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.
Fair point, we don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, however I am fearful of a surveillance state. These trust issues seem to be stacking up, so I think statutory transparency is necessary.
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.
I don’t want kidnapping scammers to have easy to fake image generators that are untraceable. I don’t want eBay scammers to have that (sometimes I will ask the seller to take a picture with specific information to confirm a listing is credible). I could site lots more examples
It is best not to extend blanket trust to a specific source at all.
That is how we ended up with the situation where "reputed" media organizations peddle daily lies or selective truths that are useful to their benefactors.
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.
People will defend this, too, saying “well, she was eventually exonerated, right? So the system works!” Ignoring how she’ll never be fully reimbursed for the time, money, and grief of going through the system.
We also need to question how many people might go through the same process without eventual exoneration and how much going through this process costs individuals. Being falsely prosecuted comes usually imparts a permanent black mark in search results about the person (outside of places with sane laws like the EU) as well as causing stress or permanent injury.
Wrongly arrested individuals with mental disabilities have a history of physical abuse in jail potentially to the point of death.
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.
IPv4 continues to be available to entities that have a need that fits a particular policy shape, just most people don't.
Specifically, you can get IPv4 /24s for IPv6 transition purposes. This includes anycast DNS, MX, etc for legacy clients on other networks, v4-side of CGNAT, etc.
E.g. I was able to get a /24 in the ARIN region in 2021 and could justify 2 more for a _logical_ network topology similar to what NK presents to the world.
Trivially on their (and qnap's) amd64 systems at least. There are some quirks where they are more similar to an embedded system than a PC, but it's not a big deal. Things like console over UART (unless you add a UART) and fan control not working out of the box, so you set it to full speed in bios or mess with config.
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.
reply