mercora

yes its basically the same thing with DRM on-top.

having multicast working on the internet would make this extremly efficient for the distributors (i.e. netflix) but the last mile (i.e. your ISP) still would have to deliver the packets to their customers one by one. at Netflix scale it would probably be already very beneficial to do that by broadcasting the stream starting every 5 seconds or something for uncached viewing. (i.e make the player wait for the next broadcast and jump to different ones [or start a new one at desired offset if none exist] when seeking).

Instead of using the internet its also feasible to use the DVB network like this. they could even broadcast a copy long before release so its guaranteed to be ready for offline watching when released. i am almost certain Sky Germany does something similar...

> The only thing I don't like about it, is how they created SLAAC (a way for a client to auto-configure its own IP address without DHCP) - but didn't enable routers to provide DNS information.

there is RDNSS for router advertisments used with slaac. although it wasnt there initially and support for it might be lacking yet.

> Also, some routers have a bug¹ whereby even a properly port-forwarded service won't be accessible from within the network.

i think the missing feature is called hairpinning[0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hairpinning

no it wont do that by default, there would be quite some wild assumptions to be made to make it a default for everything. even if cache behavior would be signaled from upstream servers properly.

while not terribly important or outright not required this fails (treats urls as regex) for link-local addresses with device identifier (zone-id) applied like "[fe80::8caa:8cff:fe80:ff32%eth0]" although that would need to be fixed in the standard if its desired :)

i've found some reasoning[0] as to why its not supported with browsers in mind though.

[0] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27234#c2

its not very likely this is whats happening here but i feel like this could be done on purpose to see how you act in this kind of situation. it kinda tells how you would act once you inevitably go into a conflict with colleagues arguing over stuff like that.

i agree with mostly everything you said but i think your calculation is wrong. to figure out how to map addresses not only the destination port can be taken to account but the addresses themselves and the source port too. that makes 28k (that figure is questionable too) concurrent connections per single connected IP and port on the far end. i am also somewhat certain if this would become a real issue the fix would probably involve mapping connections using more state like sequence numbers in TCP or similar things instead of abandoning this idea entirely and for good.

if you dont need dynamic tunnels like sixxs offered them via aiccu you can you tunnelbroker.net for free 6in4 tunels, they are pretty stable and fast.

if someone is ready to die to protect it for some reason his procedure would be more viable.

if it really works it should not be to hard to overcome this. there will be a different reaction when you see letters of the password you've been actually asked for piling up. so just second session looking for this yet unseen pattern could work.

I think this is quite interesting and would not only work for passwords if it does at all. i would love to read more about this :)

you might be thinking about this[0] written about 17 years ago

[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20091008202313/http://www.ccc.de...

has this been tried? sounds interesting on its own :)

i just tried to point out this data should be useless for prosecution. this could easily be faked to make up an alibi when you are correctly accused of something.

does it work both ways? can i present this data as an alibi when i need one? if its not deemed accurate for that why would it be considered for evidence? and if it is that seems like free alibis for everyone guilty or not ;)

its like that in germany. well not really but it was supposed to be like this but later on it got illegal to circumvent digital protection regardless how trivial it was. the fees are still in place though...

for me it was also hard to grasp what went wrong here. i always thought if this test can be gamed something is flawed with this test. they were given the task to pass the test and they did although that did not translate to the outcome the engineers developing this test envisioned for it i guess. It feels like they changed the requirements and then went after anyone not passing anymore. i do understand that they purposefully tried to detect the test to game the result "somehow" but i cant help it but to think if its possible to reduce emissions for the test then its a viable strategy on the road given the same usage pattern... although i don't really know how they actually did it...

they are already distinguishable by color without any change. this is about comments although it marks only comments as new it hasn't seen before regardless if you read them or not.

i did not notice until skimming this arch wiki page that it is now possible to have both MFA or pam auth in general and key auth both required at the same time to authenticate, great!

please do not copy your private key to remote machines ;) you can use the ssh-copy-id tool it does the right thing for you.

ssh is typically the only thing i expose (publicly if needed) because in most environments were it is running it is used for troubleshooting issues. if your issue is that your wireguard peer cant connect you are lost with that suggestion.

i wonder how much they profit on this announcement alone... probably enough to make it worth to (or pretend to) try anyhow.

NFTs are like optionally unique digital trading cards. nothing more... you own nothing but the "card"...

i have no trouble to resolve www.archive.is via 1.1.1.1 at all...

however, i noticed archive.is has a CNAME record pointing to www.archive.is while CNAME RR on apex domains are usually not allowed in DNS... what make this even more interesting, i only see the CNAME RR when querying via 1.1.1.1 and not when querying authoritative servers for archive.is (EDIT: while repeating the query via 1.1.1.1 i also saw both A and CNAME record for archive.is in the response :S)

maybe the initial issue is just gone already? considering this is apparently happening in 2019 that does not seem too unlikely...

do you have a source available?

it uses the [0]File System API of emscripten. i think it is possible to pipe via stdin somehow but i have no experience with any of this stuff but am interested to do something similar myself. although i don't want to transcode but repackage input streams for browser consumption. I also found [1]this which implements various filesystem backends in a compatible way afaict although the XHR backend [2]requires some index file i would like to avoid and its also not clear to me if this will actually stream data and/or use range requests.

[0] https://emscripten.org/docs/api_reference/Filesystem-API.htm...

[1] https://github.com/jvilk/BrowserFS

[2] https://github.com/jvilk/BrowserFS/blob/a96aa2d417995dac7d37...

its probably not their real internal motive but i think it is somewhat interesting that they've done it in a way that was publicly discussed, sparking valuable debates over this and similar practices and forcing people consciously and governments even publicly to decide upon if they like this or not. I also think it could be a nice way out of this negative PR if they just claim they wanted to open the debate over this apparently not so uncommon practice of scanning user data independent of if it is on-device or not...

WhatsApp and Signal notably don't do this on their servers for the link preview features they will fetch it locally on your device.

i could not bare it after few seconds and muted it and read the auto-generated subtitles instead. it sounds really terribly annoying to me. its weird because otherwise this video appears quite well laid out and all but listening to it was destroying the overall experience of it for me.

it would be a little too obvious if this is done for nefarious reasons by TikTok developers themselves.