vukk

You can check how EURS deals with this, for better or worse https://eurs.stasis.net/transparency/

Replace your Google Authenticator TOTP with a pair of YubiKeys and the Yubikey Authenticator app. New YK models have U2F so use that when available on whatever service you're logging on. Disable all SMS auth where possible. Look into Bitwarden.

First thing on shorewall was always to set ADMINISABSENTMINDED=Yes :)

a slightly bitrotted tool for this https://github.com/RichiH/vcsh

Europe a separate discussion from the US, as far as I know the problem is that Google refuses to sign any kind of guarantees that the data doesn't leave the EU. Probably because hosting companies that have US DCs can be compelled to give up data from EU datacenters too by the USgovt.

Microsoft does give those guarantees, it has a weird setup with Deutsche Telekom operating their datacenters.

So institutions like universities can't necessarily use Google cloud services. Even consultancies aren't necessarily so hot on providing Google cloud stuff, as some customers can't use them. All this, however, is anecdotal.

You can read more on HN, e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16858597

Perhaps you should go read the thing, you might be positively surprised. The first thing you want is there, the second is a more complicated question. Sometimes some of your data is actually really needed, e.g. when required by the law. GDPR is a compromise: you have to state explicitly where the data is going and you better keep it safe, under the threat of a possibly hefty penalty.

This ^ is a shortened simplified statement. You can argue semantics or maybe that I'm just flat out wrong if you wish, but that'll mean you read the GDPR, a win in itself.

Warning: descriptions of suicide.

I feel like this argument collapses when given any serious thought. Mainly because even without experiencing either, I'd consider drawing a warm bath and cutting your own wrists a very different experience compared to hanging upside down and somebody else cutting your throat.

But then you don't have the homophone bear/bare, with "bare" having some nice connotations when your context of the topic includes OpenSSL.

One way to elegantly describe and solve such a problem would be Answer Set Programming.

This is simply not true. Private schools do exist, they have to follow the state program though. Also the politicians do not like to allow new licenses for private schools, thus many private schools operate under the licence of another private school, which distorts some statistics.

"I live next to a major city exit road. Before that, I lived in a house that had a freight railway station across the street. I've never noticed any problems."

For you, no problems. For others, there might be. And if you do have a problem for example falling asleep when there is sound, the sound from the turbines is nasty as with such low sound you can't block it with earplugs. I'm not saying you should care, just a fyi that some people do have to care about this for their own sanity.

I'm a student at Aalto. There is promise, there are some communities with really, really smart people. But this article feels like it hypes the government.

Personally I do not agree with the government throwing a bunch of money at things, it creates a loop of nonsense, people milking the cow while the fun lasts. This can be seen and heard on the ground level here. Throwing money at companies is something Tekes has done for ages with established companies in Finland, like Nokia. The startups are just the hot thing now so money is flowing there.

This leads to the fact that the startup scene is hyped in general.

Please note that this comment is quite specific to Finland.

This is a pointless argument, since both views are "correct". Even Joe Armstrong says that "You can take two views, you can say that either erlang isn't object oriented... [or] you can say its more object oriented than all the object oriented languages."

But I do not think it's very useful to say that Erlang is object oriented, since it will confuse a lot of people, since it is not anything like the other "object oriented languages".

http://www.infoq.com/interviews/Erlang-Joe-Armstrong http://www.infoq.com/interviews/johnson-armstrong-oop

I was expecting this to be about tapping on your phone's accelerometer to gather the data.

Does it work with Readability?

Indeed, maybe more weight should be given to opposing such institutions. Though I'm still not convinced that the government should not be fixed first, and indeed I think that it is required to do so to be able to fundamentally affect those govt-like institutions.

I think your policy with stefbot is very healthy.

> ".. who has the monopoly on force, but that's not actually vital to your concerns."

> "...but it almost sounds like 90% of libertarian philosophy would be thrown out of the window if the government phrased its position like, "(1) we own all of this land, we just sublet it to the nominal owners for a rent that we call property tax, (2) you are only allowed to be on our land if you agree to our terms and conditions, which includes laws and income taxes, (3) you may at any time opt to be kicked out of our country permanently, rather than being imprisoned etc.""

This is a great observation, though I do not agree completely. I feel that this applies to ancap very much and the only argument I've heard that could be applied here has been "But it would result in better situation overall if the govt was successfully opposed, even if new ones arise", and that is not very convincing indeed if the resulting situation will fall back to suck (democracy by anarchy as I've heard it called). If someone here is ancap I'm very interested in their response to this. The reason I do not agree is because there is no real way of you creating your own government/country to compete with the existing ones, for the land area is limited and the governments are asserting that monopoly on force you find non-vital on their respective areas (if they weren't asserting it, how would they exist, thus it is indeed vital by definition). I guess I'm saying that you don't have the right to claim ownership and assert it by force if it makes you immune to competition (also, I now realize, patents). This separates govt-like institutions from governments. Go ahead and pick it apart, please, I just pulled it out of my bag by following my own reasoning.

But indeed, because of discussions like this, my mind might be very different tomorrow.

> "... he seriously constructs a totalitarian government-like dystopia inside of a libertarian minarchy, ..."

Yeah this is something one has to be constantly aware of. And it's actually surprisingly easy to be aware if one has the luxury of having smart people care enough to listen to you, but very hard otherwise. The thing to be aware of is that many have their thoughts about the perfect government, but ultimately you would have to be a totalitarian dictator to actualize them. You forcing people to live in your ideal is fundamentally no better than others doing so. A realization I've seen linked to Voluntaryism, which I feel has similar emptiness you describe with ansoc, but I'm really not knowledgeable enough to say anything of actual value about it.

Following this forward, one ends up in the dilemma, if I oppose government power, how can I uphold belief that I have the right to decide for others? After all changing a government to minarchy would be forcing it's current inhabitants to live in it or move away, and some of them might be democrats who do not want that minarcy of yours. Can I really believe that I have the right to do this?

Either one has to appeal to reasonableness and practicality, and that is very very suspect, much like a big furry frightening monster offering candy, or one turns his/her thoughts on to ancap or ansoc or voluntaryism or something else, all of which have their own problems, some of which were very briefly touched in this discussion. And again we are back in thinking about our ideal world. Frak.

Also on the issue of land and asserting private ownership on it, though I assume that you are aware of this, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geolibertarianism

> "It seems, as you say, that the only distinguishing feature is its size"

No. Well yes, but it's confusing to say so, the point is in the location of the government in the "pyramid" if you will, it's the "top dog". If government is not such as to allow competition and is willing to enforce such position, and it's reach is far and wide, the rest of the environment is doomed. In such an environment, there will be no competition for government-like institutions, and they will suck forever and ever.

That is to say, there is no hope in those institutions getting better if you don't have the environment fixed first.

There is nothing fundamentally wrong with those institutions existing, since in a competitive environment they do not have the force to compel you. They may fool you with fashion and fads and reality distortions, but fundamentally they can not compel you with force. And that force to compel is something the government has and does use, in fact it asserts a monopoly on using such force.

If some government-like institution has such a force, you can dig down and see that the force is actually granted to it by the government. (this follows from the government's assertion of monopoly on such force)

Since most current governments allow some kind of limited competition, things do usually get a little better very very very slowly, speed depending mostly on the amount of competition allowed. Obviously culture has an effect on how bad it will get if the government's power is great etc. etc.

> "Now that works for most modern libertarians, but I think it would not work for Ayn Rand"

To me Ayn Rand is more like romance novels for libertarian leaning people. Her points are seductive but ultimately lack rigorous substance "in the real world", fun to read though (or watch the movies, or listen to, since there are some songs that have some quotes in the lyrics). So I don't really care if some argument would work on Ayn Rand or not. It is my understanding, from n = a small number, that similar positions are not rare. Very cautious attitude is also exercised towards other cult-ish stuff like stefbot.

> "More interesting are the libertarians who take a doctrinaire opposition to the government, but it really requires, as I said earlier, an anarcho-socialist vibe of ... those are already Initiation of Force in some fundamental sense"

To me, that has an anarcho-capitalist vibe, granted this is probably because of difference in social scenery. I do know that the anarcho-socialists have similar arguments, I'm mostly familiar only with Chomsky's. Btw. anarcho-capitalists are infuriating and interesting to talk to.

Wow that's a lot of text for a point that is so clear in my head. I hope it gives you a plausible explanation why some reject the government but not the government-like institutions.

If your university sucks, switch to another. Or pursue starting up a new one.

I realize that you aren't saying that your university sucks, the point is that you can change it, it is subject to competition and cannot use possibly lethal force to compel you. My argument would be that with time, since the university is subjected to competition, it will get better or perish (or the whole industry gets "disrupted"). If you have an environment where things are subjected to competition, those government-like institutions will get better. Albeit slowly. Thus the opposition of the large government, since the large government will very effectively hinder hopes of such environment, at least in a libertarian opinion.

It's not that the government-like institutions aren't a problem, but the large government is the bigger problem.

A side note: It is my understanding that one of the aims of the seastanding stuff is to provide more competition between governments.

Another side note because maybe some don't know it: there are major differences in opinion inside groups of people who identify as libertarian in what is an acceptable scope of government, or if it should indeed exist at all (the extreme). Thus the "libertarian opinion" I used is a misnomer.

My first MDR-7506's had very soft rubber on it's cord, and eventually it broke. Changing the coil requires soldering and I and another person who actually had experience could not get it done, the wire resisted all attempts somehow... So not as repairable in my mind, but it is obviously somewhat relative term. Still bought new ones and the cord has been fine, if someone is wondering. Would prefer if the cord could be changed by just plugging a new one in however :)

Also, if you get or already have MDR-7506, I strongly recommend getting the velour pads! They are made by beyerdynamic and are really for DT-250 but fit fine to MDR-7506.

Since I didn't find a product number to give you, here's an amazon link http://www.amazon.com/Beyerdynamic-Velour-Earcushions-MDR750... that lists them currently unavailable though, but just to give you easier time finding them from some other retailer.

bayerdynamic DT-770 is another popular choice in pro-use (just anecdotal evidence). My experience is that they are slightly more bass-heavy than Sony MDR-7506, but the sound is very equal otherwise. Also their round shape did not fit my head as well and caused pain on long sessions. Overall I see that some might prefer them over MDR-7506.

"it isn't that different from the Tweet and Like buttons at the bottom"

Yea it is, it isn't a small button at the bottom. Also twitter and facebook are already full of noise but HN isn't, it feels like you want to promote noise in HN. Despite if this is what you want, that is what it feels like.

Every time somebody does this "vote me on HN" stuff, I wont if the content isn't really good and very, very clearly belongs to HN. It raises the bar even higher.

Small government vs. large government IS about good government, because it's about if the government CAN be good.

If yes, it might be small or large. If no, then it must be small.

This interview with Simon Peyton-Jones seems very relevant, the points made are so similar to what Michael Gove says here that it makes one wonder :)

relevant part starts at 19:19 http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/Charles/YOW-2011-Simon-Peyton...

This post is from 2008, so the next post is already posted here http://prog21.dadgum.com/16.html?_

The original comment used "anglo corporatism", which I understand, but why are you hopping to "anglo capitalism"?

Few more points that might interest you http://hardwick.fi/blog/?p=2097

Yeah, I use Readability in Inverse mode myself so I can get my reading in dark background and light text.

To be fair, that is not white on black, it's very-light-grey on dark grey. Personally I find white #FFFFFF on black #000000 hard to read too, but very few sites use such colors.

Light grey on black, which this blog uses, seems perfectly fine for me.

Might there be differences of opinion because of differences in monitors? I'm using Eizo S-PVA, so I might have it better than those with cheaper LCD monitors.

I hear a lot of bitching about food and gas prices for example here in Finland. Also very few people DON'T have a problem with some sort of bureaucrat, for example idiotic and incoherent health inspectors, bureaucrats deciding who gets subsidized etc.

The best way to deal with bureaucrats here is to catch them making a mistake and then using that to make them sign the papers. (Usually this involves following their orders until there is some kind of incoherence in them, and thus is costly if those orders involve eg. building/renovating something that is fine as is).

For some reason the favorite explanation nowdays is that the EU is in fault here, even though this crap has been going on before the EU existed.