Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | huggingmouth's commentslogin

Ideally, Mozilla would step up here given their mission statement, but they won't, probably because their CEO needs another bonus.


Yeah there's no chance Mozilla would do anything like this:

https://commonvoice.mozilla.org/


That's the first thing I thought of! I wonder how used these are. Are there any sources or data points indicating that this commonvoice data is being used, and if so, where/how? I think I may have contributed to this a few times back years ago. Nice to see it's still going, would be better to know it's being used.


It was used quite a bit of speech to text - but tts it’s not that great.


It costs a million dollar a year to host 32k hours of audio?


That changed (ahm.. will change) with ipv6. I was surprised to see that I can reach residential ipv6 lan hosts directly from the server. No firewalls, no nat. This remains true even with abusive isps that only give out /64 blocks.

That said, I agree that peer to peer will never be seemless thanks mostly to said abusive isps.


> I was surprised to see that I can reach residential ipv6 lan hosts directly from the server. No firewalls, no nat

No NAT, sure, that's great. But no firewalls? That's not great. Lots of misconfigured networks waiting for the right malware to come by...


I sure hope not, this will bring in a new era for internet worms.

If some ISPs are not currently firewalling all incoming IPv6 connections, it's a major security risk. I hope some security researcher raises boise about that soon, and the firewalls will go closed by default.


My home router seems to have a stateful firewall and so does my cellphone in tethering mode - I don't know whether that one's implemented on the phone (under my control) or the network.

Firewalling goes back in the control of the user in most cases - the other day we on IRC told someone how to unblock port 80 on their home router.


it kinda of already begun


Has there been a big ipv6 worm? I thought that the defense against worms was that scanning the address space was impractical due to the large size.


i don't think they scan the entire space. but even before that there were ones abusing bonjour/upnp which is what chrome will bring back with this feature.


IPv6 isn't going to happen. Most people's needs are met by NAT for clients and SNI routing for servers. We ran out of IPv4 addresses years ago. If it was actually a problem it would have happened then. It makes me said for the p2p internet but it's true.


> If it was actually a problem

It became a problem precisely the moment AWS starting charging for ipv4 addresses.

"IPv4 will cost our company X dollars in 2026, supporting IPv6 by 2026 will cost Y dollars, a Z% saving"

There's now a tangible motivator for various corporate systems to at least support ipv6 everywhere - which was the real ipv6 impediment.

Residential ISP appear to be very capable of moving to v6, there are lots of examples of that happening in their backends, and they've demonstrated already that they're plenty capable of giving end users boxes the just so happen to do ipv6.


Yes and setting up a single IPv4 VPS as load balancer with SNI routing in front of IPv6-only instances solves that.

Most people are probably using ELB anyway


What do you mean not going to happen? It's already happening. It's about 45% of internet packets.


The sun is about 45% of the way through its life.


Not happening for 55%.

Try to connect to github.com over IPv6.


It doesn't work now so it's never going to work?


If it doesn't work for a website as large as technically forward as GitHub in 2024, the odds are not looking good.


GitHub might work someday. Wide enough adoption that you can host a service without an IPv4 address will never happen.


Honestly, it could be a feature rather than a bug…


Yes, that's one of the rare exceptions of a company trying to obsolete itself. It's actually one reason a bunch of people are moving away from Github.


"We are introducing a new charge for public IPv4 addresses. Effective February 1, 2024 there will be a charge of $0.005 per IP per hour for all public IPv4 addresses"

https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-aws-public-ipv4-address...


Yes and setting up a single IPv4 VPS as load balancer with SNI routing in front of IPv6-only instances solves that.

Most people are probably using ELB anyway.


> consumers have already self-selected into ... crappy LLM outputs

Tangent, but last I checked, it was all the big tech giants pushing it down our throat. Unless it's your full time job to find loopholes and workarounds, there is no reasonable way for consumers to opt-out.


I wonder if intel can handle a recall of a cpus with this issue.

Recall or not, their handling of this issue has been sub optimal to say the least.


My wake up moment with google was when they accused a parent of being a pedophile, permanently banned their accounts, reported them the police, and then doubled down when they were proven wrong.

Not only due those degenerates have the gal to creep on people, they refuse to admit wrongdoing or make their victems whole.

Sickos. That's what they are. Sickos.


A reference would be nice


Good for you. Still doesn't answer gp's question. Why do we have to create a central account?


Yes it did. Authy provided cloud sync via phone number authentication. If you didn't want that, you stuck with Google Authenticator.


Dji is like samsung; great hardware ruined by owner-hostile software. I will never buy either unless I can load standard open source software on them.

I can't wait for right to repair and similar laws force these delusional companies to actually hand over control of products to their rightful owners.


Comparativly, Netherland's weather is excellent.


With (deserved) increased scrutiny in Huawei and friends, I'm half tempted to get the discarded gear to actually put in production use. China/Huawei is no longer in a position to pull something stupid.

Current gen functioning gear at a discount price will be very tempting.


What do you mean? China has economic problems, but international escalation is often a great way to distract from donestic problems.


Huawei was always subject to a much higher level of scrutiny for obvious reasons.

In the UK, for example since around 2010, Huawei turned over code to an independent oversight board: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/huawei-cyber-secu...


I sttongly disagree based in my interaction with them. They were very rude. That said, their services are reasonably priced and they have been competent throughout my time with them.

Hetzner would be far more appealing if they ever decide to muzzle their rebid support team.


> They were very rude.

No, they were German. Knowledgeable and efficient, but they won't coddle you or pretend that their life depend on your miser account. If you have a problem that can not be solved by their standard process, they will rather drop you than try to accommodate you.


> they will rather drop you than try to accommodate you.

yeah they dropped my account and kept the money, now I know how they can be that cheap


No, I'm afraid you're way off. Their response was far from efficient. I reported a fault in their interface and they wrote a whole peragraph demeaning me in a passive aggressive manner.

The workaround (to their subpar system) was a single line at the end. Very opposite from German efficiency if you ask me.

That said, I did switch newer deployments to another cloud provider who is more professional, so it really does seem that they do not care about my measly account :-)

Cheers!


German efficiency is a myth. German “rudeness” is not.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: