Technologies like OAUTH 2.0 have been around for a long, long time, and their purpose is to provide a verifiable audit-trail for users.

And it works! Although there have been (and will always be) security issues, the reality is that technologies like SAML and OAUTH do provide a very useful level of trust.

Except that, although these technologies do allow for a useful transfer of identity, the agents widely used to provide this identity (the IDP) is never an entity that provides a uniformly useful level of identity.

Here I am: Bill Jones (not my real name) citizen of the UK (not my real country, either) and I have no way to properly assert that to, say, Bank of the West (not my real bank, either) or Northern Airlines. (not my real airline)

If I have to assert my true identity, I have a state-issued driver's license or passport. Why do I have no way to assert either of these identification documents electronically?

Why can't I use my passport ID to assert myself to the bank, or the airline?

Seems to me that it would be HIGHLY USEFUL if I could. And it seems to be self-evident and proper that the agencies that issue drivers licenses or passports could offer electronic identification, even if it's sourced out to a tech company with a good reputation.

In the US, it's now become increasingly common to have a unified electronic ID to interact with agencies: see id.me. This is a start, and I know government agencies work GLACIALLY SLOWLY so maybe by the time my grandkids are having babies this could be a thing.

Eh?

> At some point you have to ask why you're using RAID at all. If it's for always-on, avoiding data loss due to hardware failures, and speed, then RAID 6 isn't really am great solution for avoiding data loss when disks get to these kinds of sizes, the chances of getting more than one disk fail simultaneously is approaching one, and obviously it was never great for speed.

If you're at this point, then using drives at all is probably already off the table. But I think this position is probably ridiculous.

I have many years of experience managing file clusters in scopes ranging from SOHO to serving up to 15,000 people at a time in a single cluster. In a cluster of 24 drives under these constant, enterprise-level loads, I saw maybe 1 drive fail in a year.

I've heard this trope about "failure rate approaching 1" since 500GB drives were new. From my own experience, it wasn't really true then, any more than it's true now.

Yes, HDDs have failure rates to keep in mind, but outside the occasional "bad batch", they are still shockingly reliable. Failure rates per unit haven't changed much, even though with rising capacities, that makes the failure rate per GB rise. It still doesn't matter as much as you think.

You can have a great time if you follow a few rules, in my experience:

1) Engineer your system so that any drive cluster going truly offline is survivable. AKA "DR" or "Disaster Recovery". What happens if your data center gets flooded or burns to the ground? And once you have solid DR plans, TRUMPET THE HECK OUT OF IT and tell all your customers. Let them know that they really are safe! It can be a HUGE selling point.

2) Engineer your system so that likely failures are casually survivable. For me, this was ZFS/RAIDZ2, with 6 or 8 drive vdevs, on "white box" 24 bay SuperMicro servers with redundant power.

3) If 24x7x36* uptime is really critical, have 3 levels of redundancy, so even in a failure condition, you fail to a redundant state. For me engineering at "enterprise" level, we used application-layer logic so there were always at least 2 independent drive clusters containing full copies of all data. We had 3 drive clusters using different filesystem technologies (ZFS, XFS/LVM) and sometimes we chose to take one offline to do filesystem level processing or analysis.

4) Backups: You *do* have backups, and you do adhere to the 3-2-1 rule, right? In our case, we used ZFS replication and merged backups and DR. This combined with automated monitoring ensured that we were ready for emergencies, which did happen and were always managed in a satisfactory way.

If "Lumen" is the same as "Quantum", then since I was forced to drop my slow-but-rock-solid DSL for the quantum "upgrade" a year ago, it's been neither "stable"
  nor "reliable." (And a double fuck-you for blocking *INCOMING* 25. WTF is that all about?)

And the hits just keep on comin'

We don't want muffins, no toast, buns, baps, baguettes or bagels, no croissants, no crumpets, no teacakes, no potato cakes and no hot cross buns! And definitely no smegging flapjacks!

> Since Ubuntu Server doesn't typically have any Wifi drivers baked in you need to (hope that you can) use your LAN port or otherwise sneakernet the required packages across

Not sure when the last time you tried it was, but I just did a 24.04 server install two weeks ago. I was expecting to have just that problem when I did the initial setup on my workbench (currently lacking a hardwire after an incident with the puppy), but it supported my USB wifi dongle OOTB.

Has Heroic made it possible to paste a password into the store login yet? Last time I tried it on my Deck, a couple months back, it was a non-starter, since I couldn't be arsed to transcribe the 32-character random string from Bitwarden on the on-screen keyboard.

There was a github issue open for a while, but it seemed to be being ignored.

https://tech.slashdot.org/stor...

No, it prompts with data files and archives (though Zen doesn't seem to recognize any of the handlers, so "Open With" is empty, which is weird) but executables don't give me the option, which is still half my annoyance. But half is better than full, I guess, if Manifest V3 forces me to switch back...

Nah, Zen, like Vanilla Firefox, just gives me "Save File" and "cancel", at least with installers.

What a pain in the ass..

Do any of those those Firefox-derived browsers let you "open" downloads directly from the "download file" prompt? That and not having to confirm "dangerous" downloads were the simple but "killer" features that sent me to Vivaldi some years ago.

Not Discord. The Discord admins have been heading the same way as Reddit's.

That's just the GPCGMR version. The CPs got it at the end of August. And if even *they* panned it...

No, that's Mr Thou over there!

I remember AudioGalaxy which was much less exposed, but was a great technology. You ran a "satellite" on the best connected machine you could find, but you could search and choose what to download from any machine on the net. Then you just picked up your files on the satellite when you had enough to fill a a 700Mb blank CD, and hived that off to your hard drive (if you had space) or just kept a bunch of mp3 CDs that many physical HiFi players could read. It was like Napster on steroids. It was shut down pretty quickly though. DCC on IRC channels worked well but was pure 1 to 1 peer to peer only.

Why would anyone trust a company named after a set of crystal balls cursed to mislead or corrupt the will of the user?