GNU octave has solvers

deleted by creator

It is not new. I downloaded (copyrighted) porn movies from my ISP’s own Usenet servers in the early 90s. On dialup. It was a decentralized, federated service before anybody even knew what decentralization or federation even meant or why they would want it. It was just assumed that everyone would want to run their own Usenet servers because the technologies of the time didn’t allow direct, continuous, real-time connection between everybody. Sharing was expensive but running a Usenet server was relatively cheap and was a good way to share all that data to all of an ISP’s users at once. It was ALWAYS an option to use it for piracy, and people did.

Nowadays, sharing is cheap, and running Usenet servers is expensive, so almost nobody runs their own Usenet servers, especially not ISPs. But that’s not the technology’s fault, it’s just the way the world has changed. The internet is a very different place now, and we use it in different ways. Usenet, on the other hand, has not changed at all. Only the people using it have changed.

Believe me I wanted to be able to say that, but they have extraordinary enforcement authority and were taking their fees off my actual gas utility bill (which was conveniently at the right address unfortunately). It’s such a huge racket.

Ironically all the dude was doing was making sure that other pirates weren’t profiting by stripping out their obnoxious ads. Good job making piracy more profitable for what is probably organized crime groups camming new movies in theaters and slapping ads all over them! Nice own goal for the UK copyright police!

It’s insane. The most painful thing I ever did was buying out of that water heater contract. Painful because I had zero interest in paying a red cent to those bastards, but I had no choice, their contracts are so iron-clad they’ve got them written by default into the literal home purchase agreement that the provincial government provides. I tried to reject that term in the home purchase agreement and refuse to take on the contract, but the seller threatened to walk away when I did that and I really wanted the house. So I sucked it up, bought the house, took the contract and bought it out, or rather tried to. They even made that a giant pain in the ass (fuck you, EnerCare!) Tried to tell me I didn’t live at the address where the water heater was, because they had put a nonexistent house number on it and they kept relentlessly trying to make excuses to try to sell me on their stupid maintenance plan instead of correcting the information. Eventually I screeched and pestered and threatened them until they finally accepted my giant proscribed racketeering payment to take their bullshit off my bill, and thankfully I’ve never heard from them since, and I hope I never will.

I continued to use the thing for many more years until got old enough that it was making horrible banging noises and decided to replace it before it failed. happily got rid of the thing (which was actually a decent unit, I guess they don’t want to have to actually repair/replace them when they’ve got you on forever-contract), and for only slightly more than the buyout payment, bought myself a fancy new water heater that I own for myself like a real adult,

v2 doesn’t realistically add anything important for functionality. sha256 is nice to have, but the chances of an actual attack on a sha1 chunk are still bafflingly remote. sha1 might be technically broken but in order to actually attack a sha1 torrent you need to generate a collision that is not only the same sha1 (which is still extremely rare and hard, only the fact that it’s proven possible at all makes it “broken”) but also within the same expected length of the torrent, otherwise any decent client should reject it for being too long, and they must reject it because otherwise they would be vulnerable to a denial-of-service attack from any bad actor who sends infinite length chunks and copyright trolls would be having a field day. I’m not a security expert but I write enough software to be fairly confident that I’m not wildly off base. In the event that somebody comes up with an actual realistic sha1 attack on bittorrent probably because of some weak/stupid client, and proves me wrong, attitudes might change quickly but I also suspect it will quickly be patched or vulnerable clients banned. If it’s pretty widespread I’m sure it will light a fire to migrate to sha256 but the actual risk remains, as far as I can tell, infinitesimal.

Until then, the v2 protocol doesn’t add anything except compatibility headaches for private trackers. I’m sure they’ll get to it eventually, but there’s no urgency and there’s not going to be unless there’s a viable attack to drive that urgency. Latest version for latest version’s sake comes with its own set of risks.

I am going to download an entire car the moment it is technically possible and feasible to do so with a sufficiently large 3d printer. I don’t even care if cars are still a thing by that point, I will do so simply out of principle, to be able to say “Yes I absolutely would download a car, I just did!”

Sometimes doing something illegal is anti-social behavior. Sometimes it’s anti-authoritarian behavior. These are not the same thing.

Screw them! We’ll build our own peertube, with blackjack, and hookers

Florida is basically the unofficial US Capitol now, so it would be confusing and ambiguous to have it associated with the traditional forms of unexpected insanity. Now it’s going to be an entirely new kind of unexpected insanity, so Ohio has been selected to represent the old kind of unexpected insanity that Florida used to represent.

The end result is exactly the same.

The difference is that you can install an iso on a computer without an internet connection. The normal iso contains copies of most or all relevant packages. Although maybe not all of the latest and most up to date ones, the bulk are enough to get you started. The net install, like the name suggests, requires an internet connection to download packages for anything except the most minimal, bare-bones configuration. The connection would hopefully be nearly as fast if not faster than the iso and be guaranteed to have the latest updates available which the iso may not. While such a fast connection is usually taken for granted nowadays, it is not always available in some situations and locations, it is not always convenient, and some hardware may have difficulty with the network stack that may be difficult to resolve before a full system is installed or may require specialized tools to configure or diagnose that are only available as packages.

In almost all cases, the netinst works great and is a more efficient and sensible way to install. However, if it doesn’t work well in your particular situation, the iso will be more reliable, with some downsides and redundancy that wastes disk space and time.

Things like windows updates and some large and complex software programs and systems often come with similar “web” and “offline” installers that make the same distinctions for the same reasons. The tradeoff is the same, as both options have valid use cases.

To be fair, in the case of something like a Linux ISO, you are only a tiny fraction of the target or you may not even need to be the target at all to become collateral damage. You only need to be worth $1 to the attacker if there’s 99,999 other people downloading it too, or if there’s one other guy who is worth $99,999 and you don’t need to be worth anything if the guy/organization they’re targeting is worth $10 million. Obviously there are other challenges that would be involved in attacking the torrent swarm like the fact that you’re not likely to have a sole seeder with corrupted checksums, and a naive implementation will almost certainly end up with a corrupted file instead of a working attack, but to someone with the resources and motivation to plan something like this it could get dangerous pretty quickly.

Supply chain attacks are increasingly becoming a serious risk, and we do need to start looking at upgrading security on things like the checksums we’re using to harden them against attackers, who are realizing that this can be a very effective and relatively cheap way to widely distribute malware.

It is mostly a myth (and scare tactic invented by copyright trolls and encouraged by overzealous virus scanners) that pirated games are always riddled with viruses. They certainly can be, if you download them from untrustworthy sources, but if you’re familiar with the actual piracy scene, you have to understand that trust is and always will be a huge part of it, ways to build trust are built into the community, that’s why trust and reputation are valued higher than even the software itself. Those names embedded into the torrent names, the people and the release groups they come from, the sources where they’re distributed, have meaning to the community, and this is why. Nobody’s going to blow 20 years of reputation to try to sneak a virus into their keygen. All the virus scans that say “Virus detected! ALARM! ALARM!” on every keygen you download? If you look at the actual detection information about what it actually detected, and you dig deep enough through their obfuscated scary-severity-risks-wall-of-text, you’ll find that in almost all cases, it’s actually just a generic, non-specific detection of “tools associated with piracy or hacking” or something along those lines. They all have their own ways of spinning it, but in every case it’s literally detecting the fact that it’s a keygen, and saying “that’s scary! you won’t want pirated illegal software on your computer right?! Don’t worry, I, your noble antivirus program will helpfully delete it for you!”

It’s not as scary as you think, they just want you to think it is, because it helps drive people back to paying for their software. It’s classic FUD tactics and they’re all part of it. Antivirus companies are part of the same racket, they want you paying for their software too.

Almost like the context matters and the world isn’t entirely made up of black and white binary choices because we’re not robots or computers and discrete logic does not apply to human moral arguments.

That’s kind of like seeing a story where a car crashed into someone’s living room and saying “I don’t see the benefit of having houses” even though:

• This is very rare
• Not all sites have equal risk of this happening
• The alternatives you would likely propose have even bigger risks.

Counter rant: This is why we built encryption and VPNs many years ago. This is a solved problem, but rather than solving it you’d rather just complain ineffectually about it. The solution, the product of years of work of technical people and privacy people, is sitting right there staring you in the face available for you to use as a free service, a paid service, or your own self-hosted service. Use a VPN, that’s what it’s for.