balentio

It'd be great to have a hacker news for things that are not hacker news. I refuse to go to reddit, though.

You left out "being a community of shills". That's really their favorite thing to do.

Yeah, I find the evil "distracting". Call me old fashioned.

I understand law enforcement which is not on the side of anyone inherently other than ideally justice. You, apparently, are not. I suggest you look up "due process" to get a jump start on some crucial points.

Maybe outsourcing one's security needs is "dumb" when it comes to something like the internet since "trust" is hard won and quite expensive.

People hurt people. That's why there are police and a judicial system with checks and balances--not a kangaroo court of internet service providers.

That is a law enforcement warrant matter--not a cloudflare policing matter.

Someone just posted up a pull quote the other day on Hacker News about how Cloudflare doesn't bend to cancel culture, and I remarked that they all ready had more than once. Now the big reveal is they ARE Cancel Culture, but they have no idea they are!

Yep. I don't know that momentum is sustaining them so much as it is denial.

The cloud is all ready a security nightmare. I don't want to put more stuff in it.

Wasn't this posted to Hacker News before?

Yep. Funny thing, people with Jewish DNA aren't all buried in Jewish graveyards.

I agree that there is a difference between the two of them and I think in both cases if any termination is going to happen, it ought to come from the legal system itself as a Court Order.

The problem with cloudflare is that they ALL READY bowed to cancel culture...

This is why there is a separation between law enforcement and service providers...

Is it a genetic bottleneck, or is it "We'd rather not understand Jewish DNA so much?"

Have a re-match in not China between the two without any other crap if for no other reason than to heal the spiritual damage done by the Chinese Olympic mafia.

> Get caught in a lie in front of a jury for a white-collar criminal prosecution with any sort of competent lawyer, and you never regain credibility.

Which is great for mega corporations who are always innocent of any robber-baroning or impulse to make security a secondary consideration to profit.

>Regardless, the other points still stand.

On feeble legs.

>It's incredibly hard to defend yourself if your head of security decides to extort you. They are the ones that design the protections to keep insider attacks from working. Luckily for Ubiquiti - the attacker screwed up his network configuration (VPN leak failure) which is also somewhat ironic.

I tend to think if you have that problem, you are probably hiring people that are much like your company. To put it differently, a known liar telling a story doesn't automatically make it a lie. I suspect we will soon be seeing later how much Ubiquiti cares about its customer base. When that time happens, I will return to this post and ask you some follow up questions.

> 2) There was no large scale data breach

Says who? The FBI? Says Ubiquiti? I bet BOTH of those places have a reason to say that, and it is green and smells of dead presidents.

You guys are thinking about this in a very cloudy kind of way. Assuming that Ubiquiti was being blackmailed, they have a security problem in who they hire (Who held user data for ransom). Assuming they were not being blackmailed, but had a security hole in their software, Ubiquiti has a security problem.

Krebs reporting comes from a potential conflict of interest in that the person who might have been trying to blackmail was also the source. Defamation is not really the issue then because the source was pointing at a security problem which they happened to also be the cause of. The entity that hired this person was...Ubiquiti! Hence, it is not really defamation AS SUCH. Rather, if anything, it was true but maybe blown out of proportion to get a larger sum of money from Ubiquiti. We don't know how much info the person got their hands on, because Ubiquiti would be to blame for that, wouldn't they?

So, ultimately I think taking down the articles is a mistake in the sense that they reported on a problem either way with Ubiquiti and security. Take off the ad revenue from those articles, and issue a modified retraction on the conflicted interest the source held as a correction. Use it as a cautionary tale on "Sensationalism" and "not always knowing what the hell someone is doing when they report a leak" and move on.

Most folks define their title by what they are paid to do. It follows then that if you are not paid to do anything, then you don't have the title, right? Well, if that's not quite right, then you haven't really become anything but rather you are someone who is mucking about with systems and happen to be being paid for it.

TLDR: Violation of the Law of One.

Perhaps I wasn't clear, so let me be quite transparent: China has terrible human rights issues. One of those issues is eating babies which they SAY is just in rural areas, but if you happen to let loose a bio weapon on the world, I tend to be a little skeptical of your main story lines.

There are whole parties just for tea...

I must have glossed over it expecting it to be in large, intimidating bold letters.

I didn't see the words "owned by Microsoft" which would be first on my list of reasons for this...

Antiochus was not exactly a nice guy if your beliefs happened to not be his.

While I acknowledge business as a driving force behind tech, I think if you want to "change the world" all you really have to do is provide solid financial support to open source tech since that is where most of the "For profit" inspiration is coming from anyway.

I'm probably in the minority opinion here, but I'd say his newer work is in some ways less inventive than his older work. I think a lot of it boils down to being around silicon valley weirdos for too long wherein the books take on themes the extremely wealthy technocrats are actually trying to accomplish. It goes from being Sci-Fi to Sci-we-really-are-doing-this.

Headline: Formerly free account in tech that got many adopters on the free platform isn't going to have a free account option anymore. "Users are "Tied into" the solution now, so we can afford to piss them off," says CEO. "Also, we'd like to pick their pocket now that we got them hooked on our crack rock."