Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
I'm not sure that's what he was saying. Because he says he'd prefer it to be destroyed than others have it.
I'm in the same boat. My data is not really all the useful to others. But I'd still prefer for it to be destroyed than others have it. Just because I keep bank accounts, passwords, etc on my machine. How much can you sell one poor college kids stuff for? Probably not much. But having that level of security, that I KNOW no one else can get into my stuff, is incredibly satisfying.
If I get my computer stolen, I don't worry about pictures of my kids getting to others, I don't worry about my bank accounts or passwords being compromised, I don't worry about my work documents getting put online (I do research, and don't want my discoveries prematurely exposed). I love not worrying about that stuff.
BUT, you are correct. Backup is also EXTREMELY important. I use duplicity/duplicati type implementations. Where I can do incremental backups that ARE encrypted. So even those get encrypted and stored in three separate locations. Now days, encrypting your backups or your system is so easy, I recommend everyone I know do it.
I love my system. And I wish more people encrypted and backed up their stuff regularly. The peace of mind is worth it. My data is always safe from failures and intruders, whether it be one my system at home, or my backups in other locations throughout the country.
I've tried to prevent duplicates, but I've missed many. So I now have two sets of files, and would like to remove any possible duplicates from the print scans that are already contained in the negative scans. I'd prefer to not have to do this by hand.
I'm trying to find a way to flag/identify the duplicate pictures so I can keep just the higher quality negative scan. So I need a way to analyze the image/visual content of the two sets, and compare them at some sort of threshold. Then, if they are reported to be similar enough, I can then check the supposed duplicates by hand, and delete where appropriate. Obviously a direct file comparison won't work, since they are very different files, even though the picture content could be the same. Also, the resolution is different (negatives are scanned at much higher resolution).
I'm hoping someone on Slashdot has a good idea about how to do this. I've been looking around for months and haven't found anything great. I'm primarily on linux, but have access to other OSes if needed.
Any ideas? Thanks."
Link to Original Source
I don't totally buy that. I do to a small degree. But its kind of like saying we should give people cars without making them learn how to drive.
We live in a day and age where everyone wants the quick fix, and the easy solution. But to use a tool properly, you need to understand some things about that tool. And when you try to make it overly simple, bad things (as we are seeing here) can happen.
I'm not by any means saying people need a perfect understanding of wifi or networks or security. But I don't think its unfair to require people to do a little bit of reading of a manual to set something up. Having "better things to do in life" is not an excuse for getting out of everything we find complicated. Its narcissistic to think that the ONLY things that are worthwile are the things ONLY oneself is interested in.
Sometimes we have better things to do, absolutely. But sometimes life requires we dig into projects we find boring to get things done correctly.
Simply setup for networks? Absolutely. But at the cost of security for the benefit of ease? Not what I would call ideal.