Dump FB and never look back
Each time one of these essentially criminal activities is revealed, it continues to feel good not to be part of FB.
111 posts • joined 24 Sep 2009
FB's business practices are truly despicable, and the more we discover the worse it gets. Therefore I decided want no more part in this company and their platform, or to any longer be their 'product'.
For those who might continue to use FB's platform, I would urge you to consider why you would do so. In real life, would you, your children or friends honestly continue association with people such the owners /execs of FB, who have such extraordinary contempt / disregard for you and yours?
Why continue to feed the extreme wealth and ego of Zuckerberg and friends, knowing now of their calculating and callous behavior against society, and as we read today and not denied, even for your physical safety.
Yep, I thought not.
Since your average user blindly accepts their LAN dhcp from their provider, and per device / per network config is an effort unlikely to be taken by said user... deployment seems only for the 'advanced' ... at best
Likely this is the same set of folks already using services like dnscrypt.
Today's now increasingly redundant IETF once again looking for a horse which bolted 5-10 years ago.
It's getting desperate at Cisco. The shift away from SP to a solely Enterprise-like business (just look at who mostly got LR'd recently), for DC, Cloud and all that comes along with that.
Chuck is without a doubt a terrible choice for Cisco at this moment. A disconnected individual, surrounding himself with some of the most out of touch people you can imagine. He even seems to revel in providing material to prove this, for example recently announcing internally that Cisco needs to refocus on IETF and legacy standards bodies. Clearly he seems not to have noticed that OpenSource and open hardware has moved the world on and 2-4 years for a standard from IETF is a model of the past...
The refocus on Enterprise comes just at the time when OTT cloud services, AWS, Microsoft etc, are about transform Enterprise exactly as has already happened to OTT services for residential.
What foothold does Cisco have in OTT today? Pretty much zero.
There was always an internal giggle when Cisco would announce they where 'Number 1 in Cloud' at ra--ra all-hands events. At the same time the CPSs, AWS, Google, FB, MS etc, had already stopped buying ToR switches and servers from any major vendor and where designing and outsourcing the build for whitebox replacements, ordering these units in the millions.
The trend continues down to optical, bye bye Cisco proprietary, and hello grey optics at 80% cost reduction. Not only are the CSPs designing them and publishing the specs, but they can purchase them cheaper than Cisco can, since it's all about volume.
So what is Cisco's answer? Well it appears to be the same as Marconi and others ghosts have done. Focus back on previous revenue streams and try to milk them a little more. do a bunch of increasingly desperate LRs to shore up the revenue margins so as not to get hammer in the market on stock pricing.
Of course they make a lot of noise about new business and re-focus this that... but essentially it's emperors new clothes time.
Thing is, very dog has it's day, and Cisco has likely had it's time run out of 'woof'.
If this was the issue, then Level 3 is totally at fault, since one of the core principals for BGP policy is only to accept what you are expecting, since this is the obvious outcome of not having that route policy correctly defined.
This is such a basic error that the 'fat finger' has to have been involved.
However it's another example of how policy needs to be defined elsewhere, and the limits of BGP policy configuration done via the current OSS model....
Please god don't anyone say "hey we need another extended attribute for BGP that will solve this"..
As someone that works for a major networking vendor on the engineering side, I'm first going to call Audio Quest and ask them some simple engineering questions concerning their solution, how it relates to ethernet protocols, transmission, framing. Next some about IP etc..and finally some basic questions about NASs and media players etc...so let see what they say.
The likely outcome is that I will next call trading standards ...
but lets see how Audio Quest respond first....
Will keep you posted during the week. :)
For the tech inclined its pretty simple to build a secure DNS solution using a Raspberry Pi running raspbian and dnscrypt.
Add in isc-dhcp-server and if you wanna stay in the gui world use WebAdmin for config. Had this running for years now, moved it to Pi for massive space/power saving a couple of years back.
Also makes a great openvpn server and sixxs tunnel box too, they all run perfectly well concurrently with dns/dhcp etc.
Another plus is no DNS intercept from Virgin anymore.
Unfortunately very little of this is about cost, it's about revenue retention. BT has no real incentive to get people off the copper, as they are still making billions from landlines and copper based retail.wholesale services. The revenue is declining, and at a rapid rate, which has made BT execs finally take note and start deployining some fibre passed the cab.
However if BT was really serious about getting FTTH deployed they would have joined forces with the utilitiy companies water/gas etc who are passing homes all over the country replacing the infrastructure right up to the front door....
The resistance inside BT was enormous when this was proposed....and they don't seem to be embracing it anytime soon.
The UK could have already done most of the fiber to the home roll-out with the money which was spend on 21CN.
Add to that the continued incremental upgrades for DSL, "polishing the copper", which nicely keeps BT OpenReach going...ops I mean OpenReach a BT Group company...they get pissy about the name. ;)
Anyone from the old G-CTO Group at BT care to comment on their lack of extraordinary lack of foresight and wastefulness? Come to think of it anyone in the recent BT Design group wanna pitch in also?
I wonder if she will also be pontificating at her new job, as at BT she was rumored to have once pronounced in a meeting she would "be taking that (some issue) to Number 10"
What a wonderful sense of overblown self importance exists with these execs...
Oh she will be missed. lol
Why the thumbs down? Do you actually work in or contribute to the IETF and even understand it....? My guess is not.
But if you do either know anything, or are actually attending then lets meet in the lobby of hotel in Vancouver where it is being hosted this week @ 11.30 PST and discuss it....yes that's right I'm actually there...
As I assume you are not a lawyer then you will be perfectly ok if you wake up one day no one serves you in any shop, bar, restaurant, denies you to board a train, stop and searches you, locks you up for 72 hours under section 7, stops you attending any sporting activity...the list is endless
So yeah a guy sticking up for himself with the ultimate result of letting Easy Jet know their bullshit is bullshit..... thank fuck for a typical lawyer...
You don't...you destroy them.
When replaced you get a machine with some level of disk/physical encryption.
Classic - "but it's hard" public sector answer... It's not hard, and considering the massive overspend on IT across Government money is not even the problem, it just requires compedency and effort.
The truly staggering lack of any decent IT across the Government spectrum of departments is just no surprise anymore.
The first question to really ask is .....why was the data on the drive not encrypted to start with?
Problem is we all know the answer. Despite that we (taxpayers) pay about 40 times the cost for state run IT than a private company would, and we get zero value for it.
From my personal experience having to deal with Government IT, +their contractors, the compedence level and skill set is so astondingly low for internal staff, with the contractors often not a lot higher, plus there is little incentive to finish a project ontime or on cost on either side. Internal don't get fired, contractors want longer contracts...
I certainly would not make the assumption that everyone here is an outsider making wild opinion, and don't know exactly what they are talking about when it comes to BT, it's internal workings, politics and architecture....
However my point was clearly aimed at the regulator /gov and it's total lack of teeth and clue when it comes to providing the country with a FTTH.
Here we go again. Almost no one will benefit from this as the distance from the cab to the home so great.
BT has consistantly been obstructive when it comes to FTTH and the regulator / gov are a complete joke when it comes to a joined up strategy. So instead of this money being used to make an actual difference somewhere it's being wasted to patch up the infrastructure.
The regulator is hopeless when it comes to a plan for FTTH, there is not even a joint partnership framework with other utility companies to lay fibre. London and the South East for example are having the water supplies to all houses replaced, all the way to the front door, they have just finished my road.
So we are already in the process of visting the home, digging and replacing infrastructure, but one bit at a time. Gas was the previous year, and BT is still running fresh copper to both new builds and existing. Even if you can't dig fibre over the poles has been used in other countries for years, which is BT has also constantly opposed as a method for FTTH.
BT instead spent the money on 21CN, to migrate voice....which did not happen, and cost around 15 billion, not far from the cost of FTTH by BT's own inflated estimates.
But...... it's not about the consumer, it's about protecting the unionised jobs at BT and all the little kingdoms the sad middle management types have created.
Mr Regulator - wake the fuck up and learn something about NG Broadband and stop relying on misinformation from the incumbent.
Oh the fun of a BT laptop with a BT internal IT build on it.
Last time I saw one of these it was just under 20mins to boot up and load all the 'security' soft/mal-ware install by BT IT. The constant hangs and crashes and totally draconian restrictions on Internet access, as the Internet is seen as a bad thing inside the corp, for stealing all their lovely telco revenue and destroying the 'walled garden'
As of this afternoon "Facebook Messenger Now Supports Voice Calling for U.S. Accounts" and it's coming to the UK soon too, naturally.
This is the type of voice App that around 1 billion users will soon have. Socially integrated, not dependent on having a fixed line somewhere in their life.
BT was approached about backending something similar, but the response was that Apps and Social Networking where neither important to customers or would catch on. The same BT that only a few years ago had a BT Retail exec telling the media that he could see no demand for more than 2meg to the home....
It is hard to be kind....
Why a thumbs down?
BT has completely failed to deliver a VOIP or any Next Gen voice product, despite having bet the farm on GCTO's 21CN design which was supposed to move the entire legacy voice network on to the new shiny IP network over 5 years ago.
They have no mobile network, having sold the license, not just for the cash but also a massive lack of foresight at the executive level.
Lets not forget, BT made promises to the financial markets that they would deliver on 21CN, and these promised filter down to the customers, who have been woefully delivered to.
There is still NO VOIP solution over fiber approved at BT, something that you have been able to find at most other national carriers for the last 5 years, NTT, Comcast, etc.
The lack of fiber in the UK is not just a cost or regulation issue, it is also down to massive failure from the national carrier who still spending and supporting a legacy network as they continue the internal management landgrab battles at the expense of the customers.
Another classic BT product 'innovation'. 5 years to late to be interesting, and less than half the service you need to really make it useful.
Exactly who is the target audience for this? Who has a mobile and it is not now their primary phone? If you have a minutes plan then it's not in your interest not to use all the minutes you have paid for, and if you have an unlimited plan then why do you care.
But what about 0800 etc numbers you cry. What about them........ ? The EU is bring the pricing for these over mobile to the same as landline, Ofcom is well underway with sorting this.
Who is going to call you on it? No one. For two reasons, we wish to call the person not the premise and if they have a mobile this is the default number to call them on....and dial in does not work anyway for this, which will be defended by BT with their usual quality assurance argument.
Yes it will likely save you some pennys if you are abroad, but this is hardly reason to keep your landline as well as your mobile at the every increasing line rental cost. Unless of course you either have no choice but to take a copper based broadband product with the still compulsory WLR element, which is frankly a scam that BT still lobbies Ofcom to protect.....
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019