irotsoma

This. Get in writing the specific legally binding policies for personal use of their network resources. Not just the personal opinion of the IT people. They don’t write the legally binding policy that you are responsible for following.

I get the idea of wanting that lifeline in case of an emergency, but I agree, constant tracking is toxic. I’d never give a corporation my kids’ information just for some small convenience like that. Basically selling their future for almost nothing. By the time they grow up, potential employers and governments will know every place they ever visited as a kid, even places that might have been technically trespassing or politically divisive in the future. Kids need to learn and explore and be guided on what’s right and wrong, not be punished for minor stuff they did as children their entire lives.

I mean, in most cases this isn’t criminal law (in the US at least), so it means you have to attract enough attention of a corporation since they’re usually the only ones who can afford the legal costs to file the DMCA requests and responses for copyright violation. And with many other civil issues, often corporations with the money for it, don’t have standing to sue, and if they did, would be required to sue each individual in the appropriate jurisdiction.

With the removal of Section 230, these costs will go down significantly as a single user’s violation could be enough to bankrupt or shut down an entire site of violating content or, if serious criminal violations like child porn, put the person who hosts the site in prison who, will be much easier to identify and sue in a single jurisdiction or arrest than a random internet user.

Yeah, other countries have similar or even more strict requirements, so yeah it all depends on the jurisdiction. You have to also understand that just hosting something externally, doesn’t mean you don’t fall under laws of another country. It’s the internet. And if you live in a country, you may be held responsible for obeying their laws. I’m not a lawyer, so it’s something to be careful of even if externally hosted.

This is especially necessary to consider if you live in the US right now. One of the things the current administration is pushing for even harder than past administrations is removal of Section 230 of the communications act that was enacted in the 90s. This provides a defense against liability for the content you host as long as you make a reasonable effort to remove content that is illegal. Problem is that this makes it really difficult to censor (maliciously or otherwise) content because it’s hard to go after the poster of the content and easier to go after the host or for the host to be under threat to stop it from being posted in the first place. But it’s a totally unreasonable thing, so it basically would mean every website would have to screen every piece of content manually with a legal team and thus would mean user generates content would go away because it would be extremely expensive to implement (to the chagrin of the broadcast content industries).

The DMCA created way for censors to file a complaint and have content taken down immediately before review, but that means the censors have to do a lot of work to implement it, so they’ve continued to push for total elimination of Section 230. Since it’s a problematic thing for fascism, the current administration has also been working hard to build a case so the current biased supreme court can remove it since legislation is unlikely to get through since those people have to get reelected whereas supreme court justices don’t care about their reremovedtion.

So, check your local laws and if in the US, keep an eye on Section 230 news as well as making sure you have a proper way to handle DMCA takedown notices.

Are there any guides to using it with reverse proxies like traefik? I’ve been wanting to try it out but haven’t had time to do the research yet.

Problem is that unless the person was paid for contributing, what goods or services are being exchanged with the project. I mean if Microsoft received money from that person for a subscription or something I might see them having to ban the user and refund the money. But what did the project receive that would violate sanctions? Volunteer work is usually not covered or else relief organizations and religious missionaries would be banned and the US historically loves sending those. What am I missing?

Yes it’s defects in the ingress-nginx controller package.

I think it’s unlikely to be enforced for normal use. If you use them for spam or to store a ton of data or some other abusive usage, they might shit down your accounts, but it would be pretty customer-unfriendly to do that for someone with just two accounts and not abusing it. Most privacy respecting services are too young to have gotten to the screw customers, only short-term profit phase of capitalism.

Censorship isn’t bad in itself. It’s a necessary evil just like imprisoning someone who imprisons others. Both are removing freedom, but one was for the benefit of an individual and the other is for the benefit of everyone else in the society. Regulation of freedoms is always necessary.

Problem is these days the far-right tries to say all regulation is too costly. But if one innocent person loses their rights compared to millions of innocent people losing their lives, its a big difference. Similarly, someone abusing their right to speak losing their right is not the same as someone using their right to speak responsibly, losing it.

Depends on what you’re backing up. Is it configs for applications, images, video, etc? If it’s application configs, you can set up those applications in a virtual machine and have a process run that starts the machine, restores the configs, and makes sure the applications start or whatever other tests you want. There are applications for doing that.

If it’s images or videos, you can create a script to randomly pick a few, restore them, and check the integrity of the files. Usually just a check of the file header (first few bytes of the file) will tell you if it’s an image or video type of file and maybe a check on the file size to make sure it’s not an unreasonably small size, like a video that’s only 100 bytes or something.

All this seems like overkill though in most scenarios.

Last time I checked, it depended on where you live and if the laws in that area require them to allow you to delete certain information. It’s on the a cache thing, it’s in your account. You can set up a new account, but if you use other Meta applications like Facebook, WhatsApp, Threads, etc, you may have to abandon those as well.

Might be possible to use a VPN or something to pretend to be in a country that they allow to have more detailed deletion of data, but I’m not totally sure if it’s just your current location or if the account has to have been created in that location or of you can change your account-level location, etc.

Generally the key fobs have a circuit and antenna inside and the circuit has a code that it broadcasts when it is near the transceiver. Some systems are more complex, but at the lowest level the system disrupts a magnetic field around the transceiver in a certain way to generate the code or is powered up by the transceiver and transmits the code using that power. That way no battery is required and it can fit inside a thin card or fob. Some older ones have a very small battery to increase range or create a more complex or modifiable code or for proximity use rather than touch.

That code is then authorized or not to open the door in the security system. And yes every time the fob is used, it is logged. And depending on if the fob has a battery, it is possible it tracks leaving. If they don’t have to touch the fob to a panel and just need to have it on them, then it logs any time they approach the door regardless of entering or leaving. If it requires touching or bringing it close to a panel and they don’t have to do that when leaving then it probably doesn’t log them by proximity.

Whether or not the log has the person’s name or just the code or ID of the fob depends on how old or cheap the system is. But there’s definitely some document somewhere that lists the peoples’ names and which fob they were assigned if it’s not in the system. So it’s easy enough to find out.

Any system that has the same code in every fob would be either super old or super cheap and unlikely to be used on secure doors. Having unique codes means that if a fob is lost or stolen it can be deactivated among other things. Which is a no-brainer for security if there is no real significant cost. The only reason older systems didn’t is because the tech couldn’t create long enough codes on the circuits that existed. And super cheap systems don’t want to create too many different codes since it’s cheaper to mass produce the same one over and over. Basically why car fobs can often open other people’s cars. Either they’re old or the car company’s too cheap and it’s not their security at risk, so they don’t care.