jauer

Self hosting wasn’t popular nomenclature back then, but it was common for people to host web and mail on at home on DSL or even dial-up (ISDN or even analog if you were bold) 20-30 years ago.

This “blame sama for memory prices” meme is so tired.

He gave demand signal so many times years ago and was mocked for it and now we have the consequences of industry not taking him seriously.

I don't think you are missing anything. There's zero actually traceable evidence in this report.

Where are the web server access logs with source IP addresses and timestamps?

That's the kind of evidence that is needed to go to a provider's abuse department or sue to unmask the user behind a given IP, not attacker controlled (and falsifiable) strings.

I think this or similar accountability measures is where we'll need to end up with this kind of technology. It's too useful for catching vehicle theft rings and similar kinds of highly disruptive criminal networks to abandon the technology entirely.

LOVEINT has been a thing for as long as electronic surveillance has existed. We fire and/or prosecute people for it. We didn't turn out back on those capabilities.

I'd like to see someone using systems not available to the general public to to look up info on people without a legitimate purpose be treated as a kind of aggravated stalking.

Government employees should be held to a higher standard because they are in a position of public trust, but TBH people at companies like Google, Meta, Verizon, Comcast abusing internal tools for this should be similarly held accountable because they have access to resources far beyond e.g. one hobbyist logging TPMS IDs on passing vehicles.

Information is default low-trust unless you have reason to extend trust to the source and that's been the case for thousands of years, if not the entirety of human existence.

We now have the tools to increase trust in specific information, for example: by signing images that need high trust for things like news reporting using camera hardware root of trust with time and geo stamping. If signatures are removed, that's back to a default low-trust state.

and the xAI data centers are uniquely dirty and polluting because they don't have sufficient grid connectivity and are running on generator 24x7.

This isn't a problem for the vast majority of datacenters, and won't become a larger problem unless the anti-civilization mindset blocks infrastructure investment that's eventually needed even if the datacenter isn't built.

AI or not, it's unconscionable that victims of compulsory legal processes by way of mistaken identity are not made whole.

Unlike enterprise datacenters, systems inside these datacenters are tightly coupled to compute system design to eke out PUE, so network cabling, electrical, and cooling to a lesser degree gets reworked every 3-5 years. On a campus with several data halls this means that there’s work for those trades well beyond initial construction. Sure, you don’t have the steel and concrete work happening that went into the shell, but it’s more than a handful of operations people.

From the 00s to mid 2010s I did fiber splicing in factories from Kenosha to Beaver Dam and even then they were fairly well-automated to the extent that I’d see just a few people on the factory floor moving carts of metal between machines or handling shipping and receiving.

I've worked in various teams on the infrastructure side of a FAANG from early career/L4 to sr staff eng/L7 and have always been encouraged and rewarded for asking questions, even when those questions have led to unexpected multimillion dollar costs and in one case a loss of ~1% of fleetwide compute capacity.

I think this comes down to how you go about asking. You have to take the time to understand what is and how it's seen by others by being curious, reading docs, etc instead of rolling in making assertions disguised as questions to assert authority like so many are wont to do.

I suppose it's possible that I'm the designated court jester and that's why I can get away with questioning, but I don't think that's the case :)

at the same time you have endless stories of people losing family and friends to cancer because a doctor dismissed complaints as anxiety or needing to exercise more leading to cancer not being discovered until it was too late to treat.

The answer can't be to put our collective heads in the sand.

There’s secret from an adversary and then there’s internal compartmentalization.

You could have 100s of people who have a business need to look at syslog from a router, but approximately nobody who should have access to login creds of administrative users and maybe 10s of people with access to automation role account creds.

TFA asserts that Git LFS is bad for several reasons including because proprietary with vendor lock-in which I don't think is fair to claim. GitHub provided an open client and server which negates that.

LFS does break disconnected/offline/sneakernet operations which wasn't mentioned and is not awesome, but those are niche workflows. It sounds like that would also be broken with promisors.

The `git partial clone` examples are cool!

The description of Large Object Promisors makes it sound like they take the client-side complexity in LFS, move it server-side, and then increases the complexity? Instead of the client uploading to a git server and to a LFS server it uploads to a git server which in turn uploads to an object store, but the client will download directly from the object store? Obviously different tradeoffs there. I'm curious how often people will get bit by uploading to public git servers which upload to hidden promisor remotes.