I’d be more worried about not using it, personally.

That said, storing videos isn’t the only use. I have a… fairly large NAS, and it has photos/videos I’ve taken (including the raws for some of my dslr photos), its the storage for my VMs, where my backups are stored (really a different NAS but appropriate for the discussion here) which are then backed up elsewhere as well, local git repos, etc, etc.

Is streaming all you do? If so, no, you don’t need it.

But if you do anything else, its a good place to store that data.

I think we’ve passed a few of those lines already.

Deploying the National Guard, withholding grants for unrelated nonsense, voter data, and pretty much anything related to ICE.

I’ll believe it when I see it.

To your side note, the DSA does advocate for an end to capitalism.

Capitalism is a system designed by the owning class to exploit the rest of us for their own profit. We must replace it with democratic socialism, a system where ordinary people have a real voice in our workplaces, neighborhoods, and society.

https://www.dsausa.org/about-us/what-is-democratic-socialism/

Edit: Just to mention, the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee (DSOC) is what formed the DSA, and the DSOC was a split from the Socialist Party of America (SPA) due to the the SPA being “obsessively anticommunist” (in quotes but the exact quote may be a little different, I’d have to look it up to check).

You may want to keep on reading. There’s more.

However everything I’m finding is listed as intended for switches/routers

They reuse the same casing.

You can check the pattern, but those ears should mount just fine on it.

Translation: Fuck everyone else I wanted money even though ive got plenty. Even money from the people fucking over the people I claim to be there to support.

Expanded rest API, an MCP, and the webhook options and integrations are significantly expanded.

Actually given that, if you have a weekly with AI as part of it, tagging [AIT] will allow people to filter it out.

Its pretty ancillary to the newsletter itself so its not really required, but just to mention… if it were tagged, any low effort comments like “slop” or similar would then be removed. I don’t really see that on your posts in general though, so more a thought for later should it become a problem.

I’ll have to go with “confirmed to have a severe misunderstanding” then.

I think you have a severe misunderstanding of what was said.

Please tag your post ( [CBH] or [AIP] ) and if AI was used, add the disclosure

See rules 7&8 and message with any questions

Thanks!

I’m not responding the post. I’m responding specifically to your comment (where you did not give context but made a definitive statement). That’s on you.

Which is part of a thread with context.

OP IS USING A GOOGLE ACCOUNT WITH GOOGLES BIOMETRICS BEING SUGGESTED TO THEM.

The police will bypass you to get that data and Google will likely give it to them without a subpoena.

Still requires way more than making you look toward a screen or holding your finger onto part of one.

Also takes a lot more time than grabbing you and forcing it.

Also requires google to provide it without a subpoena.

You really think thats somehow easier than biometrics for them?

See the OP.

It does not.

I really dont understand how you can come to that conclusion that for “biometrics make it less secure given what we know is protected and what is not”.

You keep saying that word but I don’t think you know what it means.

Quite confidently, I do. And its clearer and clearer that you just aren’t thinking this through.

If you had said using biometrics is like using a TSA approved luggage lock I might be inclined to agree with you. But what you said was that "you can be compelled to give up biometrics to unlock your device) and what I said was, a weak password is not better.

And again, no password is in no way better than a weak password.

What are you having trouble with here?

You can continue to argue but you seem to keep missing context here.

Clearly, thats not an issue for me. You seem confused about the most basic part of this.

A weak password is what most people use. That’s why there’s a top 1000 passwords in use news article every couple of years.

Do you really think the idiots stopping you on a sidewalk or at an airport or in your car are aware for the most common passwords? Or that being brought to a police station and put under a full investigation is the only way this can happen?

Your birthday or anniversary is not better than biometrics. Say whatever else you want here.

See previous comment. In every way, shape, and form it requires more time, effort, and knowledge than immediately forcing you to unlock your phone by showing it at your face or restraining you and grabbing your finger.

In what possible way could it not?

You haven’t actually proven a point but I’m over it.

Repeatedly. I’d recommend reading again, because you are missing the incredibly obvious and I don’t understand how you could be missing any of it.

It has every single thing to do with the bearing of this conversation

See the OP.

It does not.

If the police tried to use biometrics to search my device today they would find exactly nothing.

Entirely separate from weak password vs no password (biometrics).

On the average person’s phone they likely wouldn’t find much that’s actionable in a legal sense.

Bad take.

Laws are poorly written, sometimes intentionally, to make them more vague.

I guarantee you can get arrested for something if they really want to.

That is who biometrics are for.

People who don’t want to use a password, and it will functionally behave like you don’t have any sort of restriction on your data. Yes. Agreed. Biometrics provide absolutely zero protection, as said.

For anyone else who has a threat profile that should require them to be worried about police intervention or investigation of any kind

In reality, everyone, see above.

there’s either a burner phone or a hardened OS

Separate from and entirely irrelevant to a discussion about biometrics and passwords.

So let’s think about what I am arguing here.

I have been. I’m not sure that you have, and I don’t mean that to sound like a dick, I’m saying I think you are severely underestimating the issue.

But that doesn’t mean they have a good password either.

Biometrics provide functionally zero password. That’d be the context here. A weak password is better than no password. A strong password is better than no password.

As biometrics means functionally no password, any password is superior.

You are arguing that even a weak password is better than biometrics

Yes, because it means no password is required at all. Even a weak password is better than no password.

but that is in a singular instance where you are detained by or investigated by the police

The context of this entire discussion. Yes.

and in that even you probably have a threat profile

Everyone. See above.

would require more than just a password lock for your devices. Especially if you’re using a weak password.

As in not biometrics, because biometrics are the same as no password. Yes.

Telemetry is one reason.

Not having to worry about the service shutting down (Google Reader) is another.

Synced read status is a common one as well.

You may also use it in combination with another service to create RSS feeds for sites that dont have one.

Honestly having it not just get killed like Google Reader is a big chunk of the userbase.

Coercion <> compelled.

You can be forcibly restrained, and have your face or hand forcibly used to unlock and its completely legal.

And while I completely agree a burner is a better choice, it has precisely zero bearing on a discussion about specifically biometrics, police, and privacy in the context of the US.

Once the biometrics are there, it replaces the pin/password in most scenarios I can think of.

Cell phone access, logging into a PC, etc.

Setting up both doesn’t mean that both are required for access.

Biometrics can be compelled (forced). So face or fingerprint can be forced, making them irrelevant to security - the same as no password.

Compared to guaranteed success, a weak password is superior.

Youre comparing a weak password to no password here and suggesting no password is better.

You can’t be compelled to give up your password.

‘Or’ not ‘and’. Fingerprint replaces the password for access.

A bandaid would simply be removed. No you can’t just say “no”. A password is protected though.

Edit: Completely misread things, I thought you had 192.168.10.0 and 192.168.20.0. Yes it would be the whole subnet for a /24, if you wanted less you’d go higher as mentioned.

192.168.0.0/29 would include 192.168.0.1-192.168.0.7.

/28 would get you up to 192.168.0.15.

No, /24 is just 256 IPs.

192.168.0.0/24 = 192.168.0.0 mask 255.255.255.0, or 192.168.0.1-192.168.0.254.

If you want 192.168.0.0 through, say, 192.168.7.254, you need to cover 2k ip’s, which is a /21. The mask would be 255.255.248.0.

A /24 would only be the last octet.