Tag Archives: 13

ISP Telenor Will Block The Pirate Bay in Sweden Without a Shot Fired

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/isp-telenor-will-block-the-pirate-bay-in-sweden-without-a-shot-fired-180520/

Back in 2014, Universal Music, Sony Music, Warner Music, Nordisk Film and the Swedish Film Industry filed a lawsuit against Bredbandsbolaget, one of Sweden’s largest ISPs.

The copyright holders asked the Stockholm District Court to order the ISP to block The Pirate Bay and streaming site Swefilmer, claiming that the provider knowingly facilitated access to the pirate platforms and assisted their pirating users.

Soon after the ISP fought back, refusing to block the sites in a determined response to the Court.

“Bredbandsbolaget’s role is to provide its subscribers with access to the Internet, thereby contributing to the free flow of information and the ability for people to reach each other and communicate,” the company said in a statement.

“Bredbandsbolaget does not block content or services based on individual organizations’ requests. There is no legal obligation for operators to block either The Pirate Bay or Swefilmer.”

In February 2015 the parties met in court, with Bredbandsbolaget arguing in favor of the “important principle” that ISPs should not be held responsible for content exchanged over the Internet, in the same way the postal service isn’t responsible for the contents of an envelope.

But with TV companies SVT, TV4 Group, MTG TV, SBS Discovery and C More teaming up with the IFPI alongside Paramount, Disney, Warner and Sony in the case, Bredbandsbolaget would need to pull out all the stops to obtain victory. The company worked hard and initially the news was good.

In November 2015, the Stockholm District Court decided that the copyright holders could not force Bredbandsbolaget to block the pirate sites, ruling that the ISP’s operations did not amount to participation in the copyright infringement offenses carried out by some of its ‘pirate’ subscribers.

However, the case subsequently went to appeal, with the brand new Patent and Market Court of Appeal hearing arguments. In February 2017 it handed down its decision, which overruled the earlier ruling of the District Court and ordered Bredbandsbolaget to implement “technical measures” to prevent its customers accessing the ‘pirate’ sites through a number of domain names and URLs.

With nowhere left to go, Bredbandsbolaget and owner Telenor were left hanging onto their original statement which vehemently opposed site-blocking.

“It is a dangerous path to go down, which forces Internet providers to monitor and evaluate content on the Internet and block websites with illegal content in order to avoid becoming accomplices,” they said.

In March 2017, Bredbandsbolaget blocked The Pirate Bay but said it would not give up the fight.

“We are now forced to contest any future blocking demands. It is the only way for us and other Internet operators to ensure that private players should not have the last word regarding the content that should be accessible on the Internet,” Bredbandsbolaget said.

While it’s not clear whether any additional blocking demands have been filed with the ISP, this week an announcement by Bredbandsbolaget parent company Telenor revealed an unexpected knock-on effect. Seemingly without a single shot being fired, The Pirate Bay will now be blocked by Telenor too.

The background lies in Telenor’s acquisition of Bredbandsbolaget back in 2005. Until this week the companies operated under separate brands but will now merge into one entity.

“Telenor Sweden and Bredbandsbolaget today take the final step on their joint trip and become the same company with the same name. As a result, Telenor becomes a comprehensive provider of broadband, TV and mobile communications,” the company said in a statement this week.

“Telenor Sweden and Bredbandsbolaget have shared both logo and organization for the last 13 years. Today, we take the last step in the relationship and consolidate the companies under the same name.”

Up until this final merger, 600,000 Bredbandsbolaget broadband customers were denied access to The Pirate Bay. Now it appears that Telenor’s 700,000 fiber and broadband customers will be affected too. The new single-brand company says it has decided to block the notorious torrent site across its entire network.

“We have not discontinued Bredbandsbolaget, but we have merged Telenor and Bredbandsbolaget and become one,” the company said.

“When we share the same network, The Pirate Bay is blocked by both Telenor and Bredbandsbolaget and there is nothing we plan to change in the future.”

TorrentFreak contacted the PR departments of both Telenor and Bredbandsbolaget requesting information on why a court order aimed at only the latter’s customers would now affect those of the former too, more than doubling the blockade’s reach. Neither company responded which leaves only speculation as to its motives.

On the one hand, the decision to voluntarily implement an expanded blockade could perhaps be viewed as a little unusual given how much time, effort and money has been invested in fighting web-blockades in Sweden.

On the other, the merger of the companies may present legal difficulties as far as the court order goes and it could certainly cause friction among the customer base of Telenor if some customers could access TPB, and others could not.

In any event, the legal basis for web-blocking on copyright infringement grounds was firmly established last year at the EU level, which means that Telenor would lose any future legal battle, should it decide to dig in its heels. On that basis alone, the decision to block all customers probably makes perfect commercial sense.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.

A Peek Behind the Mail Curtain

Post Syndicated from marcelatoath original https://yahooeng.tumblr.com/post/174023151641

USE IMAP TO ACCESS SOME UNIQUE FEATURES

By Libby Lin, Principal Product Manager

Well, we actually won’t show you how we create the magic in our big OATH consumer mail factory. But nevertheless we wanted to share how interested developers could leverage some of our unique features we offer for our Yahoo and AOL Mail customers.

To drive experiences like our travel and shopping smart views or message threading, we tag qualified mails with something we call DECOS and THREADID. While we will not indulge in explaining how exactly we use them internally, we wanted to share how they can be used and accessed through IMAP.

So let’s just look at a sample IMAP command chain. We’ll just assume that you are familiar with the IMAP protocol at this point and you know how to properly talk to an IMAP server.

So here’s how you would retrieve DECO and THREADIDs for specific messages:

1. CONNECT

   openssl s_client -crlf -connect imap.mail.yahoo.com:993

2. LOGIN

   a login username password

   a OK LOGIN completed

3. LIST FOLDERS

   a list “” “*”

   * LIST (\Junk \HasNoChildren) “/” “Bulk Mail”

   * LIST (\Archive \HasNoChildren) “/” “Archive”

   * LIST (\Drafts \HasNoChildren) “/” “Draft”

   * LIST (\HasNoChildren) “/” “Inbox”

   * LIST (\HasNoChildren) “/” “Notes”

   * LIST (\Sent \HasNoChildren) “/” “Sent”

   * LIST (\Trash \HasChildren) “/” “Trash”

   * LIST (\HasNoChildren) “/” “Trash/l2”

   * LIST (\HasChildren) “/” “test level 1”

   * LIST (\HasNoChildren) “/” “test level 1/nestedfolder”

   * LIST (\HasNoChildren) “/” “test level 1/test level 2”

   * LIST (\HasNoChildren) “/” “&T2BZfXso-”

   * LIST (\HasNoChildren) “/” “&gQKAqk7WWr12hA-”

   a OK LIST completed

4.SELECT FOLDER

   a select inbox

   * 94 EXISTS

   * 0 RECENT

   * OK [UIDVALIDITY 1453335194] UIDs valid

   * OK [UIDNEXT 40213] Predicted next UID

   * FLAGS (\Answered \Deleted \Draft \Flagged \Seen $Forwarded $Junk $NotJunk)

   * OK [PERMANENTFLAGS (\Answered \Deleted \Draft \Flagged \Seen $Forwarded $Junk $NotJunk)] Permanent flags

   * OK [HIGHESTMODSEQ 205]

   a OK [READ-WRITE] SELECT completed; now in selected state

5. SEARCH FOR UID

   a uid search 1:*

   * SEARCH 1 2 3 4 11 12 14 23 24 75 76 77 78 114 120 121 124 128 129 130 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 40139 40140 40141 40142 40143 40144 40145 40146 40147 40148     40149 40150 40151 40152 40153 40154 40155 40156 40157 40158 40159 40160 40161 40162 40163 40164 40165 40166 40167 40168 40172 40173 40174 40175 40176     40177 40178 40179 40182 40183 40184 40185 40186 40187 40188 40190 40191 40192 40193 40194 40195 40196 40197 40198 40199 40200 40201 40202 40203 40204     40205 40206 40207 40208 40209 40211 40212

   a OK UID SEARCH completed

6. FETCH DECOS BASED ON UID

   a uid fetch 40212 (X-MSG-DECOS X-MSG-ID X-MSG-THREADID)

   * 94 FETCH (UID 40212 X-MSG-THREADID “108” X-MSG-ID “ACfIowseFt7xWtj0og0L2G0T1wM” X-MSG-DECOS (“FTI” “F1” “EML”))

   a OK UID FETCH completed

Поредно изменение на Закона за радиото и телевизията относно обновяването на състава на СЕМ

Post Syndicated from nellyo original https://nellyo.wordpress.com/2018/05/17/zid-zrt-4/

На 16 май 2018 г. Народното събрание е приело на първо и второ четене изменението на Закона за радиото и телевизията, внесено от народни представители, за заличаване на разпоредбата, предвиждаща решението на парламента и указът на президента за избиране, съответно назначаване, на членовете на Съвета за електронни медии да влизат в сила едновременно.

С промени, влезли в сила на 22.6. 2010 г., съставът на регулатора се намалява от 9 на 5 члена и двете квоти на регулатора се предвижда да се обновяват през различен период от време (2 години за квотата на НС, 3 години за президентската квота). Тогава не е заличено изискването актовете на Народното събрание и президента да влизат в сила едновременно – което е направено сега.

Изменението има връзка и с образуваното конституционно дело 7/2018 г. с докладчик Константин Пенчев, свързано със съответствието именно на заличената разпоредба с Конституцията.

КС в сходни случаи  е констатирал, че едно твърдение за противоконституционност е основателно или не “до извършването на последвалото изменение на закона, с което противоречието е отстранено и оспорването остава без предмет.”

 

*

Законопроект за изменение и допълнение на Закона за радиото и телевизията (Вносители: Вежди Рашидов, Станислав Иванов, Емил Димитров, Тома Биков, Евгени Будинов, Иво Христов и Данаил Кирилов, 3.5.2018 г.).

AWS IoT 1-Click – Use Simple Devices to Trigger Lambda Functions

Post Syndicated from Jeff Barr original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/aws-iot-1-click-use-simple-devices-to-trigger-lambda-functions/

We announced a preview of AWS IoT 1-Click at AWS re:Invent 2017 and have been refining it ever since, focusing on simplicity and a clean out-of-box experience. Designed to make IoT available and accessible to a broad audience, AWS IoT 1-Click is now generally available, along with new IoT buttons from AWS and AT&T.

I sat down with the dev team a month or two ago to learn about the service so that I could start thinking about my blog post. During the meeting they gave me a pair of IoT buttons and I started to think about some creative ways to put them to use. Here are a few that I came up with:

Help Request – Earlier this month I spent a very pleasant weekend at the HackTillDawn hackathon in Los Angeles. As the participants were hacking away, they occasionally had questions about AWS, machine learning, Amazon SageMaker, and AWS DeepLens. While we had plenty of AWS Solution Architects on hand (decked out in fashionable & distinctive AWS shirts for easy identification), I imagined an IoT button for each team. Pressing the button would alert the SA crew via SMS and direct them to the proper table.

Camera ControlTim Bray and I were in the AWS video studio, prepping for the first episode of Tim’s series on AWS Messaging. Minutes before we opened the Twitch stream I realized that we did not have a clean, unobtrusive way to ask the camera operator to switch to a closeup view. Again, I imagined that a couple of IoT buttons would allow us to make the request.

Remote Dog Treat Dispenser – My dog barks every time a stranger opens the gate in front of our house. While it is great to have confirmation that my Ring doorbell is working, I would like to be able to press a button and dispense a treat so that Luna stops barking!

Homes, offices, factories, schools, vehicles, and health care facilities can all benefit from IoT buttons and other simple IoT devices, all managed using AWS IoT 1-Click.

All About AWS IoT 1-Click
As I said earlier, we have been focusing on simplicity and a clean out-of-box experience. Here’s what that means:

Architects can dream up applications for inexpensive, low-powered devices.

Developers don’t need to write any device-level code. They can make use of pre-built actions, which send email or SMS messages, or write their own custom actions using AWS Lambda functions.

Installers don’t have to install certificates or configure cloud endpoints on newly acquired devices, and don’t have to worry about firmware updates.

Administrators can monitor the overall status and health of each device, and can arrange to receive alerts when a device nears the end of its useful life and needs to be replaced, using a single interface that spans device types and manufacturers.

I’ll show you how easy this is in just a moment. But first, let’s talk about the current set of devices that are supported by AWS IoT 1-Click.

Who’s Got the Button?
We’re launching with support for two types of buttons (both pictured above). Both types of buttons are pre-configured with X.509 certificates, communicate to the cloud over secure connections, and are ready to use.

The AWS IoT Enterprise Button communicates via Wi-Fi. It has a 2000-click lifetime, encrypts outbound data using TLS, and can be configured using BLE and our mobile app. It retails for $19.99 (shipping and handling not included) and can be used in the United States, Europe, and Japan.

The AT&T LTE-M Button communicates via the LTE-M cellular network. It has a 1500-click lifetime, and also encrypts outbound data using TLS. The device and the bundled data plan is available an an introductory price of $29.99 (shipping and handling not included), and can be used in the United States.

We are very interested in working with device manufacturers in order to make even more shapes, sizes, and types of devices (badge readers, asset trackers, motion detectors, and industrial sensors, to name a few) available to our customers. Our team will be happy to tell you about our provisioning tools and our facility for pushing OTA (over the air) updates to large fleets of devices; you can contact them at [email protected].

AWS IoT 1-Click Concepts
I’m eager to show you how to use AWS IoT 1-Click and the buttons, but need to introduce a few concepts first.

Device – A button or other item that can send messages. Each device is uniquely identified by a serial number.

Placement Template – Describes a like-minded collection of devices to be deployed. Specifies the action to be performed and lists the names of custom attributes for each device.

Placement – A device that has been deployed. Referring to placements instead of devices gives you the freedom to replace and upgrade devices with minimal disruption. Each placement can include values for custom attributes such as a location (“Building 8, 3rd Floor, Room 1337”) or a purpose (“Coffee Request Button”).

Action – The AWS Lambda function to invoke when the button is pressed. You can write a function from scratch, or you can make use of a pair of predefined functions that send an email or an SMS message. The actions have access to the attributes; you can, for example, send an SMS message with the text “Urgent need for coffee in Building 8, 3rd Floor, Room 1337.”

Getting Started with AWS IoT 1-Click
Let’s set up an IoT button using the AWS IoT 1-Click Console:

If I didn’t have any buttons I could click Buy devices to get some. But, I do have some, so I click Claim devices to move ahead. I enter the device ID or claim code for my AT&T button and click Claim (I can enter multiple claim codes or device IDs if I want):

The AWS buttons can be claimed using the console or the mobile app; the first step is to use the mobile app to configure the button to use my Wi-Fi:

Then I scan the barcode on the box and click the button to complete the process of claiming the device. Both of my buttons are now visible in the console:

I am now ready to put them to use. I click on Projects, and then Create a project:

I name and describe my project, and click Next to proceed:

Now I define a device template, along with names and default values for the placement attributes. Here’s how I set up a device template (projects can contain several, but I just need one):

The action has two mandatory parameters (phone number and SMS message) built in; I add three more (Building, Room, and Floor) and click Create project:

I’m almost ready to ask for some coffee! The next step is to associate my buttons with this project by creating a placement for each one. I click Create placements to proceed. I name each placement, select the device to associate with it, and then enter values for the attributes that I established for the project. I can also add additional attributes that are peculiar to this placement:

I can inspect my project and see that everything looks good:

I click on the buttons and the SMS messages appear:

I can monitor device activity in the AWS IoT 1-Click Console:

And also in the Lambda Console:

The Lambda function itself is also accessible, and can be used as-is or customized:

As you can see, this is the code that lets me use {{*}}include all of the placement attributes in the message and {{Building}} (for example) to include a specific placement attribute.

Now Available
I’ve barely scratched the surface of this cool new service and I encourage you to give it a try (or a click) yourself. Buy a button or two, build something cool, and let me know all about it!

Pricing is based on the number of enabled devices in your account, measured monthly and pro-rated for partial months. Devices can be enabled or disabled at any time. See the AWS IoT 1-Click Pricing page for more info.

To learn more, visit the AWS IoT 1-Click home page or read the AWS IoT 1-Click documentation.

Jeff;

 

Police Launch Investigation into Huge Pirate Manga Site Mangamura

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/police-launch-investigation-into-huge-pirate-manga-site-mangamura-180514/

Back in March, Japan’s Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said that the government was considering measures to prohibit access to pirate sites.

While protecting all content is the overall aim, it became clear that the government was determined to protect Japan’s successful manga and anime industries.

It didn’t take long for a reaction. On Friday April 13, the government introduced emergency website blocking measures, seeking cooperation from the country’s ISPs.

NTT Communications Corp., NTT Docomo Inc. and NTT Plala Inc., quickly announced they would block three leading pirate sites – Mangamura, AniTube! and MioMio which have a huge following in Japan. However, after taking the country by storm during the past two years, Mangamura had already called it quits.

On April 17, in the wake of the government announcement, Mangamura disappeared. It’s unclear whether its vanishing act was directly connected to recent developments but a program on national public broadcasting organization NHK, which claimed to have traced the site’s administrators back to the United States, Ukraine, and other regions, can’t have helped.

Further details released this morning reveal the intense pressure Mangamura was under. With 100 million visits a month it was bound to attract attention and according to Mainichi, several publishing giants ran out of patience last year and reported the platform to the authorities.

Kodansha, Japan’s largest publisher, and three other companies filed criminal complaints with Fukuoka Prefectural Police, Oita Prefectural Police, and other law enforcement departments, claiming the site violated their rights.

“The complaints, which were lodged against an unknown suspect or suspects, were filed on behalf of manga artists who are copyright holders to the pirated works, including Hajime Isayama and Eiichiro Oda, known for their wildly popular ‘Shingeki no Kyojin’ (‘Attack on Titan,’ published by Kodansha) and ‘One Piece’ (Shueisha Inc.), respectively,” the publication reports.

Mangamura launch in January 2016 and became a huge hit in Japan. Anti-piracy group Content Overseas Distribution Association (CODA), which counts publishing giant Kodansha among its members, reports that between September 2017 and February 2018, the site was accessed 620 million times.

Based on a “one visit, one manga title read” formula, CODA estimates that the site caused damages to the manga industry of 319.2 billion yen – around US$2.91 billion.

As a result, police are now stepping up their efforts to identify Mangamura’s operators. Whether that will prove fruitful will remain to be seen but in the meantime, Japan’s site-blocking efforts continue to cause controversy.

As reported last month, lawyer and NTT customer Yuichi Nakazawa launched legal action against NTT, demanding that the corporation immediately end its site-blocking operations.

“NTT’s decision was made arbitrarily on the site without any legal basis. No matter how legitimate the objective of copyright infringement is, it is very dangerous,” Nakazawa told TorrentFreak.

“I felt that ‘freedom,’ which is an important value of the Internet, was threatened. Actually, when the interruption of communications had begun, the company thought it would be impossible to reverse the situation, so I filed a lawsuit at this stage.”

Japan’s Constitution and its Telecommunications Business Act both have “no censorship” clauses, meaning that site-blocking has the potential to be ruled illegal. It’s also illegal in Japan to invade the privacy of Internet users’ communications, which some observers have argued is necessary if users are to be prevented from accessing pirate sites.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.

Съвместима ли е таксата за радио и телевизия с правото на ЕС

Post Syndicated from nellyo original https://nellyo.wordpress.com/2018/05/13/fee_psm/

През март  2018 г. Oberverwaltungsgericht Rheinland-Pfalz (Върховен административен съд на Рейнланд-Пфалц – OVG Rheinland-Pfalz) решава, че таксата за радио и телевизия в Германия е съвместима с правото на ЕС (дело № 7 A 11938/17) . Съдът отхвърля тезата, че таксата е несъвместима с правото на ЕС, тъй като предоставя на обществените радио- и телевизионни доставчици на медийни услуги несправедливо предимство пред техните частни конкуренти.

Съдът посочва, че през 2016 г. Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Федерален административен съд – BVerwG) вече е установил съответствието на таксата  – в новата й форма, въведена през 2013 г. – с правото на ЕС (решение от 18 март 2016 г., BVerwG 6 С 6.15). Съгласно това решение въвеждането на таксата  не изисква съгласието на Европейската комисия и е с съвместимо с Директивата за аудиовизуалните медийни услуги.  Обществените и частните радио- и телевизионни оператори  неизбежно ще бъдат финансирани по различни начини. Това обаче не означава непременно, че обществените радио- и телевизионни оператори са получили несправедливо предимство, тъй като за разлика от частните радио- и телевизионни оператори те са подложени на много по-ограничителни правила за рекламиране и следователно са финансово зависими от таксата.

Междувременно Landgericht Tübingen (Районен съд в Тюбинген, решение от 3 август 2017 г., дело № 5 T 246/17 и др.) е постановил, че таксата  нарушава правото на ЕС  – и в резултат има подадено преюдициално запитване до Съда на ЕС –  дело  С-492/17.

 

Преюдициални въпроси:

1)

Несъвместим ли е с правото на Съюза националният Gesetz vom 18.10.2011 zur Geltung des Rundfunkbeitragsstaatsvertrags (RdFunkBeitrStVtrBW) vom 17 Dezember 2010 (Закон от 18 октомври 2011 г. за прилагане на Държавния договор за вноската за радио- и телевизионно разпространение от 17 декември 2010 г., наричан по-нататък „RdFunkBeitrStVtrBW“) на провинция Баден-Вюртемберг, последно изменен с член 4 от Neunzehnter Rundfunkänderungsstaatsvertrag (Деветнадесети държавен договор за изменение на Държавните договори за радио- и телевизионно разпространение) от 3 декември 2015 г. (Закон от 23 февруари 2016 г., GBl. стр. 126, 129), поради това че вноската, събирана от 1 януари 2013 г. съгласно този закон безусловно по принцип от всяко живеещо в германската федерална провинция Баден-Вюртемберг пълнолетно лице в полза на радио- и телевизионните оператори SWR и ZDF, представлява помощ, която противоречи на правото на Съюза и предоставя по-благоприятно третиране само в полза на тези обществени радио- и телевизионни оператори спрямо частни радио- и телевизионни оператори? Трябва ли членове 107 и 108 ДФЕС да се тълкуват в смисъл, че за Закона за вноската за радио- и телевизионно разпространение е трябвало да се получи разрешението на Комисията и поради липсата на разрешение той е невалиден?

2)

Трябва ли член 107 ДФЕС, съответно член 108 ДФЕС да се тълкува в смисъл, че в обхвата му попада правна уредба, установена в националния закон „RdFunkBeitrStVtrBW“, която предвижда, че по принцип от всяко живеещо в Баден-Вюртемберг пълнолетно лице безусловно се събира вноска в полза само на държавни/обществени радио- и телевизионни оператори, поради това че тази вноска съдържа противоречаща на правото на Съюза и предоставяща по-благоприятно третиране помощ с цел изключването по технически причини на оператори от държави от Европейския съюз, доколкото вноските са предназначени да се използват за създаването на конкурентен начин на пренос (монопол върху DVB-T2), без да е предвидено той да се използва от чуждестранни оператори? Трябва ли член 107 ДФЕС, съответно член 108 ДФЕС да се тълкува в смисъл, че в обхвата му попадат не само преки субсидии, но и други релевантни от икономическа гледна точка привилегии (право на издаване на изпълнителен лист, правомощия за предприемане на действия както в качеството на стопанско предприятие, така и в качеството на орган, поставяне в по-благоприятно положение при изчисляването на дълговете)?

3)

Съвместимо ли е с принципа на равно третиране и със забраната за предоставящи привилегии помощи положение, при което на основание национален закон на провинция Баден-Вюртемберг германски телевизионен оператор, който се урежда от нормите на публичното право и има предоставени правомощия на орган, но същевременно се конкурира с частни радио- и телевизионни оператори на рекламния пазар, е привилегирован в сравнение с тези оператори поради това че не трябва като частните конкуренти да иска по общия съдебен ред да му бъде издаден изпълнителен лист за вземанията му срещу зрителите, преди да може да пристъпи към принудително изпълнение, а самият той има право, без участието на съд, да издаде титул, който същевременно му дава право на принудително изпълнение?

4)

Съвместимо ли е с член 10 от ЕКПЧ /член [11] от Хартата на основните права (свобода на информация) положение, при което държава членка предвижда в национален закон на провинция Баден-Вюртемберг, че телевизионен оператор, на който са предоставени правомощия на орган, има право да изисква плащането на вноска от всяко живеещо в зоната на радио- и телевизионното излъчване пълнолетно лице за целите на финансирането на точно този оператор, при неплащането на която е предвидена глоба, независимо дали това лице въобще разполага с приемник или само използва услугите на други, а именно чуждестранни или други, частни оператори?

5)

Съвместим ли е националният закон „RdFunkBeitrStVtrBW“, и по-специално членове 2 и 3, с установените в правото на Съюза принципи на равно третиране и на недопускане на дискриминация в положение, при което вноската, която следва да се плаща безусловно от всеки жител за целите на финансирането на обществен телевизионен оператор, налага на всяко лице, което само отглежда детето си, тежест в размер, многократно по-висок от сумата, дължима от лице, което живее в общо жилище с други хора? Следва ли Директива 2004/113/ЕО (1) да се тълкува в смисъл, че спорната вноска също попада в обхвата ѝ и че e достатъчно да е налице косвено поставяне в по-неблагоприятно положение, след като с оглед на реалните дадености 90 % от жените понасят по-голяма тежест?

6)

Съвместим ли националният закон „RdFunkBeitrStVtrBW“, и по-специално членове 2 и 3, с установените в правото на Съюза принципи на равно третиране и на недопускане на дискриминация в положение, при което вноската, която следва да се плаща безусловно от всеки жител за целите на финансирането на обществен телевизионен оператор, за нуждаещите се от второ жилище лица по свързана с работата причина е двойно по-голяма, отколкото за други работници?

7)

Съвместим ли е националният закон „RdFunkBeitrStVtrBW“, и по-специално членове 2 и 3, с установените в правото на Съюза принципи на равно третиране и на недопускане на дискриминация и със свободата на установяване, ако вноската, която следва да се плаща безусловно от всеки жител за целите на финансирането на обществен телевизионен оператор, е уредена по такъв начин, че при еднаква възможност за приемане на радио- и телевизионно разпространение непосредствено преди границата със съседна държава от ЕС германски гражданин дължи вноската само поради мястото си на пребиваване, докато германският гражданин, живущ непосредствено от другата страна на границата, не дължи вноската, също както гражданинът на друга държава — членка на ЕС, който по свързани с работата причини трябва да се установи непосредствено от другата страна на вътрешна граница на ЕС, понася тежестта на вноската, но не и гражданинът на ЕС, живущ непосредствено преди границата, дори и никой от двамата да не се интересува от приемането на излъчванията на германския оператор?

Коментар по въпрос №4:  допуснат е въпрос за съвместимост с чл.10 от Конвенцията за правата на човека. Съдът за правата на човека вече се е произнасял, има съображения за недопустимост по сходно дело отпреди десетина години –  ето тук съм писала – вж Faccio v Italy – но нека да се произнесе и Съдът на ЕС.

И – отново за характера на таксата: ако  плащат и хората без приемник, това очевидно не е такса в смисъл цена за услуга, а данъчно вземане, по мое мнение това е тенденцията.

Чакаме решението на Съда на ЕС. Нека да се развива и множи практиката.

The Pirating Elephant in Uncle Sam’s Room

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/the-pirating-elephant-in-uncle-sams-room-180413/

It’s not a secret that, in sheer numbers, America is the country that harbors most online pirates.

Perhaps no surprise, since it has a large and well-connected population, but it’s important to note considering what we’re about to write today.

Over the past decade, online piracy has presented itself as a massive problem for the US and its entertainment industries. It’s a global issue that’s hard to contain, but Hollywood and the major record labels are doing what they can.

Two of the key strategies they’ve employed in recent years are website blocking and domain seizures. US companies have traveled to courts all over the world to have ISP blockades put in place, with quite a bit of success.

At the same time, US rightsholders also push foreign domain registrars and registries to suspend or seize domains. The US Government is even jumping in, applying pressure against pirate domains as well.

Previously, the U.S. Embassy in Costa Rica threatened to have the country’s domain name registry shut down, unless it suspended ThePirateBay.cr. This hasn’t happened, yet, but it was a clear signal.

What’s odd, though, is that ThePirateBay.cr is a relatively meaningless proxy site. The real Pirate Bay operates from an .org domain name, which happens to be managed by the US-based Public Interest Registry (PIR).

So, if the US authorities threaten to shut down Costa Rica’s domain registry over a proxy, why is the US-based PIR registry still in action? After all, it’s the registry that ‘manages’ the domain name of the largest pirate site on the entire web, and has done for nearly 15 years.

Also of note is that the entertainment industries previously launched an overseas lawsuit to seize The Pirate Bay’s .se and .is domains, but never attempted to do the same with the US-based .org domain.

There are more of these strange observations. Let’s move back to website blocking, for example.

In a detailed overview, the Motion Picture Association recently reported that ISP blocking measures, which are in place in more than two dozen countries, help to reduce piracy significantly. This is further backed up by industry-supported reports and independent academic research.

In an ideal world, the US entertainment industries would like ISPs in every country to block pirate sites. While this is all fine and understandable from the perspective of these companies, there’s also an elephant in the room.

Over the past decade, US companies have worked hard to spread their blocking message around the world, while they yet have to attempt the same on their home turf. And this happens to be the country with the most pirates of all, which could make a massive impact.

Sure, it was a major success when a court in Iceland ordered local ISPs to block The Pirate Bay. But with roughly 130,000 Internet subscriptions in the entire country, that’s peanuts compared to the US.

So why is the US, the largest “pirate nation,” ignored?

From what we’ve heard, the entertainment industries are not pushing for ISP blockades in US courts because they fear a SOPA-like backlash. This likely applies to domain suspensions as well, which aren’t all that hard to accomplish in the US.

Instead, the major entertainment companies are focusing their efforts elsewhere.

While these entertainment companies are well within their rights to lobby for these measures, there’s an elephant in the room that is hard to ignore. Personally, I can’t help but cringe every time Hollywood pushes the blocking agenda to a new country or demands domain seizures abroad.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.

Securing Your Cryptocurrency

Post Syndicated from Roderick Bauer original https://www.backblaze.com/blog/backing-up-your-cryptocurrency/

Securing Your Cryptocurrency

In our blog post on Tuesday, Cryptocurrency Security Challenges, we wrote about the two primary challenges faced by anyone interested in safely and profitably participating in the cryptocurrency economy: 1) make sure you’re dealing with reputable and ethical companies and services, and, 2) keep your cryptocurrency holdings safe and secure.

In this post, we’re going to focus on how to make sure you don’t lose any of your cryptocurrency holdings through accident, theft, or carelessness. You do that by backing up the keys needed to sell or trade your currencies.

$34 Billion in Lost Value

Of the 16.4 million bitcoins said to be in circulation in the middle of 2017, close to 3.8 million may have been lost because their owners no longer are able to claim their holdings. Based on today’s valuation, that could total as much as $34 billion dollars in lost value. And that’s just bitcoins. There are now over 1,500 different cryptocurrencies, and we don’t know how many of those have been misplaced or lost.



Now that some cryptocurrencies have reached (at least for now) staggering heights in value, it’s likely that owners will be more careful in keeping track of the keys needed to use their cryptocurrencies. For the ones already lost, however, the owners have been separated from their currencies just as surely as if they had thrown Benjamin Franklins and Grover Clevelands over the railing of a ship.

The Basics of Securing Your Cryptocurrencies

In our previous post, we reviewed how cryptocurrency keys work, and the common ways owners can keep track of them. A cryptocurrency owner needs two keys to use their currencies: a public key that can be shared with others is used to receive currency, and a private key that must be kept secure is used to spend or trade currency.

Many wallets and applications allow the user to require extra security to access them, such as a password, or iris, face, or thumb print scan. If one of these options is available in your wallets, take advantage of it. Beyond that, it’s essential to back up your wallet, either using the backup feature built into some applications and wallets, or manually backing up the data used by the wallet. When backing up, it’s a good idea to back up the entire wallet, as some wallets require additional private data to operate that might not be apparent.

No matter which backup method you use, it is important to back up often and have multiple backups, preferable in different locations. As with any valuable data, a 3-2-1 backup strategy is good to follow, which ensures that you’ll have a good backup copy if anything goes wrong with one or more copies of your data.

One more caveat, don’t reuse passwords. This applies to all of your accounts, but is especially important for something as critical as your finances. Don’t ever use the same password for more than one account. If security is breached on one of your accounts, someone could connect your name or ID with other accounts, and will attempt to use the password there, as well. Consider using a password manager such as LastPass or 1Password, which make creating and using complex and unique passwords easy no matter where you’re trying to sign in.

Approaches to Backing Up Your Cryptocurrency Keys

There are numerous ways to be sure your keys are backed up. Let’s take them one by one.

1. Automatic backups using a backup program

If you’re using a wallet program on your computer, for example, Bitcoin Core, it will store your keys, along with other information, in a file. For Bitcoin Core, that file is wallet.dat. Other currencies will use the same or a different file name and some give you the option to select a name for the wallet file.

To back up the wallet.dat or other wallet file, you might need to tell your backup program to explicitly back up that file. Users of Backblaze Backup don’t have to worry about configuring this, since by default, Backblaze Backup will back up all data files. You should determine where your particular cryptocurrency, wallet, or application stores your keys, and make sure the necessary file(s) are backed up if your backup program requires you to select which files are included in the backup.

Backblaze B2 is an option for those interested in low-cost and high security cloud storage of their cryptocurrency keys. Backblaze B2 supports 2-factor verification for account access, works with a number of apps that support automatic backups with encryption, error-recovery, and versioning, and offers an API and command-line interface (CLI), as well. The first 10GB of storage is free, which could be all one needs to store encrypted cryptocurrency keys.

2. Backing up by exporting keys to a file

Apps and wallets will let you export your keys from your app or wallet to a file. Once exported, your keys can be stored on a local drive, USB thumb drive, DAS, NAS, or in the cloud with any cloud storage or sync service you wish. Encrypting the file is strongly encouraged — more on that later. If you use 1Password or LastPass, or other secure notes program, you also could store your keys there.

3. Backing up by saving a mnemonic recovery seed

A mnemonic phrase, mnemonic recovery phrase, or mnemonic seed is a list of words that stores all the information needed to recover a cryptocurrency wallet. Many wallets will have the option to generate a mnemonic backup phrase, which can be written down on paper. If the user’s computer no longer works or their hard drive becomes corrupted, they can download the same wallet software again and use the mnemonic recovery phrase to restore their keys.

The phrase can be used by anyone to recover the keys, so it must be kept safe. Mnemonic phrases are an excellent way of backing up and storing cryptocurrency and so they are used by almost all wallets.

A mnemonic recovery seed is represented by a group of easy to remember words. For example:

eye female unfair moon genius pipe nuclear width dizzy forum cricket know expire purse laptop scale identify cube pause crucial day cigar noise receive

The above words represent the following seed:

0a5b25e1dab6039d22cd57469744499863962daba9d2844243fec 9c0313c1448d1a0b2cd9e230a78775556f9b514a8be45802c2808e fd449a20234e9262dfa69

These words have certain properties:

  • The first four letters are enough to unambiguously identify the word.
  • Similar words are avoided (such as: build and built).

Bitcoin and most other cryptocurrencies such as Litecoin, Ethereum, and others use mnemonic seeds that are 12 to 24 words long. Other currencies might use different length seeds.

4. Physical backups — Paper, Metal

Some cryptocurrency holders believe that their backup, or even all their cryptocurrency account information, should be stored entirely separately from the internet to avoid any risk of their information being compromised through hacks, exploits, or leaks. This type of storage is called “cold storage.” One method of cold storage involves printing out the keys to a piece of paper and then erasing any record of the keys from all computer systems. The keys can be entered into a program from the paper when needed, or scanned from a QR code printed on the paper.

Printed public and private keys

Printed public and private keys

Some who go to extremes suggest separating the mnemonic needed to access an account into individual pieces of paper and storing those pieces in different locations in the home or office, or even different geographical locations. Some say this is a bad idea since it could be possible to reconstruct the mnemonic from one or more pieces. How diligent you wish to be in protecting these codes is up to you.

Mnemonic recovery phrase booklet

Mnemonic recovery phrase booklet

There’s another option that could make you the envy of your friends. That’s the CryptoSteel wallet, which is a stainless steel metal case that comes with more than 250 stainless steel letter tiles engraved on each side. Codes and passwords are assembled manually from the supplied part-randomized set of tiles. Users are able to store up to 96 characters worth of confidential information. Cryptosteel claims to be fireproof, waterproof, and shock-proof.

image of a Cryptosteel cold storage device

Cryptosteel cold wallet

Of course, if you leave your Cryptosteel wallet in the pocket of a pair of ripped jeans that gets thrown out by the housekeeper, as happened to the character Russ Hanneman on the TV show Silicon Valley in last Sunday’s episode, then you’re out of luck. That fictional billionaire investor lost a USB drive with $300 million in cryptocoins. Let’s hope that doesn’t happen to you.

Encryption & Security

Whether you store your keys on your computer, an external disk, a USB drive, DAS, NAS, or in the cloud, you want to make sure that no one else can use those keys. The best way to handle that is to encrypt the backup.

With Backblaze Backup for Windows and Macintosh, your backups are encrypted in transmission to the cloud and on the backup server. Users have the option to add an additional level of security by adding a Personal Encryption Key (PEK), which secures their private key. Your cryptocurrency backup files are secure in the cloud. Using our web or mobile interface, previous versions of files can be accessed, as well.

Our object storage cloud offering, Backblaze B2, can be used with a variety of applications for Windows, Macintosh, and Linux. With B2, cryptocurrency users can choose whichever method of encryption they wish to use on their local computers and then upload their encrypted currency keys to the cloud. Depending on the client used, versioning and life-cycle rules can be applied to the stored files.

Other backup programs and systems provide some or all of these capabilities, as well. If you are backing up to a local drive, it is a good idea to encrypt the local backup, which is an option in some backup programs.

Address Security

Some experts recommend using a different address for each cryptocurrency transaction. Since the address is not the same as your wallet, this means that you are not creating a new wallet, but simply using a new identifier for people sending you cryptocurrency. Creating a new address is usually as easy as clicking a button in the wallet.

One of the chief advantages of using a different address for each transaction is anonymity. Each time you use an address, you put more information into the public ledger (blockchain) about where the currency came from or where it went. That means that over time, using the same address repeatedly could mean that someone could map your relationships, transactions, and incoming funds. The more you use that address, the more information someone can learn about you. For more on this topic, refer to Address reuse.

Note that a downside of using a paper wallet with a single key pair (type-0 non-deterministic wallet) is that it has the vulnerabilities listed above. Each transaction using that paper wallet will add to the public record of transactions associated with that address. Newer wallets, i.e. “deterministic” or those using mnemonic code words support multiple addresses and are now recommended.

There are other approaches to keeping your cryptocurrency transaction secure. Here are a couple of them.

Multi-signature

Multi-signature refers to requiring more than one key to authorize a transaction, much like requiring more than one key to open a safe. It is generally used to divide up responsibility for possession of cryptocurrency. Standard transactions could be called “single-signature transactions” because transfers require only one signature — from the owner of the private key associated with the currency address (public key). Some wallets and apps can be configured to require more than one signature, which means that a group of people, businesses, or other entities all must agree to trade in the cryptocurrencies.

Deep Cold Storage

Deep cold storage ensures the entire transaction process happens in an offline environment. There are typically three elements to deep cold storage.

First, the wallet and private key are generated offline, and the signing of transactions happens on a system not connected to the internet in any manner. This ensures it’s never exposed to a potentially compromised system or connection.

Second, details are secured with encryption to ensure that even if the wallet file ends up in the wrong hands, the information is protected.

Third, storage of the encrypted wallet file or paper wallet is generally at a location or facility that has restricted access, such as a safety deposit box at a bank.

Deep cold storage is used to safeguard a large individual cryptocurrency portfolio held for the long term, or for trustees holding cryptocurrency on behalf of others, and is possibly the safest method to ensure a crypto investment remains secure.

Keep Your Software Up to Date

You should always make sure that you are using the latest version of your app or wallet software, which includes important stability and security fixes. Installing updates for all other software on your computer or mobile device is also important to keep your wallet environment safer.

One Last Thing: Think About Your Testament

Your cryptocurrency funds can be lost forever if you don’t have a backup plan for your peers and family. If the location of your wallets or your passwords is not known by anyone when you are gone, there is no hope that your funds will ever be recovered. Taking a bit of time on these matters can make a huge difference.

To the Moon*

Are you comfortable with how you’re managing and backing up your cryptocurrency wallets and keys? Do you have a suggestion for keeping your cryptocurrencies safe that we missed above? Please let us know in the comments.


*To the Moon — Crypto slang for a currency that reaches an optimistic price projection.

The post Securing Your Cryptocurrency appeared first on Backblaze Blog | Cloud Storage & Cloud Backup.

This is a really lovely Raspberry Pi tricorder

Post Syndicated from Helen Lynn original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/raspberry-pi-tricorder-prop/

At the moment I’m spending my evenings watching all of Star Trek in order. Yes, I have watched it before (but with some really big gaps). Yes, including the animated series (I’m up to The Terratin Incident). So I’m gratified to find this beautiful The Original Series–style tricorder build.

Star Trek Tricorder with Working Display!

At this year’s Replica Prop Forum showcase, we meet up once again wtih Brian Mix, who brought his new Star Trek TOS Tricorder. This beautiful replica captures the weight and finish of the filming hand prop, and Brian has taken it one step further with some modern-day electronics!

A what now?

If you don’t know what a tricorder is, which I guess is faintly possible, the easiest way I can explain is to steal words that Liz wrote when Recantha made one back in 2013. It’s “a made-up thing used by the crew of the Enterprise to measure stuff, store data, and scout ahead remotely when exploring strange new worlds, seeking out new life and new civilisations, and all that jazz.”

A brief history of Picorders

We’ve seen other Raspberry Pi–based realisations of this iconic device. Recantha’s LEGO-cased tricorder delivered some authentic functionality, including temperature sensors, an ultrasonic distance sensor, a photosensor, and a magnetometer. Michael Hahn’s tricorder for element14’s Sci-Fi Your Pi competition in 2015 packed some similar functions, along with Original Series audio effects, into a neat (albeit non-canon) enclosure.

Brian Mix’s Original Series tricorder

Brian Mix’s tricorder, seen in the video above from Tested at this year’s Replica Prop Forum showcase, is based on a high-quality kit into which, he discovered, a Raspberry Pi just fits. He explains that the kit is the work of the late Steve Horch, a special effects professional who provided props for later Star Trek series, including the classic Deep Space Nine episode Trials and Tribble-ations.

A still from an episode of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine: Jadzia Dax, holding an Original Series-sylte tricorder, speaks with Benjamin Sisko

Dax, equipped for time travel

This episode’s plot required sets and props — including tricorders — replicating the USS Enterprise of The Original Series, and Steve Horch provided many of these. Thus, a tricorder kit from him is about as close to authentic as you can possibly find unless you can get your hands on a screen-used prop. The Pi allows Brian to drive a real display and a speaker: “Being the geek that I am,” he explains, “I set it up to run every single Original Series Star Trek episode.”

Even more wonderful hypothetical tricorders that I would like someone to make

This tricorder is beautiful, and it makes me think how amazing it would be to squeeze in some of the sensor functionality of the devices depicted in the show. Space in the case is tight, but it looks like there might be a little bit of depth to spare — enough for an IMU, maybe, or a temperature sensor. I’m certain the future will bring more Pi tricorder builds, and I, for one, can’t wait. Please tell us in the comments if you’re planning something along these lines, and, well, I suppose some other sci-fi franchises have decent Pi project potential too, so we could probably stand to hear about those.

If you’re commenting, no spoilers please past The Animated Series S1 E11. Thanks.

The post This is a really lovely Raspberry Pi tricorder appeared first on Raspberry Pi.

Резолюция на ЕС относно плурализма и свободата на медиите в ЕС 2018

Post Syndicated from nellyo original https://nellyo.wordpress.com/2018/05/03/freedom-3/

След Peзолюция на Европейския парламент относно свободата на печата и на медиите по света  (2013 г.)  днес ЕП   гласува   Резолюция на ЕП относно  плурализма и свободата на медиите в Европейския съюз (488 гласа “за”, 43 “против” и 114 въздържали се).

Като има предвид, че […]

във всяко едно демократично общество медийният сектор изпълнява ключова роля; като има предвид, че отражението на икономическата криза, съчетано с едновременното разрастване на платформите на социалните медии и други високотехнологични гиганти и изключително селективните рекламни приходи, драстично повиши нестабилността на условията на труд и социалната несигурност на работещите в медиите лица, включително на независимите журналисти, водейки до драстично понижаване на професионалните и социалните стандарти и качеството на журналистиката, което може да повлияе отрицателно на тяхната редакционна независимост;

като има предвид, че Европейската аудио-визуална обсерватория на Съвета на Европа осъди възникването на цифров дуопол на Google и Facebook, представляващ до 85% от целия растеж на пазара на цифрови реклами през 2016 г., което застрашава бъдещето на традиционните финансирани от реклами медийни дружества, например търговските телевизионни канали, вестници и списания, чиято аудитория е много по-ограничена;

като има предвид, че в контекста на политиката на разширяване Комисията е длъжна да изисква пълно спазване на критериите от Копенхаген, включително свободата на изразяване на мнение и свободата на медиите, поради което ЕС следва да дава пример за най-високи стандарти в тази област; като има предвид, че когато станат член на ЕС, държавите са длъжни да спазват постоянно и безусловно задълженията в областта на правата на човека по силата на Договорите на ЕС и Хартата на основните права на ЕС, и като има предвид, че зачитането на свободата на изразяване на мнение и свободата на медиите в държавите членки следва да бъде обект на редовен контрол;

като има предвид, че ЕС може да се ползва с доверие на световната сцена единствено ако свободата на печата и медиите се защитава и зачита в рамките на самия Съюз […]

отправя над 60 препоръки към държавите и ЕК, всяка от които е самостоятелно важна.

В  резолюцията са записани препоръки  като:

47.  предлага с оглед на ефективната защита на свободата и плурализма на медиите да се забрани, или най-малкото да стане напълно прозрачно, участието в обществени поръчки на дружества, чийто краен собственик притежава също така и медийно дружество;

предлага държавите членки да се задължат да докладват редовно за публичното финансиране, предоставяно на медийните дружества, както и да се извършва редовен мониторинг на всяко публично финансиране, предоставено на собственици на медии;

подчертава, че лица, които са били осъждани или признати за виновни в извършване на каквото и да било престъпление, не следва да бъдат собственици на медии;

48.  подчертава, че всяко публично финансиране на медийни организации следва да бъде предоставяно въз основа на недискриминационни, обективни и прозрачни критерии, за които всички медии да са предварително уведомени;

49.  припомня, че държавите членки следва да намерят начини за подпомагане на медиите, например като осигуряват неутралността на ДДС, както се препоръчва в неговата резолюция от 13 октомври 2011 г. относно бъдещето на ДДС и като подкрепят инициативите, свързани с медиите;

50.  призовава Комисията да разпределя постоянно и подходящо финансиране в рамките на бюджета на ЕС за подкрепа на мониторинга на плурализма на медиите на Центъра за плурализъм и свобода на медиите и за създаване на годишен механизъм за оценка на рисковете за плурализма на медиите в държавите членки; […]

51.  призовава Комисията да наблюдава и да събира информация и статистически данни относно свободата и плурализма на медиите във всички държави членки и да анализира отблизо случаите на нарушаване на основните права на журналистите, като същевременно спазва принципа на субсидиарност;

52.  подчертава необходимостта от засилване на споделянето на най-добри практики между регулаторните органи на държавите членки в аудио-визуалната сфера;

53.  призовава Комисията да вземе под внимание препоръките, съдържащи се в резолюцията на Европейския парламент от 25 октомври 2016 г. относно създаването на механизъм на ЕС за демокрацията, принципите на правовата държава и основните правапризовава Комисията да включи резултатите и препоръките от мониторинга на плурализма на медиите относно рисковете за плурализма и свободата на медиите в ЕС при изготвянето на годишния си доклад относно демокрацията, принципите на правовата държава и основните права (европейски доклад относно демокрацията, принципите на правовата държава и основните права);

54.  насърчава държавите членки да активизират усилията си за укрепване на медийната грамотност и да насърчават инициативите за обучение и образование сред всички граждани чрез формално, неформално и информално образование от гледна точка на ученето през целия живот, също и като обръщат особено внимание на първоначалната и текущата подготовка и подкрепа на учителите и като насърчават диалога и сътрудничеството между сектора на образованието и обучението и всички съответни заинтересовани страни, включително работещите в сферата на медиите лица, гражданското общество и младежките организации; отново потвърждава необходимостта от оказване на подкрепа за съобразените с възрастта иновативни инструменти за насърчаване на овластяването и онлайн сигурността като задължителни елементи в учебната програма на училищата и от преодоляване на цифровото разделение както чрез специални проекти за технологична грамотност, така и чрез подходящи инвестиции в инфраструктурата, за да се гарантира всеобщият достъп до информация;

55.  подчертава, че развиването на чувство за критична оценка и анализ по отношение на използването и създаването на медийно съдържание е от съществено значение, за да могат хората да вникват в актуалните проблеми и да оказват принос за обществения живот, както и за да бъдат те запознати с потенциала за промени и със заплахите, присъщи за все по-сложната и взаимосвързана медийна среда; подчертава, че медийната грамотност е основно демократично умение, което овластява гражданите; призовава Комисията и държавите членки да разработят конкретни мерки с цел насърчаване и подкрепа на проектите в областта на медийната грамотност като пилотния проект „Медийна грамотност за всички“ и да разработят цялостна политика за медийна грамотност, насочена към гражданите от всички възрастови групи и всички видове медии като неразделна част от политиката на Европейския съюз в областта на образованието, която да бъде целесъобразно подпомогната чрез съответните възможности за финансиране от ЕС, например европейските структурни и инвестиционни фондове и програмата „Хоризонт 2020“ [..]

 

 

The Helium Factor and Hard Drive Failure Rates

Post Syndicated from Andy Klein original https://www.backblaze.com/blog/helium-filled-hard-drive-failure-rates/

Seagate Enterprise Capacity 3.5 Helium HDD

In November 2013, the first commercially available helium-filled hard drive was introduced by HGST, a Western Digital subsidiary. The 6 TB drive was not only unique in being helium-filled, it was for the moment, the highest capacity hard drive available. Fast forward a little over 4 years later and 12 TB helium-filled drives are readily available, 14 TB drives can be found, and 16 TB helium-filled drives are arriving soon.

Backblaze has been purchasing and deploying helium-filled hard drives over the past year and we thought it was time to start looking at their failure rates compared to traditional air-filled drives. This post will provide an overview, then we’ll continue the comparison on a regular basis over the coming months.

The Promise and Challenge of Helium Filled Drives

We all know that helium is lighter than air — that’s why helium-filled balloons float. Inside of an air-filled hard drive there are rapidly spinning disk platters that rotate at a given speed, 7200 rpm for example. The air inside adds an appreciable amount of drag on the platters that in turn requires an appreciable amount of additional energy to spin the platters. Replacing the air inside of a hard drive with helium reduces the amount of drag, thereby reducing the amount of energy needed to spin the platters, typically by 20%.

We also know that after a few days, a helium-filled balloon sinks to the ground. This was one of the key challenges in using helium inside of a hard drive: helium escapes from most containers, even if they are well sealed. It took years for hard drive manufacturers to create containers that could contain helium while still functioning as a hard drive. This container innovation allows helium-filled drives to function at spec over the course of their lifetime.

Checking for Leaks

Three years ago, we identified SMART 22 as the attribute assigned to recording the status of helium inside of a hard drive. We have both HGST and Seagate helium-filled hard drives, but only the HGST drives currently report the SMART 22 attribute. It appears the normalized and raw values for SMART 22 currently report the same value, which starts at 100 and goes down.

To date only one HGST drive has reported a value of less than 100, with multiple readings between 94 and 99. That drive continues to perform fine, with no other errors or any correlating changes in temperature, so we are not sure whether the change in value is trying to tell us something or if it is just a wonky sensor.

Helium versus Air-Filled Hard Drives

There are several different ways to compare these two types of drives. Below we decided to use just our 8, 10, and 12 TB drives in the comparison. We did this since we have helium-filled drives in those sizes. We left out of the comparison all of the drives that are 6 TB and smaller as none of the drive models we use are helium-filled. We are open to trying different comparisons. This just seemed to be the best place to start.

Lifetime Hard Drive Failure Rates: Helium vs. Air-Filled Hard Drives table

The most obvious observation is that there seems to be little difference in the Annualized Failure Rate (AFR) based on whether they contain helium or air. One conclusion, given this evidence, is that helium doesn’t affect the AFR of hard drives versus air-filled drives. My prediction is that the helium drives will eventually prove to have a lower AFR. Why? Drive Days.

Let’s go back in time to Q1 2017 when the air-filled drives listed in the table above had a similar number of Drive Days to the current number of Drive Days for the helium drives. We find that the failure rate for the air-filled drives at the time (Q1 2017) was 1.61%. In other words, when the drives were in use a similar number of hours, the helium drives had a failure rate of 1.06% while the failure rate of the air-filled drives was 1.61%.

Helium or Air?

My hypothesis is that after normalizing the data so that the helium and air-filled drives have the same (or similar) usage (Drive Days), the helium-filled drives we use will continue to have a lower Annualized Failure Rate versus the air-filled drives we use. I expect this trend to continue for the next year at least. What side do you come down on? Will the Annualized Failure Rate for helium-filled drives be better than air-filled drives or vice-versa? Or do you think the two technologies will be eventually produce the same AFR over time? Pick a side and we’ll document the results over the next year and see where the data takes us.

The post The Helium Factor and Hard Drive Failure Rates appeared first on Backblaze Blog | Cloud Storage & Cloud Backup.

2018-05-03 python, multiprocessing, thread-ове и забивания

Post Syndicated from Vasil Kolev original https://vasil.ludost.net/blog/?p=3384

Всеки ден се убеждавам, че нищо не работи.

Открих забавен проблем с python и multiprocessing, който в момента още не мога да реша чий проблем е (в крайна сметка ще се окаже мой). Отне ми прилично количество време да го хвана и си струва да го разкажа.

Малко предистория: ползваме influxdb, в което тъпчем бая секундни данни, които после предъвкваме до минутни. InfluxDB има continuous queries, които вършат тази работа – на някакъв интервал от време хващат новите данни и ги сгъват. Тези заявки имаха няколко проблема:
– не се оправят с попълване на стари данни;
– изпълняват се рядко и минутните данни изостават;
– изпълняват се в общи линии в един thread, което кара минутните данни да изостават още повече (в нашия случай преди да ги сменим с около 12 часа).

Хванаха ме дяволите и си написах просто демонче на python, което да събира информация за различните бази какви данни могат да се сгънат, и паралелно да попълва данните. Работи в общи линии по следния начин:
– взима списък с базите данни
– пуска през multiprocessing-а да се събере за всяка база какви заявки трябва да се пуснат, на база на какви measurement-и има и докога са минутните и секундните данни в тях;
– пуска през multiprocessing-а събраните от предния pass заявки
– и така до края на света (или докато зависне).

След като навакса за няколко часа, успяваше да държи минутните данни в рамките на няколко минути от последните секундни данни, което си беше сериозно подобрение на ситуацията. Единственият проблем беше, че от време на време спираше да process-ва и увисваше.

Днес намерих време да го прегледам внимателно какво му се случва. Процесът изглежда като един parent и 5 fork()-нати child-а, като:
Parent-а спи във futex 0x22555a0;
Child 18455 във futex 0x7fdbfa366000;
Child 18546 read
Child 18457 във futex 0x7fdbfa366000
Child 18461 във futex 0x7fdbfa366000
Child 18462 във futex 0x7fdbfa366000
Child 18465 във futex 0x7fdbf908c2c0

Това не беше особено полезно, и се оказа, че стандартния python debugger (pdb) не може да се закача за съществуващи процеси, но за сметка на това gdb с подходящи debug символи може, и може да дава доста полезна информация. По този начин открих, че parent-а чака един child да приключи работата си:


#11 PyEval_EvalFrameEx (
[email protected]=Frame 0x235fb80, for file /usr/lib64/python2.7/multiprocessing/pool.py, line 543, in wait (self== 1525137960000000000 AND time < 1525138107000000000 GROUP BY time(1m), * fill(linear)\' in a read only context, please use a POST request instead', u'level': u'warning'}], u'statement_id': 0}]}, None], _callback=None, _chunksize=1, _number_left=1, _ready=False, _success=True, _cond=<_Condition(_Verbose__verbose=False, _Condition__lock=, acquire=, _Condition__waiters=[], release=) at remote 0x7fdbe0015310>, _job=45499, _cache={45499: < ...>}) a...(truncated), [email protected]=0) at /usr/src/debug/Python-2.7.5/Python/ceval.c:3040

Като в pool.py около ред 543 има следното:


class ApplyResult(object):

...

def wait(self, timeout=None):
self._cond.acquire()
try:
if not self._ready:
self._cond.wait(timeout)
finally:
self._cond.release()

Първоначално си мислех, че 18546 очаква да прочете нещо от грешното място, но излезе, че това е child-а, който е спечелил състезанието за изпълняване на следващата задача и чака да му я дадат (което изглежда се раздава през futex 0x7fdbfa366000). Един от child-овете обаче чака в друг lock:


(gdb) bt
#0 __lll_lock_wait () at ../nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/lowlevellock.S:135
#1 0x00007fdbf9b68dcb in _L_lock_812 () from /lib64/libpthread.so.0
#2 0x00007fdbf9b68c98 in __GI___pthread_mutex_lock ([email protected]=0x7fdbf908c2c0 ) at ../nptl/pthread_mutex_lock.c:79
#3 0x00007fdbf8e846ea in _nss_files_gethostbyname4_r ([email protected]=0x233fa44 "localhost", [email protected]=0x7fdbecfcb8e0, [email protected]=0x7fdbecfcb340 "hZ \372\333\177",
[email protected]=1064, [email protected]=0x7fdbecfcb8b0, [email protected]=0x7fdbecfcb910, [email protected]=0x0) at nss_files/files-hosts.c:381
#4 0x00007fdbf9170ed8 in gaih_inet (name=, [email protected]=0x233fa44 "localhost", service=, [email protected]=0x7fdbecfcbb90, [email protected]=0x7fdbecfcb9f0,
[email protected]=0x7fdbecfcb9e0) at ../sysdeps/posix/getaddrinfo.c:877
#5 0x00007fdbf91745cd in __GI_getaddrinfo ([email protected]=0x233fa44 "localhost", [email protected]=0x7fdbecfcbbc0 "8086", [email protected]=0x7fdbecfcbb90, [email protected]=0x7fdbecfcbb78)
at ../sysdeps/posix/getaddrinfo.c:2431
#6 0x00007fdbeed8760d in socket_getaddrinfo (self=
, args=) at /usr/src/debug/Python-2.7.5/Modules/socketmodule.c:4193
#7 0x00007fdbf9e5fbb0 in call_function (oparg=
, pp_stack=0x7fdbecfcbd10) at /usr/src/debug/Python-2.7.5/Python/ceval.c:4408
#8 PyEval_EvalFrameEx (
[email protected]=Frame 0x7fdbe8013350, for file /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/urllib3/util/connection.py, line 64, in create_connection (address=('localhost', 8086), timeout=3000, source_address=None, socket_options=[(6, 1, 1)], host='localhost', port=8086, err=None), [email protected]=0) at /usr/src/debug/Python-2.7.5/Python/ceval.c:3040

(gdb) frame 3
#3 0x00007fdbf8e846ea in _nss_files_gethostbyname4_r ([email protected]=0x233fa44 "localhost", [email protected]=0x7fdbecfcb8e0, [email protected]=0x7fdbecfcb340 "hZ \372\333\177",
[email protected]=1064, [email protected]=0x7fdbecfcb8b0, [email protected]=0x7fdbecfcb910, [email protected]=0x0) at nss_files/files-hosts.c:381
381 __libc_lock_lock (lock);
(gdb) list
376 enum nss_status
377 _nss_files_gethostbyname4_r (const char *name, struct gaih_addrtuple **pat,
378 char *buffer, size_t buflen, int *errnop,
379 int *herrnop, int32_t *ttlp)
380 {
381 __libc_lock_lock (lock);
382
383 /* Reset file pointer to beginning or open file. */
384 enum nss_status status = internal_setent (keep_stream);
385

Или в превод – опитваме се да вземем стандартния lock, който libc-то използва за да си пази reentrant функциите, и някой го държи. Кой ли?


(gdb) p lock
$3 = {__data = {__lock = 2, __count = 0, __owner = 16609, __nusers = 1, __kind = 0, __spins = 0, __elision = 0, __list = {__prev = 0x0, __next = 0x0}},
__size = "\002\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\[email protected]\000\000\001", '\000' , __align = 2}
(gdb) p &lock
$4 = (__libc_lock_t *) 0x7fdbf908c2c0

Тук се вижда как owner-а на lock-а всъщност е parent-а. Той обаче не смята, че го държи:


(gdb) p lock
$2 = 0
(gdb) p &lock
$3 = (__libc_lock_t *) 0x7fdbf9450df0
(gdb) x/20x 0x7fdbf9450df0
0x7fdbf9450df0
: 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000
0x7fdbf9450e00 <__abort_msg>: 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000
0x7fdbf9450e10 : 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000
0x7fdbf9450e20 : 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000
0x7fdbf9450e30 : 0x001762c9 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000

… което е и съвсем очаквано, при условие, че са два процеса и тая памет не е обща.

Та, явно това, което се е случило е, че докато parent-а е правел fork(), тоя lock го е държал някой, и child-а реално не може да пипне каквото и да е, свързано с него (което значи никакви reentrant функции в glibc-то, каквито па всички ползват (и би трябвало да ползват)). Въпросът е, че по принцип това не би трябвало да е възможно, щото около fork() няма нищо, което да взима тоя lock, и би трябвало glibc да си освобождава lock-а като излиза от функциите си.

Първоначалното ми идиотско предположение беше, че в signal handler-а на SIGCHLD multiprocessing модула създава новите child-ове, и така докато нещо друго държи lock-а идва сигнал, прави се нов процес и той го “наследява” заключен. Това беше твърде глупаво, за да е истина, и се оказа, че не е…

Около въпросите с lock-а бях стигнал с търсене до две неща – issue 127 в gperftools и Debian bug 657835. Първото каза, че проблемът ми може да е от друг lock, който някой друг държи преди fork-а (което ме накара да се загледам по-внимателно какви lock-ове се държат), а второто, че като цяло ако fork-ваш thread-нато приложение, може после единствено да правиш execve(), защото всичко друго не е ясно колко ще работи.

И накрая се оказа, че ако се ползва multiprocessing модула, той пуска в главния процес няколко thread-а, които да се занимават със следенето и пускането на child-ове за обработка. Та ето какво реално се случва:

– някой child си изработва нужния брой операции и излиза
– parent-а получава SIGCHLD и си отбелязва, че трябва да види какво става
– главния thread на parent-а тръгва да събира списъка бази, и вика в някакъв момент _nss_files_gethostbyname4_r, който взима lock-а;
– по това време другия thread казва “а, нямам достатъчно child-ове, fork()”
– profit.

Текущото ми глупаво решение е да не правя нищо в главния thread, което може да взима тоя lock и да се надявам, че няма още някой такъв. Бъдещото ми решение е или да го пиша на python3 с някой друг модул по темата, или на go (което ще трябва да науча).

Hard Drive Stats for Q1 2018

Post Syndicated from Andy Klein original https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-stats-for-q1-2018/

Backblaze Drive Stats Q1 2018

As of March 31, 2018 we had 100,110 spinning hard drives. Of that number, there were 1,922 boot drives and 98,188 data drives. This review looks at the quarterly and lifetime statistics for the data drive models in operation in our data centers. We’ll also take a look at why we are collecting and reporting 10 new SMART attributes and take a sneak peak at some 8 TB Toshiba drives. Along the way, we’ll share observations and insights on the data presented and we look forward to you doing the same in the comments.

Background

Since April 2013, Backblaze has recorded and saved daily hard drive statistics from the drives in our data centers. Each entry consists of the date, manufacturer, model, serial number, status (operational or failed), and all of the SMART attributes reported by that drive. Currently there are about 97 million entries totaling 26 GB of data. You can download this data from our website if you want to do your own research, but for starters here’s what we found.

Hard Drive Reliability Statistics for Q1 2018

At the end of Q1 2018 Backblaze was monitoring 98,188 hard drives used to store data. For our evaluation below we remove from consideration those drives which were used for testing purposes and those drive models for which we did not have at least 45 drives. This leaves us with 98,046 hard drives. The table below covers just Q1 2018.

Q1 2018 Hard Drive Failure Rates

Notes and Observations

If a drive model has a failure rate of 0%, it only means there were no drive failures of that model during Q1 2018.

The overall Annualized Failure Rate (AFR) for Q1 is just 1.2%, well below the Q4 2017 AFR of 1.65%. Remember that quarterly failure rates can be volatile, especially for models that have a small number of drives and/or a small number of Drive Days.

There were 142 drives (98,188 minus 98,046) that were not included in the list above because we did not have at least 45 of a given drive model. We use 45 drives of the same model as the minimum number when we report quarterly, yearly, and lifetime drive statistics.

Welcome Toshiba 8TB drives, almost…

We mentioned Toshiba 8 TB drives in the first paragraph, but they don’t show up in the Q1 Stats chart. What gives? We only had 20 of the Toshiba 8 TB drives in operation in Q1, so they were excluded from the chart. Why do we have only 20 drives? When we test out a new drive model we start with the “tome test” and it takes 20 drives to fill one tome. A tome is the same drive model in the same logical position in each of the 20 Storage Pods that make up a Backblaze Vault. There are 60 tomes in each vault.

In this test, we created a Backblaze Vault of 8 TB drives, with 59 of the tomes being Seagate 8 TB drives and 1 tome being the Toshiba drives. Then we monitored the performance of the vault and its member tomes to see if, in this case, the Toshiba drives performed as expected.

Q1 2018 Hard Drive Failure Rate — Toshiba 8TB

So far the Toshiba drive is performing fine, but they have been in place for only 20 days. Next up is the “pod test” where we fill a Storage Pod with Toshiba drives and integrate it into a Backblaze Vault comprised of like-sized drives. We hope to have a better look at the Toshiba 8 TB drives in our Q2 report — stay tuned.

Lifetime Hard Drive Reliability Statistics

While the quarterly chart presented earlier gets a lot of interest, the real test of any drive model is over time. Below is the lifetime failure rate chart for all the hard drive models which have 45 or more drives in operation as of March 31st, 2018. For each model, we compute their reliability starting from when they were first installed.

Lifetime Hard Drive Failure Rates

Notes and Observations

The failure rates of all of the larger drives (8-, 10- and 12 TB) are very good, 1.2% AFR (Annualized Failure Rate) or less. Many of these drives were deployed in the last year, so there is some volatility in the data, but you can use the Confidence Interval to get a sense of the failure percentage range.

The overall failure rate of 1.84% is the lowest we have ever achieved, besting the previous low of 2.00% from the end of 2017.

Our regular readers and drive stats wonks may have noticed a sizable jump in the number of HGST 8 TB drives (model: HUH728080ALE600), from 45 last quarter to 1,045 this quarter. As the 10 TB and 12 TB drives become more available, the price per terabyte of the 8 TB drives has gone down. This presented an opportunity to purchase the HGST drives at a price in line with our budget.

We purchased and placed into service the 45 original HGST 8 TB drives in Q2 of 2015. They were our first Helium-filled drives and our only ones until the 10 TB and 12 TB Seagate drives arrived in Q3 2017. We’ll take a first look into whether or not Helium makes a difference in drive failure rates in an upcoming blog post.

New SMART Attributes

If you have previously worked with the hard drive stats data or plan to, you’ll notice that we added 10 more columns of data starting in 2018. There are 5 new SMART attributes we are tracking each with a raw and normalized value:

  • 177 – Wear Range Delta
  • 179 – Used Reserved Block Count Total
  • 181- Program Fail Count Total or Non-4K Aligned Access Count
  • 182 – Erase Fail Count
  • 235 – Good Block Count AND System(Free) Block Count

The 5 values are all related to SSD drives.

Yes, SSD drives, but before you jump to any conclusions, we used 10 Samsung 850 EVO SSDs as boot drives for a period of time in Q1. This was an experiment to see if we could reduce boot up time for the Storage Pods. In our case, the improved boot up speed wasn’t worth the SSD cost, but it did add 10 new columns to the hard drive stats data.

Speaking of hard drive stats data, the complete data set used to create the information used in this review is available on our Hard Drive Test Data page. You can download and use this data for free for your own purpose, all we ask are three things: 1) you cite Backblaze as the source if you use the data, 2) you accept that you are solely responsible for how you use the data, and 3) you do not sell this data to anyone. It is free.

If you just want the summarized data used to create the tables and charts in this blog post, you can download the ZIP file containing the MS Excel spreadsheet.

Good luck and let us know if you find anything interesting.

[Ed: 5/1/2018 – Updated Lifetime chart to fix error in confidence interval for HGST 4TB drive, model: HDS5C4040ALE630]

The post Hard Drive Stats for Q1 2018 appeared first on Backblaze Blog | Cloud Storage & Cloud Backup.

Reddit Repeat Infringer Policy Shuts Down Megalinks Piracy Sub

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/reddit-repeat-infringer-policy-shuts-down-megalinks-piracy-sub-180430/

Without doubt, Reddit is one of the most popular sites on the entire Internet. At the time of writing it’s the fourth most visited site in the US with 330 million users per month generating 14 billion screenviews.

The core of the site’s success is its communities. Known as ‘sub-Reddits’ or just ‘subs’, there are currently 138,000 of them dedicated to every single subject you can think of and tens of thousands you’d never considered.

Even though they’re technically forbidden, a small but significant number are dedicated to piracy, offering links to copyright-infringing content hosted elsewhere. One of the most popular is /r/megalinks, which is dedicated to listing infringing content (mainly movies and TV shows) uploaded to file-hosting site Mega.

Considering its activities, Megalinks has managed to stay online longer than most people imagined but following an intervention from Reddit, the content indexing sub has stopped accepting new submissions, which will effectively shut it down.

In an announcement Sunday, the sub’s moderators explained that following a direct warning from Reddit’s administrators, the decision had been taken to move on.

“As most of you know by now, we’ve had to deal with a lot of DMCA takedowns over the last 6 months. Everyone knew this day would come, eventually, and its finally here,” they wrote.

“We received a formal warning from Reddit’s administration 2 days ago, and have decided to restrict new submissions for the safety of the subreddit.”

The message from Reddit’s operators makes it absolutely clear that Reddit isn’t the platform to host what amounts to a piracy links forum.

“This is an official warning from Reddit that we are receiving too many copyright infringement notices about material posted to your community. We will be required to ban this community if you can’t adequately address the problem,” the warning reads.

Noting that Redditors aren’t allowed to post content that infringes copyrights, the administrators say they are required by law to handle DMCA notices and that in cases where infringement happens on multiple occasions, that needs to be handled in a more aggressive manner.

“The law also requires us to issue bans in cases of repeat infringement. Sometimes a repeat infringement problem is limited to just one user and we ban just that person. Other times the problem pervades a whole community and we ban the community,” the admins continue.

“This is our formal warning about repeat infringement in this community. Over the past three months we’ve had to remove material from the community in response to copyright notices 60 times. That’s an unusually high number taking into account the community’s size.

The warning suggests ways to keep infringing content down but in a sub dedicated to piracy, they’re all completely irrelevant. It also suggests removing old posts to ensure that Reddit doesn’t keep getting notices, but that would mean deleting pretty much everything. Backups exist but a simple file is a poor substitute for a community.

So, with Reddit warning that without change the sub will be banned, the moderators of /r/megalinks have decided to move on to a new home. Reportedly hosted ‘offshore’, their new forum already has more than 9,800 members and is likely to grow quickly as the word spreads.

A month ago, the /r/megaporn sub-Reddit suffered a similar fate following a warning from Reddit’s admins. It successfully launched a new external forum which is why the Megalinks crew decided on the same model.

“[A]fter seeing how /r/megaporn approached the same situation, we had started working on an offshore forum a week ago in anticipation of the ban. This allows us to work however we want, without having to deal with Reddit’s policies and administration,” the team explain.

Ever since the BMG v Cox case went bad ways for the ISP in 2015, repeat infringer policies have become a very hot topic in the US. That Reddit is now drawing a line in the sand over a relatively small number of complaints (at least compared to other similar platforms) is clear notice that Reddit and blatant piracy won’t be allowed to walk hand in hand.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.