Aren't most exploits that get used, shared through black markets anyway? So Saying Xcountry-linked hackers, is just saying who ponied up the bitcoin to pay for the attack?
Here I see 9 distinctly purple dots. On a phone screen. The depth of field about a half arms length. Despite what the article says, I see all dots — the one I'm focused upon — as well as all those in peripheral vision as purple. The illusion does not apply to my visual cortex.
I think I may have found the reason in the Maxwell's Spot PDF the article links to. It says:
"The reason why this illusion [Maxwell's Spot] does not tend to be clearly visible with LCDs may be because the peak wavelength of blue in LCDs is on the shorter wavelength side than 460nm."
I don't know what technology my monitor is using, but it's possible it's LCD. Or maybe OLEDs have a similar color shift.
It has been going this way for some time in the US. My own story and experience was very similar to yours. Lost my position as a Sr. Engineer, and while going through that gauntlet of algorithms trying to find a new role, I found a pivot instead. Left the software world of abstractions and optimizations, and brought my skills in physical hardware and machine knowledge to the forefront. Now I work in hard technology. I may be sort of unique in that I had these parallel skillsets and experiences. But it's never too late to learn new skills. What other skills outside of software do you have?
That’s a great pivot and thank you for your comment at least it s open other point of view
I’m mostly focused on software full-stack, backend, automation, and building products.
The problem in my case is that I’m too passionate about it. I was so committed to web and software development that I don’t really have easily transferable skills outside of it.
I’m currently training for some certifications, but I still feel like it’s not the best use of my time.
Find places where you're the most technical person, and you will find your skills have easily transferred.
I just landed a consulting gig installing network hardware. I'm a full stack web dev like yourself. I did a web project for them before they asked about this one.
I'm simply the only technical person they know.
Thankfully, the network requirements are simple enough I could confidently agree.
That's funny. I was having this similar discussion with my 16 year old niece, and I was asking her what she's been listening to as a 50 year old trying to broaden my musical horizons. She pulled out her Spotify and shared some of her playlists with me, and I was astonished to see that most of the music that she had been enjoying was produced in the late 1960s to the mid-1980s. We had a good laugh about it, and bonded over some of the classic music that I love that I was suprised to find that she loves. There were some modern things interspersed, and I did learn about some new artists and experimental genres. Seems like a clear example of the Law of diminishing marginal returns in the cinema and music industries in Southern California — leading to those industries collapsing. AI and generative crap being a big evidence point for the argument.
Seeding is opt-out, not opt-in… but it is usually a default that has to actively manually overridden. Most users never touch those settings. The average pirate downloading a torrent is seeding whether they know it or not.
The protocol absolutely does not enforce seeding. A client can lie to the tracker, cap upload to 0k. BitTorrent has no mechanism to compel one to share. Leeching a file, downloading and sharing no forward packets is possible. While the "social contract" of seeding is entirely a norm enforced by private trackers and community shame. It is not the protocol itself.
you're uploading before seeding, and i'm willing to bet Meta weren't seeding but, as they correctly stated in that regard, they're sharing even when they try their best not to because of the way the protocol works as zero-upload is typically impractical for any significant size files
some trackers will additionally penalise you for not sharing file parts, but this depends on the tracker
If you try to download any significant file with zero-upload, you will run out of peers that will share with you much earlier than you will download the file. It's not practical.
Most people that speak of leeching or not seeding really are talking about not seeding at all after they've completed. In fact, most clients will let you set upload speeds to a trickle but not zero (zero means unlimited in most clients). From a legal standpoint, that already means you uploaded.
It’s true that most clients do not support a zero upload configuration, but it’s not inherent to the protocol, and modified clients exist.
I’m not aware of any clients that will refuse to share data with clients that are configured to not upload. I don’t even see how they could determine that, especially in situations where there are no other peers to upload to, and given that stats are entirely self-reported and clients that send bogus numbers exist.
You would need a central tracker that cares, which is what private torrent communities rely on, but not public/DHT torrents such as those discussed here.
You’re correct about seeds, but peers who are also downloading will often stop sharing with you if you stop sharing with them. Seeds generally are configured to try to give different pieces to different peers so that they can send them to each other and reduce load on the seed; they don’t want to give you the entire file directly unless you’re the only person downloading. And peers prioritize and filter which other ones they’ll send pieces to based on reciprocity.
You will probably get the data eventually, and it really depends on the composition and configuration of the swarm, but generally, you do need to upload if you want to ensure the fastest and most reliable download.
Long-running torrents are mostly populated by seeders. Bit torrent was originally designed for a lot of downloaders to get a file at the same time with limited seeding bandwidth, so leechers would need to trade with each other a lot, but that's not really the situation most torrents are in today.
You can, but you will slow down your own downloads dramatically by doing so. In some cases you will fail to finish them.
The case for doing this would be just so you can have this ridiculous legal defence Meta seem to be trying to pull out. Really no other good reason. Even for the most parasitic leeches, zero upload is a bad strategy.
"tit-for-tat" trading of chunks only happens between peers that both are actively downloading. Seeding nodes just let anybody leech.
You totally CAN disable all uploads in the torrent protocol. Just set the "upload budget" to zero in most clients. Just nobody realizes they can do that.
Bittorrent is wildly successful in part because every popular client makes it nontrivial to "opt out" of it's more socialist components (chunk trading, DHT participation, seeding by default).
Making an "leech behavior only" torrent client is straightforward and viable.
Tit-for-tat kicks in. It's fine for smaller files to just jump peers with zero upload, but i reckon Meta would have found it challenging to download very large files without sharing. It's certainly much faster if you don't get throttled or banned by many peers.
> i reckon Meta would have found it challenging to download very large files without sharing. It's certainly much faster if you don't get throttled or banned by many peers.
You're not that likely to get throttled by seeds though, and most torrents that are downloadable at all have a few seeds. Seeds have no way of verifying whether you're contributing the network, they're just there because someone (implicitly) decided to make the file available to whomever drops by and asks for it.
they'd most certainly go for very large curated collections like those of Anna's Archives, we're talking about 10s or 100s of TBs per archive
going 1 by 1 would be quite the exercise in itself considering just how much variety of formats, styles, crap added in the files, random password crapware, etc etc you find for anything other than the most trendy stuff
Avid conosour of both DMT and Psilocybin and would not characterize the effects as “extremely similar”. Psychedelic yes, but profoundly different at their core in heroic doses—at least from my vantage point.
Just curious, nn-DMT or 5meo-DMT? I haven't tried either but have heard nn-DMT to be more the machine elves type experience and 5meo-DMT to elicit a feeling of not existing in the physical world anymore.
Usually when people just say DMT they mean nn-DMT (which is a lot more visual/weird and can bring on the "elves" at breakthrough dosage). 5-meo-dmt(/bufo) is much more of a felt thing, but can definitely have some visual effects (I usually get enveloped in the bright white light of god before dissolving into everything/nothing, ymmv).
