Because I have limited empathy and scope insensitivity.
If I'm emotionally burnt out about the crimes of a strongman like Putin who I have zero ability to change how will I put pressure on my local police chief to fire bad cops?
I've tried to go over this with my dad and uncles a few times, they're all IT professionals.
The theory is essentially that the machines weren't properly secured, they cite some provision of AZ election law that I don't recall precisely which states that if the machines aren't air-gapped the election is invalid and must be rerun.
They think the routers are the proof that the rules were broken and thus will force a revote. When pressed they never can really articulate a specific theory of fraud, just that the rules were broken and they're upset when the rules were broken and their guy lost.
> some provision of AZ election law that I don't recall precisely which states that if the machines aren't air-gapped the election is invalid and must be rerun
So, we don't need to follow the law?
The law is merely advisory and doesn't require our adherence?
Would you be this unaffected by violations of the law if your guy hadn't won?
> This is false. Maricopa County uses an air-gapped system, meaning its tabulation equipment is never connected to the internet and is completely separated from the Maricopa County network. There are no routers connected to the system and there never have been.
> Two separate federally certified Voting System Testing Laboratories independently confirmed that the system is not connected to the internet. In February 2021, they tested the equipment and found no evidence of internet connectivity. The firms also confirmed that there was not any malicious software or hardware installed on the tabulation equipment.
Can we cut it out with the "your guy" stuff? A baseless conspiracy theory is a baseless conspiracy theory no matter which political candidate you support.
In this instance there is no evidence that any law has been broken. Requesting the routers is a fishing expedition based on zero evidence. The equipment has already been tested and proven to not be connected to the internet, if they turn over the routers then "stop the steal" activists will say the hacks are actually hidden in the ethernet cables, or something. This is not an investigation based on facts, it is an attempt to confuse and sow doubt.
Having the router connected to the internet might be against the law, but refusing a request to turn over routers is not a violation of the law.
Do you honestly believe anyone is going to arrest the county board of supervisors?
What do you believe will happen to remedy this?
I'm all for enforcing the law, but I recognize that local authorities are essentially unaccountable to the rest of the nation. I assume that the residents of Maricopa county either support the outcome, are unable or unwilling to change it, or do not care about our civic processes.
I started this account when I realized that was what is happening at my current job.
I've been trying to ask for some of the things this suggests, and been told that it's a 'low value use of my time' to have expensive developers talk to cheap service reps.
The entire point of my work is to multiply the value those low cost reps provide. I'm probably deluding myself to hope that will improve their working conditions, but even just eliminating the day to day pain points of their job is more motivating to me than whatever "move this widget 1px to the right cause the design isn't pixel perfect on the CEOs new phone with a strange resolution" type crap I wind up working on.
I frequently think of the brain drain, wherein many people who would have gone on to advance science and technology instead end up having to explain to some ad person why you can't have a "mirror" color on your monitor, in the vein of the first fifty quotes on the old ClientCopia site.
We could start doing like the comment on OP does. Send a rejection notice with a link to some list of all the various blogs documenting how big providers refuse to follow the standards.
> My other thought was to have my Postfix server reject all mail from Microsoft servers, with a message requesting the sender to use a different mail provider and pointing to this article.
I've often been tempted to do that. However, we would actively be hurting our own users who would be incapable to receive mails from such servers. We'd in fact be hurting the very principles of interoperability we're defending in the first place.
Adding an auto-reply or an email footer mentioning that their providers actively hurts the email ecosystem and linking to alternatives would be a good compromise in my view.
Along with a libre email provider federation, that could go a long way...
I'm not sure it's fair to call telling foreign investors that they're not welcome to use your country as a rent farm is fairly called "communism." Until the rise of neo-liberalism that seemed to be a pretty core part of all economic populism on both the left and right.
I realized this when Microsoft started reading the emails and attachments in my office 365 account, and having Cortana "helpfully" suggest various to-do items from them.
The degree to which this seems to be the case has me convinced that the only way I will actually have any control of my data is if it's on a hard drive in my physical possession. And frankly I don't have time to maintain my own IT infrastructure.
I was mortified by Cortana auto-extracting todos from private emails but my father in his late 50’s said it was neat and very useful for him. So it goes.
Long term this is definitely something I want from my personal AI assistant, filtering out all kinds of annoyance/tedium from my life, so I totally understand how your father could like it. The difference for you and I right now is that we don’t view the AIs as personal enough and thus don’t trust them.
> The difference for you and I right now is that we don’t view the AIs as personal enough and thus don’t trust them.
I don't trust them because I know that they're reporting to their real bosses, who aren't me. If I could have a personal assistant that was completely local and under my control, I'd begin to get interested in them.
When it is locally done, I find it hard to see what isn't too like. That is, if I open an email and it asks if I want to make a reminder or add it to my calendar, that is cool.
When I see that several emails I have not opened are already on my calendar, I am less happy about it.
I don’t really see what’s different, honestly. They’re moving it from one system they control to another, big deal. Plus who says I even saw the original e-mail?
If they have given a side channel to impact my calendar, that will cause issues.
Sure, for many folks this will be fine. But it seems an unnecessary denial of service attack vector that needs more engineering to protect than makes sense.
I would guess in the many years they've had this they've had to iron out some issues, but allowing you to receive e-mail at all is a denial of service attack vector.
Self hosting e-mail? With the trust issues you get with small mail servers these days, I've got better things to do than worry if that job application ever reached their inbox.
Having done self hosting and and coming back to it after a 10 year break.. much easier.
One example of not setting everyone from scratch..
IaaS/Paas: Install Proxmox from USB.. 10 minutes from boot to web interface to your own local linode/digital ocean. Redundancy, setup 2 and link them. Disaster recovery, put it off site. Backups, connect it to one of a few built in options.
Network/infrastructure: deploy docker images for VPN (algo), firewalls (pfsense), dns (pihole), proxy (traefik, etc). It can remain an appliance that can be configured to self update if needed.
Storage: make storage into an appliance that you set and forget with a nas.
Next spin up your services/packages. Things like turnkeylinux is a nice way to try out things.
There is a nice self hosting community on Reddit if you’re interested for folks who have setup homelabs.
I feel like the rule for these kinds of features goes like this: if it would be fine and useful for a self-hosted version of the app to do something then it's fine if a cloud-hosted version to do it as well.
If you don't like that o365 is scanning your emails for todos and potential calendar events but it would be a non-issue on your Mail-in-a-Box then you have a problem with MS not the scanning.
Precisely this. I think this is why these discussions always blow up. A lot of commenters talking past each other about the tech that is pretty awesome. I've loved the idea of a personal assistant since I saw the movie Cherry 2000. However, I don't want MS or Google in charge of it. I'm in the process of setting up home automation and I'd like to eventually get to some AI driven processes but it needs to stay in my house. It makes me sad that the tech exists but I can't trust it's purveyors. I'm gonna have to figure it out myself.
It irritates me to no end how Microsoft keeps updating their programs to make them be "helpful". I literally NEVER want their suggestions, I just want their programs to get out of my fucking way so I can do my work.
One of a thousand Microsoft "papercuts" that drove me to Linux. Admittedly it ain't Windows, but that's pretty much the point. After enough years of daily little Windows annoyances built up, the fact that Linux was not Windows was worth the learning curve to me.
Most of the historical community building was done at faith communities, and by stay-at home parents in the past. As a society we fell hook line and sinker for "The two income trap," and are unwilling to contemplate the horrible idea of allowing families to collect the childcare subsidy to pay the parent providing childcare is upsetting to enough different groups to be a non-starter.
Right wingers are upset because "it's socialism" and folks on the left who I've discussed the idea with have repeatedly expressed fear that it will undermine feminism.
I feel like a mix of hand written test cases and copilot generated code might go somewhere, but I think you've got the basic problem sorted out. I'd much rather type an algorithm in from scratch than wrap my head around whatever copilot spits out.
I had an idea long ago that you basically write unit tests (nowadays I would add property-based tests to the mix too) and a genetic algorithm (best I could come up with at the time, nowadays we obviously have much fancier techniques, as evidenced by Copilot) would come up with code to try and make the tests pass.
I could see Copilot used in such a way. I think the interaction would have to change though: force the user to give it the tests as input, not give it some basic instruction, have it generate code, and then I try to write tests after. The tests should be the spec that Copilot uses to generate its output.
Right now, I'm not excited about Copilot. Like you say, understanding what Copilot spits out is difficult and I suspect more error prone than just writing it yourself (since we often see what we want to see and can overlook even glaring mistakes). I'm also not excited about them ignoring the licenses of the code they trained on. But I can imagine a future iteration that generated code to pass some tests that I could get excited about.
It seems to me that "generate the code that makes these unit tests pass" is actually a much saner engineering task than "go from a comments to an implmentation"
