.

Don't waste your life crafting an advertisement for how great your life is. Get out there and live a great life."

Source:

http://time.com/5208108/facebook-cheating-infidelity-divorce...

Source:

http://www.techfirm.com/storage/ProfileFacebookComplaint.pdf

"So they'll work on campus, they'll eat on campus, they'll socialise on campus and now they'll sleep on campus?" I asked. I wondered whether maybe that was kind of unhealthy. Creepy, even.

My guide looked right at me, and for a moment, his megawatt smile faltered. When he first worked there, it reminded him of the Dave Eggers book, The Circle, he said. Then he started talking about the opportunity to connect the world's people, and I stopped listening."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Circle_(Eggers_novel)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Circle_(2017_film)

Source:

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/jennifer-o-...

420 million Facebook profiles uploaded to archive.org

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2018/03/the-kiwi-s...

Heres a no-Javascript version:

    curl -o 1.htm  http://amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2018/03/31/facebook-employees-are-reportedly-deleting-controversial-internal-messages

    sed -i '/<p>/,/<\/p>/!d' 1.htm ;

    firefox file:///1.htm ;

http://fortune.com/2018/03/31/facebook-employees-are-reporte...

For the user, there is simply no need for a local program, e.g. a "word processor", to be connecting to the internet at startup. That connection attempt is for the needs of Microsoft, not the user. It sacrafices user privacy for the benefit of Microsoft.

IMO, they would not have made these sort of changes were it not for the success of Google and similar ad-supported web businesses.

As another commenter points out, Windows 10 is apparently full of this type of behavior. Telemetry is data collection.

Lets not forget about Bing. More Google mimicry.

LinkedIn, like Facebook a seemingly benign and useful "service", is one of most egregious data collectors, and is a major threat to user privacy. They are part of Microsoft. Microsoft wants user data and has paid billions to get it.

"Stub resolvers are "minimal DNS resolvers that use recursive query mode to offload most of the work of DNS resolution to a recursive name server."

A stub resolver will simply forward a request to a recursive name server..."

dig can send both recursive and non-recursive queries.

This appears to meet the definition of a "stub resolver" according the definition above.

However I am asking about programs that send only non-recursive queries and only send them to authoritative nameservers.

(FWIW I do not consider caches to be authoritative for any name.)

Is there a well-understood term to describe this type of program?

When Apples CEO says "we could have monetized our users but we didnt" that should raise a red flag. Why are they even in a position to monetize users? Its hardware. His comments are pure marketing; hes trying to differentiate Apple from these other companies (yet hes admitting Apple could easily do as they do). If Apple was really "doing the right thing" as to privacy, they would not be collecting data by default, they would not have integrated Facebook and other such ad-driven companies into iOS (perhaps they have finally removed them now), they would be training users to think twice before uploading private data into "the cloud". That is, if Apple was really concerned about user privacy.

All collection would be optional and certainly would not be encouraged or enabled by default. The default would be no data collection.

There is a consistent, predictable effort to flag or downvote every comment that expresses any skepticism of Apple. This is really sad. No company is perfect. I am not anti-Apple; I have been using their hardware since the Apple ][. If users want Apple to improve then suppressing all commentary is not going to help. I think constructive criticism could actually improve the situation. Companies are "listening".

The truth is that Apple has been aggressively collecting user data just like these other companies, likely at least in part for "competitive purposes". They have invested heavily in building data centers to hold user data. Todays Apple computers start dialing in to Apple servers the moment the user powers them on. Whether they use the data to serve ads is not the issue. Apple is not training users to be wary of such collection. Quite the opposite.

It just doesnt fit with "Privacy is a fundamental human right." Users who want privacy (all thirteen of them, for now) may not want their data in the possession of third parties, stored in some data center. This is just common sense. Those users are the models to follow if privacy is really, truly important. Why would a company try to frustrate the user who wants to manage their own privacy?

If such users are marginalised (e.g. limited hardware functionality unless one participates in data collection, because Apple is upselling users after purchase on "Apple services"), if Apple subscribes to the belief of other web companies that all users want their data stored with third parties (truly, the third parties are the ones who want it), then this is making privacy much more difficult to achieve.

Apple privacy terms state users are not "required" to submit data, but if they dont some services wont work. It is the same type of "subtle language" as referred to in the recently leaked Facebook memo.

Ive got plenty of karma points to sacrafice. Its worth it. Apple can most certainly improve but not without honest feedback.

Was/is all that data collection necessary?

Did they (or Microsoft) make decisions about data collection based on perceived competition from Facebook or Google.

Considering e.g. how ads were integrated into MS software products (e.g. the "free" versions of Office software that appeared a number of years ago) I think the answer is yes, at least for MS.

I believe all these companies (AAPL, MS, FB, GOOG, AMZN, a few others) react to each other and often adjust their short-term and long-term goals accordingly, even when they might be thought not to be competing.

What about programs run by clients that look things up over at authoritative servers? (Programs that do not look things up over at resolvers.)

"Zone files are one way of storing DNS data, but these are not integral to the operation of a nameserver. The zone file format is standardized, but it is highly non-trivial to parse.

...

Of specific note, many people have attempted to write a grammar (parser) for zonefiles and it is almost impossible."

I am guessing this statement is only referring to "BIND" zone file format.

I wonder how that could be a desirable or even acceptable state of affairs: having a "standardized" format that is "almost impossible" to parse.

The author suggests zone files are "not integral" to operation of a nameserver.

If zonefiles are optional does that also leave the programmer the option to use a zonefile format of their own choosing?

IME, parsing a tinydns zonefile is not difficult at all, because the author did not use the "standardized" BIND zonefile format.

Andrew "Boz" Bosworth will oversee Building 8 and Oculus, Facebook's virtual reality arm, Business Insider has learned. ...

The device, codenamed Aloha, will feature a large touchscreen along with a camera and speakers and be capable of recognizing peoples' faces when they step into view, three people with knowledge of the device said.

...

One hurdle Building 8 has faced in its efforts to build its first device is consumer mistrust of Facebook protecting user privacy, according to multiple people familiar with the matter. The company conducted marketing studies for project Aloha and received overwhelming concern that Facebook would use the device to spy on users, according to one person with knowledge of the matter.

To assuage concerns about privacy, Facebook has considered creative ways to market Aloha, including pitching it as a device for letting the elderly easily communicate with their families. Building 8 employees have also considered creating new brand names beside Facebook to sell their gadgets under."

Source:

https://www.businessinsider.in/Facebook-is-unifying-its-hard...

"Regina Dugan, the head of Facebook's secretive hardware lab called Building 8, is leaving the company after just 18 months.

It's unclear who will take over Dugan's role leading Building 8 on a day-to-day basis. Facebook recently promoted Andrew "Boz" Bosworth to run all of the company's hardware projects, but that also includes Oculus hardware, not just Building 8.

"There is a tidal shift going on in Silicon Valley, and those of us in this industry have greater responsibilities than ever before," Dugan said in a statement provided by a company spokesperson. "The timing feels right to step away and be purposeful about what's next, thoughtful about new ways to contribute in times of disruption."

At Facebook, Dugan oversaw a number of hardware efforts, none of which have actually launched, including a video chat device and a smart [microphone and] speaker, according to Business Insider."

Source:

https://www.recode.net/2017/10/17/16488654/regina-dugan-face...

[ What did she mean by "greater responsibilities"? Whats the "tidal shift"? ]

"The memo is classic Boz because it speaks to the majority of Facebook employee views but it's also polarizing. Tonally he doesn't mince words. This is clearly a post meant to rally the troops."

There is no record of Zuckerberg's response to the memo. However, a year later in August 2017, Bosworth was tapped to run the company's consumer hardware efforts."

"The natural state of the world is not connected," Bosworth wrote. "It is not unified. It is fragmented by borders, languages, and increasingly by different products. The best products don't win. The ones everyone use win."

Source:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanmac/growth-at-any-cost-top-face...

That last statement suggests everyone is not using the best products.

It suggests the senior management at Facebook are well aware that their product is not the best.

As a user, I want the best products.FN1

Is there any reason I shouldnt?

Why should I settle?

There are many ways to communicate over the internet (cf. www), peer-to-peer being the original and one of the most versatile, IMO.

Using a single billions-page public website to communicate over the internet is one possible way, it has proven very popular, but if I understand the Bosworth statement correctly, it is not necessarily the best way.

Being "fragmented" (e.g. decentralized) may be a desirable characteristic for users communication if one of the goals is to avoid being an easy target for advertisers looking for massive pools of consumers all gathered in one place, which appears to be the definition of the Facebook "product".

FN1. Using the word "product" to describe what Facebook offers to the user is probably misleading. FB is only a "product" for advertisers. Users pay nothing and recieve nothing. They merely use a single website belonging to a Harvard computer science drop-out in order to "stay in touch". The website is designed to exploit that use for the purpose of selling advertising.

"This is so disappointing, wonder if there is a way to hire for integrity. We are probably focusing on the intelligence part and getting smart people here who lack a moral compass and loyalty."

Note how the focus is not on the morality of honouring users privacy, but on the "morality" of protecting the company. Collecting personal information about billions of people, using "questionable" practices, then selling access to it. Its a "good job". One that the commenter does not want to lose. Understood.

However there are laws to protect companies against employees who leak secrets. Employees sign nondisclosure agreements. Companies can adopt no tolerance policies on leaking to the media. They can terminate employees who violate them. No employee needs to consult a moral compass; the rules are clear. Break them and there can be grave consequences.

On the contrary, there are no equivalent remedies available to users whose privacy has been entrusted to Facebook. There is nothing to keep FB honest. There are no grave consequences for violations of user privacy.

When there is a "leak" of users information, the user is entitled to nothing more than an impersonal apology.

Relative to other businesses, one might go so far as to believe "there are no rules" in the space where FB has operated. Users (who are not the customers of FB) have no recourse; theres nowhere else they can go. Buy.

In all seriousness, it is the user who must hope that every FB employee has a "moral compass". Whether FB employees can trust each other is not what the user wants to know. The user wants to know if she can trust FB's employees.

Question: In this situation, if the person serving as COB+CEO is "incompetent" (e.g., "absentee"), what can shareholders do, besides divesting their holdings?

Source:

Todays Wall Street Journal

Author:

https://www.skadden.com/professionals/b/barusch-ronald-c

Source:

https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-a-history-of-mark-zucke...

"Whether Boz believed his own words-then or now-matters less than the memo's seeming confirmation of a growing hunch among users: that tech companies like Facebook care less about the people who use their products than they do about growth as a means to fulfill their rosy-lensed ambitions.

...

Instead, it lays bare the naivete Facebook has maintained about its product."

[Poll: What do you think. Do the employees comments that have been "shared with everyone" suggest naivete?]

Source:

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/03/why-the-leaked-faceb...

https://github.com/lkundrak/dev86

Now this seems like something "no one" (other than "techies") would really care about, right?

Yet he is calling this out specifically. This just shows that people inside Facebook (or LinkedIn or the other internet companies that do this) cannot claim they see nothing wrong with these practices. They cannot claim "no one cares" except some outliers, e.g. nerds.

They know what they are doing is wrong. Even if users dont know what Facebook is doing, if they are duped into giving "consent", Facebook knows and knows it is wrong.

If someone pilfers other peoples email address books or mobile phone contacts, that gives a very effective view into peoples personal and business connections. The thief can "connect people" (e.g., find her next targets).

But, assuming this thief hasnt gone bananas, she doesnt start trying to justify the theft by saying she is on some grand mission to "connect people" and "Its just what I do." Shes a thief who steals email address books and contacts -- personal belongings that were never intended to be shared with anyone else.

Nor does it make sense for her to try to start a "debate" on whether or not her thievery is justified. Its wrong, she knew that from the start and she did it anyway. Her actions were intentional. Theres nothing to debate.

     # read this story as text-only, no javascript;
     t=198f3c4c31d49ced9b00837138196ec7b5c415904e81b59f3ea04e7b3959a1c9 ;
     curl -4 https://cdn.contentful.com/spaces/t0pm5m7uku03/entries/4NOhsWpS3m4esgOG6uMYm?access_token=$t \
     |exec sed 's/{/\
     /g;s/\\n/\
     /g;s/\\"/\"/g;s/}//g;s/ *//;s/\"###/\
     \
     ###/;' > 1.htm ;
     exec firefox file:///1.htm ;

     # another script to get all the stories from starterstory.com, text-only, no javascript;
     # sample output:

     
      ---------------------
      id: ventana-surfboards-and-supplies
      title: Ventana Surfboards & Supplies
      subtitle: Growing A Business Selling Surfboards As Pieces of Art
      description: Collector surfboards and more.
      link: /ventana-surfboards-and-supplies
      name: David Dennis
      revenue: 8e3
      measurement: revenue/mo
      founders: 2
      employees: 0
      startDate: 2014/08/01
      location: Santa Cruz, CA
      category: other
      publishedDate: 2018/03/27
      contentId: 5YPTt4uj3a022uOi0uASUc
     

   [hyperlink to content]

      type: story
     
      ---------------------
      id: cblocks
      title: CBlocks.io
      subtitle: Earning $32,000 in 30 Days With a Crypto-Filled USB Drive
      description: Crypto-filled USB drive.
      link: /cblocks
      name: Auston Bunsen
      revenue: 32e3
      measurement: revenue/mo
      founders: 3
      employees: 0
      startDate: 2018/01/01
      location: Miami, FL
      category: other
      publishedDate: 2018/03/27
      contentId: 4NOhsWpS3m4esgOG6uMYm
     

   [hyperlink to content]

      type: story
     
      ---------------------
 
     etc.

     curl -4o 1.js https://www.starterstory.com/static/js/main.6bf2bb3b.js ;
     t=$(exec sed 's/.*access_token=//;/acess_token/q;s/\".*//;/\//d' 1.js);
     exec sed 's/{id:\"/\
     &/g;s/\"type\":story/&\
     /g;/{id:\".*title:/!d;s/.*X=\[//;s/t.a=X.*//;/{id:\".*title:/p;' 1.js \
     |exec sed '1s/^/<pre>/;s/,[^ 0]/\
     &/g;$s/$/<\/pre>/;/Date:/{s/new Date(\"//g;s/\")//g;};s/{/\
     ---------------------\
     /;' \
     |exec sed '/additional:/d;s/}.*//;/component:/d;/live:/d;/dynamic:/d;/\"jpg/d;/\"jpeg/d;/[iI]mage:Object(/d;s>contentId:\".\{22\}>&\"\
     </pre\><a href=https://cdn.contentful.com/spaces/t0pm5m7uku03/entries/&?access_token='"$t"'\>[hyperlink to content]</a\><pre\>>;s>contentId:>>2;s>\">>g;s>,>>;s>:>: >' > 1.htm;

     exec firefox file:///1.htm ;

On Wednesday, Collins said he accepted the offer of evidence from Cox, and suggested the Facebook executive answer U.K. lawmakers' questions on April 24.

"However, given the seriousness of these issues we still believe that Mark Zuckerberg himself is the right person to give evidence," he said in a letter to Rebecca Stimson, Facebook's head of public policy.

"Mr Zuckerberg has stated in interviews that if he is the right person to appear, he will appear. He appears to have acted on this belief with respect to appearing before Congress. We now request confirmation as to whether he will make the same decision for us."

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/28/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerberg...

"Facebook wont confirm whether CEO Mark Zuckerberg will testify before Congress, even though he already said he was open to it.

...

Officially, Facebook says that it is still undecided, and a spokesperson declined to confirm CNNs story, which states Zuckerberg has come to terms with the fact that he will have to testify before Congress within a matter of weeks, and Facebook is currently planning the strategy for his testimony."

https://www.recode.net/2018/3/27/17168614/facebook-mark-zuck...

   Symbol: ZUCKERBERG.063018
   Start Date: 03/20/2018
   End Date: 06/30/2018 11:59 PM (ET)
   Shares Traded: 98,254
   Today's Volume: 124
   Total Shares: 33,948
   Today's Change: NC

Should Mr. Zuckerberg appear at such a hearing, but decline to answer any and all substantive questions asked by committee members upon invoking his 5th Amendment rights, this market will resolve as No, whether or not Mr. Zuckerberg submits a sworn statement or reads all or part of such statement aloud during the hearing."

https://www.predictit.org/Contract/9916/Will-Mark-Zuckerberg...