If for example a laptop like that gets lost or stolen, the attacker has the data and the key, in a box they physically hold, with no attempt limit, and unless they actively mess with the boot process, it will happily load the key into memory for them. If it's a discrete TPM the attacker can likely sniff the key on the wire. If that doesn't work, they just need to find a vuln anywhere in the secure boot process, or in Windows, and again, they have the key. And if that doesn't work, they could sniff the memory bus, or do a cold boot attack (again, with unlimited attempts unless they irreparably damage the mainboard/TPM in the process).

AFAIK iPhone backups, if restored on the exact same device (i.e. a CPU with the correct decryption key embedded in it) will restore almost everything, including authenticator apps.

The only realistic option for Android is a separate "burner" device.

- Noise (from fans to generators to possible infrasound concerns)

- Air pollution (from data centers semi-permanently running on generators)

- Electricity prices (although I don't understand how this is supposed to work)

- Water consumption affecting the population (water restrictions, price increases, water table dropping)

Many of these are one-sided stories told from the perspective of the residents that I didn't try to verify, but I suspect some of these concerns are legit.

The company building the datacenter has a lot of incentives to cut corners and/or cause some of these impacts, externalizing its costs (e.g. by saving money at the expense of noise emissions, running the DC on unpermitted gas turbines to be able to build a DC where there isn't enough grid, negotiating clever deals that benefit the company but screw over the utility forcing it to raise prices for others, using groundwater for evaporative cooling to make cooling cheaper, etc.)

The company building the datacenter also likely has a lot more experience while the people of the town and the town itself are doing this once, so there is an inbalance in experience that makes it easy for the company to get away with some of these.

There is very little benefit that the people of the area can expect from a data center - as I understand it, there are very few jobs in one past the construction phase, even the construction jobs are often filled with experienced travelling workers, and given the negotiation imbalance, a town seems likely to get screwed on any contributions that the data center promises.

Maybe the solution would be some kind of framework/organization that guarantees (ideally with binding, well tested contracts) that the datacenter won't be a nuisance, builds a reputation for being reliable, and in exchange, companies that work under that framework can expect quick approvals and less pushback.

Until that exists, or companies start offering guarantees up front (e.g. guaranteeing a certain power price or noise level), I'm not surprised that people push back (especially if the company building the data center has screwed up in the past).

Is it just a case of "monkey see monkey do" (decision makers see it everywhere, so they also want it), do lawyers really think that giving people pages full of "you must not use this wifi to break the law" T&Cs is necessary, or does it serve an actual technical purpose like soft-disconnecting devices after N hours to minimize background traffic or keeping noisy IoT devices from blindly connecting to the open WiFi?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48166141

Points: 3

# Comments: 2

I disagree, because the impact on my quality of life from fighting the fight is just not a level of sacrifice that is sensible.

> There are now and there always will be alternatives

The problem is that those "alternatives" often come with serious downsides, from higher cost, to massive inconvenience, to having to work around simply not having a service. And while most of the time it's possible to work around it, most people quickly hit the limit where the cost isn't bearable.

That's not true, because in the 1990s there was no presumption that everyone has a major-vendor smartphone. Now, the ways to do things without a smartphone are often disappearing, so things are more inconvenient. For example, ticket machines and printed schedules for public transit are going away in many places.

Nowadays, you can no longer exist in society without a phone. Most things will work but it takes one critical service that doesn't have a viable workaround, and you're forced to buy (and possibly carry) a "mainstream" phone just for that.

Banking, government, authentication, postal service and public transit apps are just some of the common categories that will, in the end, force you to use one of those systems, unless governments mandate viable alternatives. The QR-code based recaptcha that's being introduced will be another brick in the wall.

As an individual, it feels like my options are to either submit or try to live a hermit's life, bringing endless suffering and exclusion to myself.

Matrix addresses have a similar format, anyone can run a host, open protocol, domain ownership, interop... Threaded messages are supported AFAIK, the details of the crypto will be different but overall it feels like it is close enough that a new protocol will have a hard time having enough advantages to overcome the huge network effect (Matrix being one of the few open messengers that actually have some following already).

The transmission itself would need to be stealthy or separated (by distance and/or time) from the pilot. For example, the pilot might leave a transmitter to send a message "moving south, will hide on X hill" hours after the pilot leaves, or even toss a transmitter into a river. But most likely just very spread-spectrum/CDMA to make it indistinguishable from noise.

"Heat pump" can mean many things, from essentially "split A/C" (air-air heat pumps) to ground-source heat pumps, using floor heating for the output, warm water production from the heat pump, etc.

Installing a heat pump can require (city) permits, permission from your landlord (if renting) or HOA/condo association (if you own a flat in a shared building) which can either be or feel impossible to get.

Some cities have either actually or de facto (through requirements/regulations that are impossible or unaffordable to meet) banned air conditioners, resulting in people buying inefficient monoblock units that can't be used for heating.

Edit: Other regulatory hurdles come from rules about refrigerant handling. Refrigerant must only be handled by experts who are certified in proper handling and recovery (and who, of course, are now in high demand and charging princely prices for their work). This made a lot of sense in the times where 1 kg of refrigerant had 10 tons CO2e in global warming potential, ozone depletion potential or other dangers.

Nowadays, a skilled layperson can probably set up an air conditioner with quick-connect couplings by themselves, but they aren't legally allowed to. These cost something like 500 EUR, contain less than 1 kg of R32 with a GWP of 675, so let's say 500 kg CO2e of harm if it leaks. If you passed a law that landlords cannot prohibit installation, and any electrician that passes a quick online training can install them, you could have them all over the place very quickly.

These could then be used for covering some or all of the heating load in winter, but they'd also alleviate suffering in summer, and that's luxury, and we can't have that (especially as it uses energy to provide the "needless" luxury!)