Tag Archives: paris

1834: The First Cyberattack

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2018/05/1834_the_first_.html

Tom Standage has a great story of the first cyberattack against a telegraph network.

The Blanc brothers traded government bonds at the exchange in the city of Bordeaux, where information about market movements took several days to arrive from Paris by mail coach. Accordingly, traders who could get the information more quickly could make money by anticipating these movements. Some tried using messengers and carrier pigeons, but the Blanc brothers found a way to use the telegraph line instead. They bribed the telegraph operator in the city of Tours to introduce deliberate errors into routine government messages being sent over the network.

The telegraph’s encoding system included a “backspace” symbol that instructed the transcriber to ignore the previous character. The addition of a spurious character indicating the direction of the previous day’s market movement, followed by a backspace, meant the text of the message being sent was unaffected when it was written out for delivery at the end of the line. But this extra character could be seen by another accomplice: a former telegraph operator who observed the telegraph tower outside Bordeaux with a telescope, and then passed on the news to the Blancs. The scam was only uncovered in 1836, when the crooked operator in Tours fell ill and revealed all to a friend, who he hoped would take his place. The Blanc brothers were put on trial, though they could not be convicted because there was no law against misuse of data networks. But the Blancs’ pioneering misuse of the French network qualifies as the world’s first cyber-attack.

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.

Pirates Taunt Amazon Over New “Turd Sandwich” Prime Video Quality

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/pirates-taunt-amazon-over-new-turd-sandwich-prime-video-quality-180419/

Even though they generally aren’t paying for the content they consume, don’t fall into the trap of believing that all pirates are eternally grateful for even poor quality media.

Without a doubt, some of the most quality-sensitive individuals are to be found in pirate communities and they aren’t scared to make their voices known when release groups fail to come up with the best possible goods.

This week there’s been a sustained chorus of disapproval over the quality of pirate video releases sourced from Amazon Prime. The anger is usually directed at piracy groups who fail to capture content in the correct manner but according to a number of observers, the problem is actually at Amazon’s end.

Discussions on Reddit, for example, report that episodes in a single TV series have been declining in filesize and bitrate, from 1.56 GB in 720p at a 3073 kb/s video bitrate for episode 1, down to 907 MB in 720p at just 1514 kb/s video bitrate for episode 10.

Numerous theories as to why this may be the case are being floated around, including that Amazon is trying to save on bandwidth expenses. While this is a possibility, the company hasn’t made any announcements to that end.

Indeed, one legitimate customer reported that he’d raised the quality issue with Amazon and they’d said that the problem was “probably on his end”.

“I have Amazon Prime Video and I noticed the quality was always great for their exclusive shows, so I decided to try buying the shows on Amazon instead of iTunes this year. I paid for season pass subscriptions for Legion, Billions and Homeland this year,” he wrote.

“Just this past weekend, I have noticed a significant drop in details compared to weeks before! So naturally I assumed it was an issue on my end. I started trying different devices, calling support, etc, but nothing really helped.

“Billions continued to look like a blurry mess, almost like I was watching a standard definition DVD instead of the crystal clear HD I paid for and have experienced in the past! And when I check the previous episodes, sure enough, they look fantastic again. What the heck??”

With Amazon distancing itself from the issues, piracy groups have already begun to dig in the knife. Release group DEFLATE has been particularly critical.

“Amazon, in their infinite wisdom, have decided to start fucking with the quality of their encodes. They’re now reaching Netflix’s subpar 1080p.H264 levels, and their H265 encodes aren’t even close to what Netflix produces,” the group said in a file attached to S02E07 of The Good Fight released on Sunday.

“Netflix is able to produce drastic visual improvements with their H265 encodes compared to H264 across every original. In comparison, Amazon can’t decide whether H265 or H264 is going to produce better results, and as a result we suffer for it.”

Arrr! The quality be fallin’

So what’s happening exactly?

A TorrentFreak source (who tells us he’s been working in the BluRay/DCP authoring business for the last 10 years) was kind enough to give us two opinions, one aimed at the techies and another at us mere mortals.

“In technical terms, it appears [Amazon has] increased the CRF [Constant Rate Factor] value they use when encoding for both the HEVC [H265] and H264 streams. Previously, their H264 streams were using CRF 18 and a max bitrate of 15Mbit/s, which usually resulted in file sizes of roughly 3GB, or around 10Mbit/s. Similarly with their HEVC streams, they were using CRF 20 and resulting in streams which were around the same size,” he explained.

“In the past week, the H264 streams have decreased by up to 50% for some streams. While there are no longer any x264 headers embedded in the H264 streams, the HEVC streams still retain those headers and the CRF value used has been increased, so it does appear this change has been done on purpose.”

In layman’s terms, our source believes that Amazon had previously been using an encoding profile that was “right on the edge of relatively good quality” which kept bitrates relatively low but high enough to ensure no perceivable loss of quality.

“H264 streams encoded with CRF 18 could provide an acceptable compromise between quality and file size, where the loss of detail is often negligible when watched at regular viewing distances, at a desk, or in a lounge room on a larger TV,” he explained.

“Recently, it appears these values have been intentionally changed in order to lower the bitrate and file sizes for reasons unknown. As a result, the quality of some streams has been reduced by up to 50% of their previous values. This has introduced a visual loss of quality, comparable to that of viewing something in standard definition versus high definition.”

With the situation failing to improve during the week, by the time piracy group DEFLATE released S03E14 of Supergirl on Tuesday their original criticism had transformed into flat-out insults.

“These are only being done in H265 because Amazon have shit the bed, and it’s a choice between a turd sandwich and a giant douche,” they wrote, offering these images as illustrative of the problem and these indicating what should be achievable.

With DEFLATE advising customers to start complaining to Amazon, the memes have already begun, with unfavorable references to now-defunct group YIFY (which was often chastized for its low quality rips) and even a spin on one of the most well known anti-piracy campaigns.

You wouldn’t download stream….

TorrentFreak contacted Amazon Prime for comment on both the recent changes and growing customer complaints but at the time of publication we were yet to receive a response.

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

[$] A look at terminal emulators, part 2

Post Syndicated from jake original https://lwn.net/Articles/751763/rss

A comparison of the feature sets for a handful of terminal emulators was
the subject of a recent article; here I follow that up by
examining the performance of those terminals.

This might seem like a
lesser concern, but as it turns out, terminals exhibit surprisingly
high latency for such fundamental programs. I also examine what is
traditionally considered “speed” (but is really scroll bandwidth) and
memory usage, with the understanding that the impact of memory use
is less than it was when I looked at this a decade ago (in

Subscribers can read on for part 2 from guest author Antoine Beaupré.

Reddit Copyright Complaints Jump 138% But Almost Half Get Rejected

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/reddit-copyright-complaints-jump-138-but-almost-half-get-rejected-180411/

So-called ‘transparency reports’ are becoming increasingly popular with Internet-based platforms and their users. Among other things, they provide much-needed insight into how outsiders attempt to censor content published online and what actions are taken in response.

Google first started publishing its report in 2010, Twitter followed in 2012, and they’ve now been joined by a multitude of major companies including Microsoft, Facebook and Cloudflare.

As one of the world’s most recognized sites, Reddit joined the transparency party fairly late, publishing its first report in early 2015. While light on detail, it revealed that in the previous year the site received just 218 requests to remove content, 81% of which were DMCA-style copyright notices. A significant 62% of those copyright-related requests were rejected.

Over time, Reddit’s reporting has become a little more detailed. Last April it revealed that in 2016, the platform received ‘just’ 3,294 copyright removal requests for the entire year. However, what really caught the eye is how many notices were rejected. In just 610 instances, Reddit was required to remove content from the site, a rejection rate of 81%.

Having been a year since Reddit’s last report, the company has just published its latest edition, covering the period January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017.

“Reddit publishes this transparency report every year as part of our ongoing commitment to keep you aware of the trends on the various requests regarding private Reddit user account information or removal of content posted to Reddit,” the company said in a statement.

“Reddit believes that maintaining this transparency is extremely important. We want you to be aware of this information, consider it carefully, and ask questions to keep us accountable.”

The detailed report covers a wide range of topics, including government requests for the preservation or production of user information (there were 310) and even an instruction to monitor one Reddit user’s activities in real time via a so-called ‘Trap and Trace’ order.

In copyright terms, there has been significant movement. In 2017, Reddit received 7,825 notifications of alleged copyright infringement under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, that’s up roughly 138% over the 3,294 notifications received in 2016.

For a platform of Reddit’s unquestionable size, these volumes are not big. While the massive percentage increase is notable, the site still receives less than 10 complaints each day. For comparison, Google receives millions every week.

But perhaps most telling is that despite receiving more than 7,800 DMCA-style takedown notices, these resulted in Reddit carrying out just 4,352 removals. This means that for whatever reasons (Reddit doesn’t specify), 3,473 requests were denied, a rejection rate of 44.38%. Google, on the other hand, removes around 90% of content reported.

DMCA notices can be declared invalid for a number of reasons, from incorrect formatting through to flat-out abuse. In many cases, copyright law is incorrectly applied and it’s not unknown for complainants to attempt a DMCA takedown to stifle speech or perceived competition.

Reddit says it tries to take all things into consideration before removing content.

“Reddit reviews each DMCA takedown notice carefully, and removes content where a valid report is received, as required by the law,” the company says.

“Reddit considers whether the reported content may fall under an exception listed in the DMCA, such as ‘fair use,’ and may ask for clarification that will assist in the review of the removal request.”

Considering the numbers of community-focused “subreddits” dedicated to piracy (not just general discussion, but actual links to content), the low numbers of copyright notices received by Reddit continues to baffle.

There are sections in existence right now offering many links to movies and TV shows hosted on various file-hosting sites. They’re the type of links that are targeted all the time whenever they appear in Google search but copyright owners don’t appear to notice or care about them on Reddit.

Finally, it would be nice if Reddit could provide more information in next year’s report, including detail on why so many requests are rejected. Perhaps regular submission of notices to the Lumen Database would be something Reddit would consider for the future.

Reddit’s Transparency Report for 2017 can be found here.

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

A geometric Rust adventure

Post Syndicated from Eevee original https://eev.ee/blog/2018/03/30/a-geometric-rust-adventure/

Hi. Yes. Sorry. I’ve been trying to write this post for ages, but I’ve also been working on a huge writing project, and apparently I have a very limited amount of writing mana at my disposal. I think this is supposed to be a Patreon reward from January. My bad. I hope it’s super great to make up for the wait!

I recently ported some math code from C++ to Rust in an attempt to do a cool thing with Doom. Here is my story.

The problem

I presented it recently as a conundrum (spoilers: I solved it!), but most of those details are unimportant.

The short version is: I have some shapes. I want to find their intersection.

Really, I want more than that: I want to drop them all on a canvas, intersect everything with everything, and pluck out all the resulting polygons. The input is a set of cookie cutters, and I want to press them all down on the same sheet of dough and figure out what all the resulting contiguous pieces are. And I want to know which cookie cutter(s) each piece came from.

But intersection is a good start.

Example of the goal.  Given two squares that overlap at their corners, I want to find the small overlap piece, plus the two L-shaped pieces left over from each square

I’m carefully referring to the input as shapes rather than polygons, because each one could be a completely arbitrary collection of lines. Obviously there’s not much you can do with shapes that aren’t even closed, but at the very least, I need to handle concavity and multiple disconnected polygons that together are considered a single input.

This is a non-trivial problem with a lot of edge cases, and offhand I don’t know how to solve it robustly. I’m not too eager to go figure it out from scratch, so I went hunting for something I could build from.

(Infuriatingly enough, I can just dump all the shapes out in an SVG file and any SVG viewer can immediately solve the problem, but that doesn’t quite help me. Though I have had a few people suggest I just rasterize the whole damn problem, and after all this, I’m starting to think they may have a point.)

Alas, I couldn’t find a Rust library for doing this. I had a hard time finding any library for doing this that wasn’t a massive fully-featured geometry engine. (I could’ve used that, but I wanted to avoid non-Rust dependencies if possible, since distributing software is already enough of a nightmare.)

A Twitter follower directed me towards a paper that described how to do very nearly what I wanted and nothing else: “A simple algorithm for Boolean operations on polygons” by F. Martínez (2013). Being an academic paper, it’s trapped in paywall hell; sorry about that. (And as I understand it, none of the money you’d pay to get the paper would even go to the authors? Is that right? What a horrible and predatory system for discovering and disseminating knowledge.)

The paper isn’t especially long, but it does describe an awful lot of subtle details and is mostly written in terms of its own reference implementation. Rather than write my own implementation based solely on the paper, I decided to try porting the reference implementation from C++ to Rust.

And so I fell down the rabbit hole.

The basic algorithm

Thankfully, the author has published the sample code on his own website, if you want to follow along. (It’s the bottom link; the same author has, confusingly, published two papers on the same topic with similar titles, four years apart.)

If not, let me describe the algorithm and how the code is generally laid out. The algorithm itself is based on a sweep line, where a vertical line passes across the plane and ✨ does stuff ✨ as it encounters various objects. This implementation has no physical line; instead, it keeps track of which segments from the original polygon would be intersecting the sweep line, which is all we really care about.

A vertical line is passing rightwards over a couple intersecting shapes.  The line current intersects two of the shapes' sides, and these two sides are the "sweep list"

The code is all bundled inside a class with only a single public method, run, because… that’s… more object-oriented, I guess. There are several helper methods, and state is stored in some attributes. A rough outline of run is:

  1. Run through all the line segments in both input polygons. For each one, generate two SweepEvents (one for each endpoint) and add them to a std::deque for storage.

    Add pointers to the two SweepEvents to a std::priority_queue, the event queue. This queue uses a custom comparator to order the events from left to right, so the top element is always the leftmost endpoint.

  2. Loop over the event queue (where an “event” means the sweep line passed over the left or right end of a segment). Encountering a left endpoint means the sweep line is newly touching that segment, so add it to a std::set called the sweep list. An important point is that std::set is ordered, and the sweep list uses a comparator that keeps segments in order vertically.

    Encountering a right endpoint means the sweep line is leaving a segment, so that segment is removed from the sweep list.

  3. When a segment is added to the sweep list, it may have up to two neighbors: the segment above it and the segment below it. Call possibleIntersection to check whether it intersects either of those neighbors. (This is nearly sufficient to find all intersections, which is neat.)

  4. If possibleIntersection detects an intersection, it will split each segment into two pieces then and there. The old segment is shortened in-place to become the left part, and a new segment is created for the right part. The new endpoints at the point of intersection are added to the event queue.

  5. Some bookkeeping is done along the way to track which original polygons each segment is inside, and eventually the segments are reconstructed into new polygons.

Hopefully that’s enough to follow along. It took me an inordinately long time to tease this out. The comments aren’t especially helpful.

    std::deque<SweepEvent> eventHolder;    // It holds the events generated during the computation of the boolean operation

Syntax and basic semantics

The first step was to get something that rustc could at least parse, which meant translating C++ syntax to Rust syntax.

This was surprisingly straightforward! C++ classes become Rust structs. (There was no inheritance here, thankfully.) All the method declarations go away. Method implementations only need to be indented and wrapped in impl.

I did encounter some unnecessarily obtuse uses of the ternary operator:

(prevprev != sl.begin()) ? --prevprev : prevprev = sl.end();

Rust doesn’t have a ternary — you can use a regular if block as an expression — so I expanded these out.

C++ switch blocks become Rust match blocks, but otherwise function basically the same. Rust’s enums are scoped (hallelujah), so I had to explicitly spell out where enum values came from.

The only really annoying part was changing function signatures; C++ types don’t look much at all like Rust types, save for the use of angle brackets. Rust also doesn’t pass by implicit reference, so I needed to sprinkle a few &s around.

I would’ve had a much harder time here if this code had relied on any remotely esoteric C++ functionality, but thankfully it stuck to pretty vanilla features.

Language conventions

This is a geometry problem, so the sample code unsurprisingly has its own home-grown point type. Rather than port that type to Rust, I opted to use the popular euclid crate. Not only is it code I didn’t have to write, but it already does several things that the C++ code was doing by hand inline, like dot products and cross products. And all I had to do was add one line to Cargo.toml to use it! I have no idea how anyone writes C or C++ without a package manager.

The C++ code used getters, i.e. point.x (). I’m not a huge fan of getters, though I do still appreciate the need for them in lowish-level systems languages where you want to future-proof your API and the language wants to keep a clear distinction between attribute access and method calls. But this is a point, which is nothing more than two of the same numeric type glued together; what possible future logic might you add to an accessor? The euclid authors appear to side with me and leave the coordinates as public fields, so I took great joy in removing all the superfluous parentheses.

Polygons are represented with a Polygon class, which has some number of Contours. A contour is a single contiguous loop. Something you’d usually think of as a polygon would only have one, but a shape with a hole would have two: one for the outside, one for the inside. The weird part of this arrangement was that Polygon implemented nearly the entire STL container interface, then waffled between using it and not using it throughout the rest of the code. Rust lets anything in the same module access non-public fields, so I just skipped all that and used polygon.contours directly. Hell, I think I made contours public.

Finally, the SweepEvent type has a pol field that’s declared as an enum PolygonType (either SUBJECT or CLIPPING, to indicate which of the two inputs it is), but then some other code uses the same field as a numeric index into a polygon’s contours. Boy I sure do love static typing where everything’s a goddamn integer. I wanted to extend the algorithm to work on arbitrarily many input polygons anyway, so I scrapped the enum and this became a usize.

Then I got to all the uses of STL. I have only a passing familiarity with the C++ standard library, and this code actually made modest use of it, which caused some fun days-long misunderstandings.

As mentioned, the SweepEvents are stored in a std::deque, which is never read from. It took me a little thinking to realize that the deque was being used as an arena: it’s the canonical home for the structs so pointers to them can be tossed around freely. (It can’t be a std::vector, because that could reallocate and invalidate all the pointers; std::deque is probably a doubly-linked list, and guarantees no reallocation.)

Rust’s standard library does have a doubly-linked list type, but I knew I’d run into ownership hell here later anyway, so I think I replaced it with a Rust Vec to start with. It won’t compile either way, so whatever. We’ll get back to this in a moment.

The list of segments currently intersecting the sweep line is stored in a std::set. That type is explicitly ordered, which I’m very glad I knew already. Rust has two set types, HashSet and BTreeSet; unsurprisingly, the former is unordered and the latter is ordered. Dropping in BTreeSet and fixing some method names got me 90% of the way there.

Which brought me to the other 90%. See, the C++ code also relies on finding nodes adjacent to the node that was just inserted, via STL iterators.

next = prev = se->posSL = it = sl.insert(se).first;
(prev != sl.begin()) ? --prev : prev = sl.end();

I freely admit I’m bad at C++, but this seems like something that could’ve used… I don’t know, 1 comment. Or variable names more than two letters long. What it actually does is:

  1. Add the current sweep event (se) to the sweep list (sl), which returns a pair whose first element is an iterator pointing at the just-inserted event.

  2. Copies that iterator to several other variables, including prev and next.

  3. If the event was inserted at the beginning of the sweep list, set prev to the sweep list’s end iterator, which in C++ is a legal-but-invalid iterator meaning “the space after the end” or something. This is checked for in later code, to see if there is a previous event to look at. Otherwise, decrement prev, so it’s now pointing at the event immediately before the inserted one.

  4. Increment next normally. If the inserted event is last, then this will bump next to the end iterator anyway.

In other words, I need to get the previous and next elements from a BTreeSet. Rust does have bidirectional iterators, which BTreeSet supports… but BTreeSet::insert only returns a bool telling me whether or not anything was inserted, not the position. I came up with this:

let mut maybe_below = active_segments.range(..segment).last().map(|v| *v);
let mut maybe_above = active_segments.range(segment..).next().map(|v| *v);

The range method returns an iterator over a subset of the tree. The .. syntax makes a range (where the right endpoint is exclusive), so ..segment finds the part of the tree before the new segment, and segment.. finds the part of the tree after it. (The latter would start with the segment itself, except I haven’t inserted it yet, so it’s not actually there.)

Then the standard next() and last() methods on bidirectional iterators find me the element I actually want. But the iterator might be empty, so they both return an Option. Also, iterators tend to return references to their contents, but in this case the contents are already references, and I don’t want a double reference, so the map call dereferences one layer — but only if the Option contains a value. Phew!

This is slightly less efficient than the C++ code, since it has to look up where segment goes three times rather than just one. I might be able to get it down to two with some more clever finagling of the iterator, but microsopic performance considerations were a low priority here.

Finally, the event queue uses a std::priority_queue to keep events in a desired order and efficiently pop the next one off the top.

Except priority queues act like heaps, where the greatest (i.e., last) item is made accessible.

Sorting out sorting

C++ comparison functions return true to indicate that the first argument is less than the second argument. Sweep events occur from left to right. You generally implement sorts so that the first thing comes, erm, first.

But sweep events go in a priority queue, and priority queues surface the last item, not the first. This C++ code handled this minor wrinkle by implementing its comparison backwards.

struct SweepEventComp : public std::binary_function<SweepEvent, SweepEvent, bool> { // for sorting sweep events
// Compare two sweep events
// Return true means that e1 is placed at the event queue after e2, i.e,, e1 is processed by the algorithm after e2
bool operator() (const SweepEvent* e1, const SweepEvent* e2)
    if (e1->point.x () > e2->point.x ()) // Different x-coordinate
        return true;
    if (e2->point.x () > e1->point.x ()) // Different x-coordinate
        return false;
    if (e1->point.y () != e2->point.y ()) // Different points, but same x-coordinate. The event with lower y-coordinate is processed first
        return e1->point.y () > e2->point.y ();
    if (e1->left != e2->left) // Same point, but one is a left endpoint and the other a right endpoint. The right endpoint is processed first
        return e1->left;
    // Same point, both events are left endpoints or both are right endpoints.
    if (signedArea (e1->point, e1->otherEvent->point, e2->otherEvent->point) != 0) // not collinear
        return e1->above (e2->otherEvent->point); // the event associate to the bottom segment is processed first
    return e1->pol > e2->pol;

Maybe it’s just me, but I had a hell of a time just figuring out what problem this was even trying to solve. I still have to reread it several times whenever I look at it, to make sure I’m getting the right things backwards.

Making this even more ridiculous is that there’s a second implementation of this same sort, with the same name, in another file — and that one’s implemented forwards. And doesn’t use a tiebreaker. I don’t entirely understand how this even compiles, but it does!

I painstakingly translated this forwards to Rust. Unlike the STL, Rust doesn’t take custom comparators for its containers, so I had to implement ordering on the types themselves (which makes sense, anyway). I wrapped everything in the priority queue in a Reverse, which does what it sounds like.

I’m fairly pleased with Rust’s ordering model. Most of the work is done in Ord, a trait with a cmp() method returning an Ordering (one of Less, Equal, and Greater). No magic numbers, no need to implement all six ordering methods! It’s incredible. Ordering even has some handy methods on it, so the usual case of “order by this, then by this” can be written as:

return self.point().x.cmp(&other.point().x)

Well. Just kidding! It’s not quite that easy. You see, the points here are composed of floats, and floats have the fun property that not all of them are comparable. Specifically, NaN is not less than, greater than, or equal to anything else, including itself. So IEEE 754 float ordering cannot be expressed with Ord. Unless you want to just make up an answer for NaN, but Rust doesn’t tend to do that.

Rust’s float types thus implement the weaker PartialOrd, whose method returns an Option<Ordering> instead. That makes the above example slightly uglier:

return self.point().x.partial_cmp(&other.point().x).unwrap()

Also, since I use unwrap() here, this code will panic and take the whole program down if the points are infinite or NaN. Don’t do that.

This caused some minor inconveniences in other places; for example, the general-purpose cmp::min() doesn’t work on floats, because it requires an Ord-erable type. Thankfully there’s a f64::min(), which handles a NaN by returning the other argument.

(Cool story: for the longest time I had this code using f32s. I’m used to translating int to “32 bits”, and apparently that instinct kicked in for floats as well, even floats spelled double.)

The only other sorting adventure was this:

// Due to overlapping edges the resultEvents array can be not wholly sorted
bool sorted = false;
while (!sorted) {
    sorted = true;
    for (unsigned int i = 0; i < resultEvents.size (); ++i) {
        if (i + 1 < resultEvents.size () && sec (resultEvents[i], resultEvents[i+1])) {
            std::swap (resultEvents[i], resultEvents[i+1]);
            sorted = false;

(I originally misread this comment as saying “the array cannot be wholly sorted” and had no idea why that would be the case, or why the author would then immediately attempt to bubble sort it.)

I’m still not sure why this uses an ad-hoc sort instead of std::sort. But I’m used to taking for granted that general-purpose sorting implementations are tuned to work well for almost-sorted data, like Python’s. Maybe C++ is untrustworthy here, for some reason. I replaced it with a call to .sort() and all seemed fine.

Phew! We’re getting there. Finally, my code appears to type-check.

But now I see storm clouds gathering on the horizon.

Ownership hell

I have a problem. I somehow run into this problem every single time I use Rust. The solutions are never especially satisfying, and all the hacks I might use if forced to write C++ turn out to be unsound, which is even more annoying because rustc is just sitting there with this smug “I told you so expression” and—

The problem is ownership, which Rust is fundamentally built on. Any given value must have exactly one owner, and Rust must be able to statically convince itself that:

  1. No reference to a value outlives that value.
  2. If a mutable reference to a value exists, no other references to that value exist at the same time.

This is the core of Rust. It guarantees at compile time that you cannot lose pointers to allocated memory, you cannot double-free, you cannot have dangling pointers.

It also completely thwarts a lot of approaches you might be inclined to take if you come from managed languages (where who cares, the GC will take care of it) or C++ (where you just throw pointers everywhere and hope for the best apparently).

For example, pointer loops are impossible. Rust’s understanding of ownership and lifetimes is hierarchical, and it simply cannot express loops. (Rust’s own doubly-linked list type uses raw pointers and unsafe code under the hood, where “unsafe” is an escape hatch for the usual ownership rules. Since I only recently realized that pointers to the inside of a mutable Vec are a bad idea, I figure I should probably not be writing unsafe code myself.)

This throws a few wrenches in the works.

Problem the first: pointer loops

I immediately ran into trouble with the SweepEvent struct itself. A SweepEvent pulls double duty: it represents one endpoint of a segment, but each left endpoint also handles bookkeeping for the segment itself — which means that most of the fields on a right endpoint are unused. Also, and more importantly, each SweepEvent has a pointer to the corresponding SweepEvent at the other end of the same segment. So a pair of SweepEvents point to each other.

Rust frowns upon this. In retrospect, I think I could’ve kept it working, but I also think I’m wrong about that.

My first step was to wrench SweepEvent apart. I moved all of the segment-stuff (which is virtually all of it) into a single SweepSegment type, and then populated the event queue with a SweepEndpoint tuple struct, similar to:

enum SegmentEnd {

struct SweepEndpoint<'a>(&'a SweepSegment, SegmentEnd);

This makes SweepEndpoint essentially a tuple with a name. The 'a is a lifetime and says, more or less, that a SweepEndpoint cannot outlive the SweepSegment it references. Makes sense.

Problem solved! I no longer have mutually referential pointers. But I do still have pointers (well, references), and they have to point to something.

Problem the second: where’s all the data

Which brings me to the problem I always run into with Rust. I have a bucket of things, and I need to refer to some of them multiple times.

I tried half a dozen different approaches here and don’t clearly remember all of them, but I think my core problem went as follows. I translated the C++ class to a Rust struct with some methods hanging off of it. A simplified version might look like this.

struct Algorithm {
    arena: LinkedList<SweepSegment>,
    event_queue: BinaryHeap<SweepEndpoint>,

Ah, hang on — SweepEndpoint needs to be annotated with a lifetime, so Rust can enforce that those endpoints don’t live longer than the segments they refer to. No problem?

struct Algorithm<'a> {
    arena: LinkedList<SweepSegment>,
    event_queue: BinaryHeap<SweepEndpoint<'a>>,

Okay! Now for some methods.

fn run(&mut self) {
    self.arena.push_back(SweepSegment{ data: 5 });
    self.event_queue.push(SweepEndpoint(self.arena.back().unwrap(), SegmentEnd::Left));
    self.event_queue.push(SweepEndpoint(self.arena.back().unwrap(), SegmentEnd::Right));
    for event in &self.event_queue {
        println!("{:?}", event)

Aaand… this doesn’t work. Rust “cannot infer an appropriate lifetime for autoref due to conflicting requirements”. The trouble is that self.arena.back() takes a reference to self.arena, and then I put that reference in the event queue. But I promised that everything in the event queue has lifetime 'a, and I don’t actually know how long self lives here; I only know that it can’t outlive 'a, because that would invalidate the references it holds.

A little random guessing let me to change &mut self to &'a mut self — which is fine because the entire impl block this lives in is already parameterized by 'a — and that makes this compile! Hooray! I think that’s because I’m saying self itself has exactly the same lifetime as the references it holds onto, which is true, since it’s referring to itself.

Let’s get a little more ambitious and try having two segments.

fn run(&'a mut self) {
    self.arena.push_back(SweepSegment{ data: 5 });
    self.event_queue.push(SweepEndpoint(self.arena.back().unwrap(), SegmentEnd::Left));
    self.event_queue.push(SweepEndpoint(self.arena.back().unwrap(), SegmentEnd::Right));
    self.arena.push_back(SweepSegment{ data: 17 });
    self.event_queue.push(SweepEndpoint(self.arena.back().unwrap(), SegmentEnd::Left));
    self.event_queue.push(SweepEndpoint(self.arena.back().unwrap(), SegmentEnd::Right));
    for event in &self.event_queue {
        println!("{:?}", event)

Whoops! Rust complains that I’m trying to mutate self.arena while other stuff is referring to it. And, yes, that’s true — I have references to it in the event queue, and Rust is preventing me from potentially deleting everything from the queue when references to it still exist. I’m not actually deleting anything here, of course (though I could be if this were a Vec!), but Rust’s type system can’t encode that (and I dread the thought of a type system that can).

I struggled with this for a while, and rapidly encountered another complete showstopper:

fn run(&'a mut self) {

fn mutate_something(&'a mut self) {}

Rust objects that I’m trying to borrow self mutably, twice — once for the first call, once for the second.

But why? A borrow is supposed to end automatically once it’s no longer used, right? Maybe if I throw some braces around it for scope… nope, that doesn’t help either.

It’s true that borrows usually end automatically, but here I have explicitly told Rust that mutate_something() should borrow with the lifetime 'a, which is the same as the lifetime in run(). So the first call explicitly borrows self for at least the rest of the method. Removing the lifetime from mutate_something() does fix this error, but if that method tries to add new segments, I’m back to the original problem.

Oh no. The mutation in the C++ code is several calls deep. Porting it directly seems nearly impossible.

The typical solution here — at least, the first thing people suggest to me on Twitter — is to wrap basically everything everywhere in Rc<RefCell<T>>, which gives you something that’s reference-counted (avoiding questions of ownership) and defers borrow checks until runtime (avoiding questions of mutable borrows). But that seems pretty heavy-handed here — not only does RefCell add .borrow() noise anywhere you actually want to interact with the underlying value, but do I really need to refcount these tiny structs that only hold a handful of floats each?

I set out to find a middle ground.

Solution, kind of

I really, really didn’t want to perform serious surgery on this code just to get it to build. I still didn’t know if it worked at all, and now I had to rearrange it without being able to check if I was breaking it further. (This isn’t Rust’s fault; it’s a natural problem with porting between fairly different paradigms.)

So I kind of hacked it into working with minimal changes, producing a grotesque abomination which I’m ashamed to link to. Here’s how!

First, I got rid of the class. It turns out this makes lifetime juggling much easier right off the bat. I’m pretty sure Rust considers everything in a struct to be destroyed simultaneously (though in practice it guarantees it’ll destroy fields in order), which doesn’t leave much wiggle room. Locals within a function, on the other hand, can each have their own distinct lifetimes, which solves the problem of expressing that the borrows won’t outlive the arena.

Speaking of the arena, I solved the mutability problem there by switching to… an arena! The typed-arena crate (a port of a type used within Rust itself, I think) is an allocator — you give it a value, and it gives you back a reference, and the reference is guaranteed to be valid for as long as the arena exists. The method that does this is sneaky and takes &self rather than &mut self, so Rust doesn’t know you’re mutating the arena and won’t complain. (One drawback is that the arena will never free anything you give to it, but that’s not a big problem here.)

My next problem was with mutation. The main loop repeatedly calls possibleIntersection with pairs of segments, which can split either or both segment. Rust definitely doesn’t like that — I’d have to pass in two &muts, both of which are mutable references into the same arena, and I’d have a bunch of immutable references into that arena in the sweep list and elsewhere. This isn’t going to fly.

This is kind of a shame, and is one place where Rust seems a little overzealous. Something like this seems like it ought to be perfectly valid:

let mut v = vec![1u32, 2u32];
let a = &mut v[0];
let b = &mut v[1];
// do stuff with a, b

The trouble is, Rust only knows the type signature, which here is something like index_mut(&'a mut self, index: usize) -> &'a T. Nothing about that says that you’re borrowing distinct elements rather than some core part of the type — and, in fact, the above code is only safe because you’re borrowing distinct elements. In the general case, Rust can’t possibly know that. It seems obvious enough from the different indexes, but nothing about the type system even says that different indexes have to return different values. And what if one were borrowed as &mut v[1] and the other were borrowed with v.iter_mut().next().unwrap()?

Anyway, this is exactly where people start to turn to RefCell — if you’re very sure you know better than Rust, then a RefCell will skirt the borrow checker while still enforcing at runtime that you don’t have more than one mutable borrow at a time.

But half the lines in this algorithm examine the endpoints of a segment! I don’t want to wrap the whole thing in a RefCell, or I’ll have to say this everywhere:

if segment1.borrow().point.x < segment2.borrow().point.x { ... }


But wait — this code only mutates the points themselves in one place. When a segment is split, the original segment becomes the left half, and a new segment is created to be the right half. There’s no compelling need for this; it saves an allocation for the left half, but it’s not critical to the algorithm.

Thus, I settled on a compromise. My segment type now looks like this:

struct SegmentPacket {
    // a bunch of flags and whatnot used in the algorithm
struct SweepSegment {
    left_point: MapPoint,
    right_point: MapPoint,
    faces_outwards: bool,
    index: usize,
    order: usize,
    packet: RefCell<SegmentPacket>,

I do still need to call .borrow() or .borrow_mut() to get at the stuff in the “packet”, but that’s far less common, so there’s less noise overall. And I don’t need to wrap it in Rc because it’s part of a type that’s allocated in the arena and passed around only via references.

This still leaves me with the problem of how to actually perform the splits.

I’m not especially happy with what I came up with, I don’t know if I can defend it, and I suspect I could do much better. I changed possibleIntersection so that rather than performing splits, it returns the points at which each segment needs splitting, in the form (usize, Option<MapPoint>, Option<MapPoint>). (The usize is used as a flag for calling code and oughta be an enum, but, isn’t yet.)

Now the top-level function is responsible for all arena management, and all is well.

Except, er. possibleIntersection is called multiple times, and I don’t want to copy-paste a dozen lines of split code after each call. I tried putting just that code in its own function, which had the world’s most godawful signature, and that didn’t work because… uh… hm. I can’t remember why, exactly! Should’ve written that down.

I tried a local closure next, but closures capture their environment by reference, so now I had references to a bunch of locals for as long as the closure existed, which meant I couldn’t mutate those locals. Argh. (This seems a little silly to me, since the closure’s references cannot possibly be used for anything if the closure isn’t being called, but maybe I’m missing something. Or maybe this is just a limitation of lifetimes.)

Increasingly desperate, I tried using a macro. But… macros are hygienic, which means that any new name you use inside a macro is different from any name outside that macro. The macro thus could not see any of my locals. Usually that’s good, but here I explicitly wanted the macro to mess with my locals.

I was just about to give up and go live as a hermit in a cabin in the woods, when I discovered something quite incredible. You can define local macros! If you define a macro inside a function, then it can see any locals defined earlier in that function. Perfect!

macro_rules! _split_segment (
    ($seg:expr, $pt:expr) => (
            let pt = $pt;
            let seg = $seg;
            // ... waaay too much code ...

loop {
    // ...
    // This is possibleIntersection, renamed because Rust rightfully complains about camelCase
    let cross = handle_intersections(Some(segment), maybe_above);
    if let Some(pt) = cross.1 {
        segment = _split_segment!(segment, pt);
    if let Some(pt) = cross.2 {
        maybe_above = Some(_split_segment!(maybe_above.unwrap(), pt));
    // ...

(This doesn’t actually quite match the original algorithm, which has one case where a segment can be split twice. I realized that I could just do the left-most split, and a later iteration would perform the other split. I sure hope that’s right, anyway.)

It’s a bit ugly, and I ran into a whole lot of implicit behavior from the C++ code that I had to fix — for example, the segment is sometimes mutated just before it’s split, purely as a shortcut for mutating the left part of the split. But it finally compiles! And runs! And kinda worked, a bit!


I still had a lot of work to do.

For one, this code was designed for intersecting two shapes, not mass-intersecting a big pile of shapes. The basic algorithm doesn’t care about how many polygons you start with — all it sees is segments — but the code for constructing the return value needed some heavy modification.

The biggest change by far? The original code traced each segment once, expecting the result to be only a single shape. I had to change that to trace each side of each segment once, since the vast bulk of the output consists of shapes which share a side. This violated a few assumptions, which I had to hack around.

I also ran into a couple very bad edge cases, spent ages debugging them, then found out that the original algorithm had a subtle workaround that I’d commented out because it was awkward to port but didn’t seem to do anything. Whoops!

The worst was a precision error, where a vertical line could be split on a point not quite actually on the line, which wreaked all kinds of havoc. I worked around that with some tasteful rounding, which is highly dubious but makes the output more appealing to my squishy human brain. (I might switch to the original workaround, but I really dislike that even simple cases can spit out points at 1500.0000000000003. The whole thing is parameterized over the coordinate type, so maybe I could throw a rational type in there and cross my fingers?)

All that done, I finally, finally, after a couple months of intermittent progress, got what I wanted!

This is Doom 2’s MAP01. The black area to the left of center is where the player starts. Gray areas indicate where the player can walk from there, with lighter shades indicating more distant areas, where “distance” is measured by the minimum number of line crossings. Red areas can’t be reached at all.

(Note: large playable chunks of the map, including the exit room, are red. That’s because those areas are behind doors, and this code doesn’t understand doors yet.)

(Also note: The big crescent in the lower-right is also black because I was lazy and looked for the player’s starting sector by checking the bbox, and that sector’s bbox happens to match.)

The code that generated this had to go out of its way to delete all the unreachable zones around solid walls. I think I could modify the algorithm to do that on the fly pretty easily, which would probably speed it up a bit too. Downside is that the algorithm would then be pretty specifically tied to this problem, and not usable for any other kind of polygon intersection, which I would think could come up elsewhere? The modifications would be pretty minor, though, so maybe I could confine them to a closure or something.

Some final observations

It runs surprisingly slowly. Like, multiple seconds. Unless I add --release, which speeds it up by a factor of… some number with multiple digits. Wahoo. Debug mode has a high price, especially with a lot of calls in play.

The current state of this code is on GitHub. Please don’t look at it. I’m very sorry.

Honestly, most of my anguish came not from Rust, but from the original code relying on lots of fairly subtle behavior without bothering to explain what it was doing or even hint that anything unusual was going on. God, I hate C++.

I don’t know if the Rust community can learn from this. I don’t know if I even learned from this. Let’s all just quietly forget about it.

Now I just need to figure this one out…

Introducing Backblaze’s Rapid Ingest Service: B2 Fireball

Post Syndicated from Ahin Thomas original https://www.backblaze.com/blog/introducing-backblazes-rapid-ingest-service-fireball/

Introducing Backblaze Fireball

Backblaze’s rapid ingest service, Fireball, graduates out of public beta. Our device holds 70 terabytes of customer data and is perfect for migrating large data sets to B2 Cloud Storage.

At Backblaze, we like to put ourselves in the customer’s shoes. Specifically, we ask questions like “how can we make cloud storage more useful?” There is a long list of things we can do to help — over the last few weeks, we’ve addressed some of them when we lowered the cost of downloading data to $0.01 / GB. Today, we are pleased to publicly release our rapid ingest service, Fireball.

What is the Backblaze B2 Fireball?

The Fireball is a hardware device, specifically a NAS device. Any Backblaze B2 customer can order it from inside their account. The Fireball device can hold up to 70 terabytes of data. Upon ordering, it ships from a Backblaze data center to you. When you receive it, you can transfer your data onto the Fireball using your internal network. Once your data transfer is complete, you send it back to a Backblaze data center. Finally, inside our secure data center, your data is uploaded from the Fireball to your account. Your data remains encrypted throughout the process. Step by step instructions can be found here.

What is Fireball?

Why Use the Fireball?

“We would not have been able to get this project off the ground without the B2 Fireball.” — James Cole, KLRU (Austin City Limits)

For most customers, transferring large quantities of data isn’t always simple. The need can arise as you migrate off of legacy systems (e.g. replacing LTO) or simply on a project basis (e.g. transferring video shot in the field to the cloud). An common approach is to upload your data via the internet to the cloud storage vendor of your choosing. While cloud storage vendors don’t charge for uploads, you have to pay your network provider for bandwidth. That’s assuming you are in a place where the bandwidth can be secured.

Your data is stored in megabytes (“MB”) but your bandwidth is measured in megabits per second (“Mbps”). The difference? An 80 Mbps upload connection will transfer no more than 10 MB per second. That means, in your best case scenario, you might be able to upload 50 terabytes in 50 days, assuming you use nearly all of your upload bandwidth for the upload.

If you’re looking to migrate old backups from LTO or even a large project, a 3 month lag time is not operationally viable. That’s why multiple cloud storage providers have introduced rapid ingest devices.

How It Compares: Backblaze B2 Fireball vs AWS Snowball vs GCS Transfer Appliance

“We found the B2 Fireball much simpler and easier to use than Amazon’s Snowball. WunderVu had been looking for a cloud solution for security and simplicity, and B2 hit every check box.” — Aaron Rhodes, Executive Producer, WunderVu

Every vendor that offers a rapid ingest service only lets you upload to that vendor’s cloud. For example, you can’t use an Amazon Snowball to upload to Google Cloud Storage. This means that when considering a rapid ingest service, you are also making a decision on what cloud storage vendor to use. As such, one should consider not only the cost of the rapid ingest service, but also how much that vendor is going to charge you to store and download your data.

Device Capacity Service Fee Shipping Cloud Storage
Backblaze B2 70 TB $550
(30 day rental)
$75 $0.005 $0.01
Amazon S3 50 TB $200
(10 day rental)
$? * $0.021
Google Cloud 100 TB $300
(10 day rental)
$500 $0.020

*AWS does not estimate shipping fees at the time of the Snowball order.

To make the comparison easier, let’s create a hypothetical case and compare the costs incurred in the first year. Assume you have 100 TB as an initial upload. But that’s just the initial upload. Over the course of the year, let’s consider a usage pattern where every month you add 5 TB, delete 2 TBs, and download 10 TBs.

Transfer Cost Cloud Storage Fees Total Transfer +
Cloud Storage Fees
Backblaze B2 $1,250
(2 Fireballs)
$9,570 $10,820
Amazon S3 $400
(2 Snowballs)
$36,114 $36,514
Google Cloud $800
(1 transit)
$39,684 $40,484

Just looking at the first year, Amazon is 337% more expensive than Backblaze and Google is 374% more expensive than Backblaze.

Put simply, Backblaze offers the lowest cost, high performance cloud storage on the planet. During our public beta of the Fireball program we’ve had extremely positive feedback around how the Fireball enables customers to get their projects started in a time efficient and cost effective way. We hope you’ll give it a try!

The post Introducing Backblaze’s Rapid Ingest Service: B2 Fireball appeared first on Backblaze Blog | Cloud Storage & Cloud Backup.

[$] Some 4.16 and -stable development statistics

Post Syndicated from corbet original https://lwn.net/Articles/750054/rss

The 4.16 development cycle is shaping up to be a
relatively straightforward affair with little in the way of known problems
and a probable release after nine weeks of work. In comparison to the wild
ride that was 4.15, 4.16 looks positively calm. Even so, there is a lot
that has happened this time around; read on for a look at who contributed
to this release, with a brief digression into stable kernel updates.

Google предлага ново средство за заплащане за съдържание онлайн – Subscribe with Google

Post Syndicated from nellyo original https://nellyo.wordpress.com/2018/03/21/google-subscribe/

Качествената журналистика има цена.

Компанията Google предлага нов и по-лесен начин за заплащане, научаваме от блога на компанията – Subscribe with Google.

За съдържанието на издателите, които  дадат възможност за използване на това средство,  може да се кликне  върху “Абониране”  – автоматично се влиза в сайта  на издателя и  може да се плаща с всяка кредитна карта, която  е използвана с Google в миналото.

Участват Les Échos, Fairfax Media, Le Figaro, the Financial Times, Gannett, Gatehouse Media, Grupo Globo, The Mainichi, McClatchy, La NaciónThe New York Times, NRC Group, Le Parisien, Reforma, la Republica, The Telegraph и The Washington Post.



Pirate Site Admins Receive Suspended Sentences, Still Face €60m Damages Claim

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-site-admins-receive-suspended-sentences-still-face-e60m-damages-claim-180313/

After being founded in 2009, French site Liberty Land (LL) made its home in Canada. At the time listed among France’s top 200 sites, Liberty Land carried an estimated 30,000 links to a broad range of unlicensed content.

Like many other indexes of its type, LL carried no content itself but hosted links to content hosted elsewhere, on sites like Megaupload and Rapidshare, for example. This didn’t save the operation from an investigation carried out by rightsholder groups SACEM and ALPA, which filed a complaint against Liberty Land with the French authorities in 2010.

Liberty Land

In May 2011 and alongside complaints from police that the people behind Liberty Land had taken extreme measures to hide themselves away, authorities arrested several men linked to the site in Marseille, near Le Havre, and in the Paris suburb of Montreuil.

Despite the men facing a possible five years in jail and fines of up to $700,000, the inquiry dragged on for nearly seven years. The trial of its alleged operators, now aged between 29 and 36-years-old, finally went ahead January 30 in Rennes.

The men faced charges that they unlawfully helped to distribute movies, TV series, games, software, music albums and e-books without permission from rightsholders. In court, one defended the site as being just like Google.

“For me, we had the same role as Google,” he said. “We were an SEO site. There is a difference between what we were doing and the distribution of pirated copies on the street.”

According to the prosecution, the site made considerable revenues from advertising, estimated at more than 300,000 euros between January 2009 and May 2011. The site’s two main administrators reportedly established an offshore company in the British Virgin Islands and a bank account in Latvia where they deposited between 100,000 and 150,000 euros each.

The prosecutor demanded fines for the former site admins and sentences of between six and 12 months in prison. Last week the Rennes Criminal Court rendered its decision, sentencing the four men to suspended sentences of between two and three months. More than 176,000 euros generated by the site was also confiscated by the Court.

While the men will no doubt be relieved that this extremely long case has reached a conclusion of sorts, it’s not over yet. 20minutes reports that the claims for damages filed by copyright groups including SACEM won’t be decided until September and they are significant, totaling 60 million euros.

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

Message Filtering Operators for Numeric Matching, Prefix Matching, and Blacklisting in Amazon SNS

Post Syndicated from Christie Gifrin original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/compute/message-filtering-operators-for-numeric-matching-prefix-matching-and-blacklisting-in-amazon-sns/

This blog was contributed by Otavio Ferreira, Software Development Manager for Amazon SNS

Message filtering simplifies the overall pub/sub messaging architecture by offloading message filtering logic from subscribers, as well as message routing logic from publishers. The initial launch of message filtering provided a basic operator that was based on exact string comparison. For more information, see Simplify Your Pub/Sub Messaging with Amazon SNS Message Filtering.

Today, AWS is announcing an additional set of filtering operators that bring even more power and flexibility to your pub/sub messaging use cases.

Message filtering operators

Amazon SNS now supports both numeric and string matching. Specifically, string matching operators allow for exact, prefix, and “anything-but” comparisons, while numeric matching operators allow for exact and range comparisons, as outlined below. Numeric matching operators work for values between -10e9 and +10e9 inclusive, with five digits of accuracy right of the decimal point.

  • Exact matching on string values (Whitelisting): Subscription filter policy   {"sport": ["rugby"]} matches message attribute {"sport": "rugby"} only.
  • Anything-but matching on string values (Blacklisting): Subscription filter policy {"sport": [{"anything-but": "rugby"}]} matches message attributes such as {"sport": "baseball"} and {"sport": "basketball"} and {"sport": "football"} but not {"sport": "rugby"}
  • Prefix matching on string values: Subscription filter policy {"sport": [{"prefix": "bas"}]} matches message attributes such as {"sport": "baseball"} and {"sport": "basketball"}
  • Exact matching on numeric values: Subscription filter policy {"balance": [{"numeric": ["=", 301.5]}]} matches message attributes {"balance": 301.500} and {"balance": 3.015e2}
  • Range matching on numeric values: Subscription filter policy {"balance": [{"numeric": ["<", 0]}]} matches negative numbers only, and {"balance": [{"numeric": [">", 0, "<=", 150]}]} matches any positive number up to 150.

As usual, you may apply the “AND” logic by appending multiple keys in the subscription filter policy, and the “OR” logic by appending multiple values for the same key, as follows:

  • AND logic: Subscription filter policy {"sport": ["rugby"], "language": ["English"]} matches only messages that carry both attributes {"sport": "rugby"} and {"language": "English"}
  • OR logic: Subscription filter policy {"sport": ["rugby", "football"]} matches messages that carry either the attribute {"sport": "rugby"} or {"sport": "football"}

Message filtering operators in action

Here’s how this new set of filtering operators works. The following example is based on a pharmaceutical company that develops, produces, and markets a variety of prescription drugs, with research labs located in Asia Pacific and Europe. The company built an internal procurement system to manage the purchasing of lab supplies (for example, chemicals and utensils), office supplies (for example, paper, folders, and markers) and tech supplies (for example, laptops, monitors, and printers) from global suppliers.

This distributed system is composed of the four following subsystems:

  • A requisition system that presents the catalog of products from suppliers, and takes orders from buyers
  • An approval system for orders targeted to Asia Pacific labs
  • Another approval system for orders targeted to European labs
  • A fulfillment system that integrates with shipping partners

As shown in the following diagram, the company leverages AWS messaging services to integrate these distributed systems.

  • Firstly, an SNS topic named “Orders” was created to take all orders placed by buyers on the requisition system.
  • Secondly, two Amazon SQS queues, named “Lab-Orders-AP” and “Lab-Orders-EU” (for Asia Pacific and Europe respectively), were created to backlog orders that are up for review on the approval systems.
  • Lastly, an SQS queue named “Common-Orders” was created to backlog orders that aren’t related to lab supplies, which can already be picked up by shipping partners on the fulfillment system.

The company also uses AWS Lambda functions to automatically process lab supply orders that don’t require approval or which are invalid.

In this example, because different types of orders have been published to the SNS topic, the subscribing endpoints have had to set advanced filter policies on their SNS subscriptions, to have SNS automatically filter out orders they can’t deal with.

As depicted in the above diagram, the following five filter policies have been created:

  • The SNS subscription that points to the SQS queue “Lab-Orders-AP” sets a filter policy that matches lab supply orders, with a total value greater than $1,000, and that target Asia Pacific labs only. These more expensive transactions require an approver to review orders placed by buyers.
  • The SNS subscription that points to the SQS queue “Lab-Orders-EU” sets a filter policy that matches lab supply orders, also with a total value greater than $1,000, but that target European labs instead.
  • The SNS subscription that points to the Lambda function “Lab-Preapproved” sets a filter policy that only matches lab supply orders that aren’t as expensive, up to $1,000, regardless of their target lab location. These orders simply don’t require approval and can be automatically processed.
  • The SNS subscription that points to the Lambda function “Lab-Cancelled” sets a filter policy that only matches lab supply orders with total value of $0 (zero), regardless of their target lab location. These orders carry no actual items, obviously need neither approval nor fulfillment, and as such can be automatically canceled.
  • The SNS subscription that points to the SQS queue “Common-Orders” sets a filter policy that blacklists lab supply orders. Hence, this policy matches only office and tech supply orders, which have a more streamlined fulfillment process, and require no approval, regardless of price or target location.

After the company finished building this advanced pub/sub architecture, they were then able to launch their internal procurement system and allow buyers to begin placing orders. The diagram above shows six example orders published to the SNS topic. Each order contains message attributes that describe the order, and cause them to be filtered in a different manner, as follows:

  • Message #1 is a lab supply order, with a total value of $15,700 and targeting a research lab in Singapore. Because the value is greater than $1,000, and the location “Asia-Pacific-Southeast” matches the prefix “Asia-Pacific-“, this message matches the first SNS subscription and is delivered to SQS queue “Lab-Orders-AP”.
  • Message #2 is a lab supply order, with a total value of $1,833 and targeting a research lab in Ireland. Because the value is greater than $1,000, and the location “Europe-West” matches the prefix “Europe-“, this message matches the second SNS subscription and is delivered to SQS queue “Lab-Orders-EU”.
  • Message #3 is a lab supply order, with a total value of $415. Because the value is greater than $0 and less than $1,000, this message matches the third SNS subscription and is delivered to Lambda function “Lab-Preapproved”.
  • Message #4 is a lab supply order, but with a total value of $0. Therefore, it only matches the fourth SNS subscription, and is delivered to Lambda function “Lab-Cancelled”.
  • Messages #5 and #6 aren’t lab supply orders actually; one is an office supply order, and the other is a tech supply order. Therefore, they only match the fifth SNS subscription, and are both delivered to SQS queue “Common-Orders”.

Although each message only matched a single subscription, each was tested against the filter policy of every subscription in the topic. Hence, depending on which attributes are set on the incoming message, the message might actually match multiple subscriptions, and multiple deliveries will take place. Also, it is important to bear in mind that subscriptions with no filter policies catch every single message published to the topic, as a blank filter policy equates to a catch-all behavior.


Amazon SNS allows for both string and numeric filtering operators. As explained in this post, string operators allow for exact, prefix, and “anything-but” comparisons, while numeric operators allow for exact and range comparisons. These advanced filtering operators bring even more power and flexibility to your pub/sub messaging functionality and also allow you to simplify your architecture further by removing even more logic from your subscribers.

Message filtering can be implemented easily with existing AWS SDKs by applying message and subscription attributes across all SNS supported protocols (Amazon SQS, AWS Lambda, HTTP, SMS, email, and mobile push). SNS filtering operators for numeric matching, prefix matching, and blacklisting are available now in all AWS Regions, for no extra charge.

To experiment with these new filtering operators yourself, and continue learning, try the 10-minute Tutorial Filter Messages Published to Topics. For more information, see Filtering Messages with Amazon SNS in the SNS documentation.

Backblaze Cuts B2 Download Price In Half

Post Syndicated from Ahin Thomas original https://www.backblaze.com/blog/backblaze-b2-drops-download-price-in-half/

Backblaze B2 downloads now cost 50% less
Backblaze is pleased to announce that, effective immediately, we are reducing the price of Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage downloads by 50%. This means that B2 download pricing drops from $0.02 to $0.01 per GB. As always, the first gigabyte of data downloaded each day remains free.

If some of this sounds familiar, that’s because a little under a year ago, we dropped our download price from $0.05 to $0.02. While that move solidified our position as the affordability leader in the high performance cloud storage space, we continue to innovate on our platform and are excited to provide this additional value to our customers.

This price reduction applies immediately to all existing and new customers. In keeping with Backblaze’s overall approach to providing services, there are no tiers or minimums. It’s automatic and it starts today.

Why Is Backblaze Lowering What Is Already The Industry’s Lowest Price?

Because it makes cloud storage more useful for more people.

When we decided to use Backblaze B2 as our cloud storage service, their download pricing at the time enabled us to offer our broadcasters unlimited audio uploads so they can upload past decades of preaching to our extensive library for streaming and downloading. With Backblaze cutting the bandwidth prices 50% to just one penny a gigabyte, we are excited about offering much higher quality video. — Ian Wagner, Senior Developer, Sermon Audio

Since our founding in 2007, Backblaze’s mission has been to make storing data astonishingly easy and affordable. We have a well documented, relentless pursuit of lowering storage costs — it starts with our storage pods and runs through everything we do. Today, we have over 500 petabytes of customer data stored. B2’s storage pricing already being 14 that of Amazon’s S3 has certainly helped us get there. Today’s pricing reduction puts our download pricing 15 that of S3. The “affordable” part of our story is well established.

I’d like to take a moment to discuss the “easy” part. Our industry has historically done a poor job of putting ourselves in our customers’ shoes. When customers are faced with the decision of where to put their data, price is certainly a factor. But it’s not just the price of storage that customers must consider. There’s a cost to download your data. The business need for providers to charge for this is reasonable — downloading data requires bandwidth, and bandwidth costs money. We discussed that in a prior post on the Cost of Cloud Storage.

But there’s a difference between the costs of bandwidth and what the industry is charging today. There’s a joke that some of the storage clouds are competing to become “Hotel California” — you can check out anytime you want, but your data can never leave.1 Services that make it expensive to restore data or place time lag impediments to data access are reducing the usefulness of your data. Customers should not have to wonder if they can afford to access their own data.

When replacing LTO with StarWind VTL and cloud storage, our customers had only one concern left: the possible cost of data retrieval. Backblaze just wiped this concern out of the way by lowering that cost to just one penny per gig. — Max Kolomyeytsev, Director of Product Management, StarWind

Many businesses have not yet been able to back up their data to the cloud because of the costs. Many of those companies are forced to continue backing up to tape. That tape is an inefficient means for data storage is clear. Solution providers like StarWind VTL specialize in helping businesses move off of antiquated tape libraries. However, as Max Kolomyeytsev, Director of Product Management at StarWind points out, “When replacing LTO with StarWind VTL and cloud storage our customers had only one concern left: the possible cost of data retrieval. Backblaze just wiped this concern out of the way by lowering that cost to just one penny per gig.”

Customers that have already adopted the cloud often are forced to make difficult tradeoffs between data they want to access and the cost associated with that access. Surrendering the use of your own data defeats many of the benefits that “the cloud” brings in the first place. Because of B2’s download price, Ian Wagner, a Senior Developer at Sermon Audio, is able to lower his costs and expand his product offering. “When we decided to use Backblaze B2 as our cloud storage service, their download pricing at the time enabled us to offer our broadcasters unlimited audio uploads so they can upload past decades of preaching to our extensive library for streaming and downloading. With Backblaze cutting the bandwidth prices 50% to just one penny a gigabyte, we are excited about offering much higher quality video.”

Better Download Pricing Also Helps Third Party Applications Deliver Customer Solutions

Many organizations use third party applications or devices to help manage their workflows. Those applications are the hub for customers getting their data to where it needs to go. Leaders in verticals like Media Asset Management, Server & NAS Backup, and Enterprise Storage have already chosen to integrate with B2.

With Backblaze lowering their download price to an amazing one penny a gigabyte, our CloudNAS is even a better fit for photographers, videographers and business owners who need to have their files at their fingertips, with an easy, reliable, low cost way to use Backblaze for unlimited primary storage and active archive. — Paul Tian, CEO, Morro Data

For Paul Tian, founder of Ready NAS and CEO of Morro Data, reasonable download pricing also helps his company better serve its customers. “With Backblaze lowering their download price to an amazing one penny a gigabyte, our CloudNAS is even a better fit for photographers, videographers and business owners who need to have their files at their fingertips, with an easy, reliable, low cost way to use Backblaze for unlimited primary storage and active archive.”

If you use an application that hasn’t yet integrated with B2, please ask your provider to add B2 Cloud Storage and mention the application in the comments below.


How Do the Major Cloud Storage Providers Compare on Pricing?

Not only is Backblaze B2 storage 14 the price of Amazon S3, Google Cloud, or Azure, but our download pricing is now 15 their price as well.

Pricing Tier Backblaze B2 Amazon S3 Microsoft Azure Google Cloud
First 1 TB $0.01 $0.09 $0.09 $0.12
Next 9 TB $0.01 $0.09 $0.09 $0.11
Next 40 TB $0.01 $0.085 $0.09 $0.08
Next 100 TB $0.01 $0.07 $0.07 $0.08
Next 350 TB+ $0.01 $0.05 $0.05 $0.08

Using the chart above, let’s compute a few examples of download costs…

Data Backblaze B2 Amazon S3 Microsoft Azure Google Cloud
1 terabyte $10 $90 $90 $120
10 terabytes $100 $900 $900 $1,200
50 terabytes $500 $4,300 $4,500 $4,310
500 terabytes $5,000 $28,800 $29,000 $40,310
Not only is Backblaze B2 pricing dramatically lower cost, it’s also simple — one price for any amount of data downloaded to anywhere. In comparison, to compute the cost of downloading 500 TB of data with S3 you start with the following formula:
(($0.09 * 10) + ($0.085 * 40) + ($0.07 * 100) + ($0.05 * 350)) * 1,000
Want to see this comparison for the amount of data you manage?
Use our cloud storage calculator.

Customers Want to Avoid Vendor Lock In

Halving the price of downloads is a crazy move — the kind of crazy our customers will be excited about. When using our Transmit 5 app on the Mac to upload their data to B2 Cloud Storage, our users can sleep soundly knowing they’ll be getting a truly affordable price when they need to restore that data. Cool beans, Backblaze. — Cabel Sasser, Co-Founder, Panic

As the cloud storage industry grows, customers are increasingly concerned with getting locked in to one vendor. No business wants to be fully dependent on one vendor for anything. In addition, customers want multiple copies of their data to mitigate against a vendor outage or other issues.

Many vendors offer the ability for customers to replicate data across “regions.” This enables customers to store data in two physical locations of the customer’s choosing. Of course, customers pay for storing both copies of the data and for the data transfer between regions.

At 1¢ per GB, transferring data out of Backblaze is more affordable than transferring data between most other vendor regions. For example, if a customer is storing data in Amazon S3’s Northern California region (US West) and wants to replicate data to S3 in Northern Virginia (US East), she will pay 2¢ per GB to simply move the data.

However, if that same customer wanted to replicate data from Backblaze B2 to S3 in Northern Virginia, she would pay 1¢ per GB to move the data. She can achieve her replication strategy while also mitigating against vendor risk — all while cutting the bandwidth bill by 50%. Of course, this is also before factoring the savings on her storage bill as B2 storage is 14 of the price of S3.

How Is Backblaze Doing This?

Simple. We just changed our pricing table and updated our website.

The longer answer is that the cost of bandwidth is a function of a few factors, including how it’s being used and the volume of usage. With another year of data for B2, over a decade of experience in the cloud storage industry, and data growth exceeding 100 PB per quarter, we know we can sustainably offer this pricing to our customers; we also know how better download pricing can make our customers and partners more effective in their work. So it is an easy call to make.

Our pricing is simple. Storage is $0.005/GB/Month, Download costs are $0.01/GB. There are no tiers or minimums and you can get started any time you wish.

Our desire is to provide a great service at a fair price. We’re proud to be the affordability leader in the Cloud Storage space and hope you’ll give us the opportunity to show you what B2 Cloud Storage can enable for you.

Enjoy the service and I’d love to hear what this price reduction does for you in the comments below…or, if you are attending NAB this year, come by to visit and tell us in person!

1 For those readers who don’t get the Eagles reference there, please click here…I promise you won’t regret the next 7 minutes of your life.

The post Backblaze Cuts B2 Download Price In Half appeared first on Backblaze Blog | Cloud Storage & Cloud Backup.

PipeCam: the low-cost underwater camera

Post Syndicated from Alex Bate original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/pipecam-low-cost-underwater-camera/

Fred Fourie is building a low-cost underwater camera for shallow deployment, and his prototypes are already returning fascinating results. You can build your own PipeCam, and explore the undiscovered depths with a Raspberry Pi and off-the-shelf materials.

PipeCam underwater Raspberry Pi Camera

Materials and build

In its latest iteration, PipeCam consists of a 110mm PVC waste pipe with fittings and a 10mm perspex window at one end. Previous prototypes have also used plumbing materials for the body, but this latest version employs heavy-duty parts that deliver the good seal this project needs.

PipeCam underwater Raspberry Pi Camera

In testing, Fred and a friend determined that the rig could withstand 4 bar of pressure. This is enough to protect the tech inside at the depths Fred plans for, and a significant performance improvement on previous prototypes.

PipeCam underwater Raspberry Pi Camera
PipeCam underwater Raspberry Pi Camera

Inside the pipe are a Raspberry Pi 3, a camera module, and a real-time clock add-on board. A 2.4Ah rechargeable lead acid battery powers the set-up via a voltage regulator.

Using foam and fibreboard, Fred made a mount that holds everything in place and fits snugly inside the pipe.

PipeCam underwater Raspberry Pi Camera
PipeCam underwater Raspberry Pi Camera
PipeCam underwater Raspberry Pi Camera

PipeCam will be subject to ocean currents, not to mention the attentions of sea creatures, so it’s essential to make sure that everything is held securely inside the pipe – something Fred has learned from previous versions of the project.


It’s straightforward to write time-lapse code for a Raspberry Pi using Python and one of our free online resources, but Fred has more ambitious plans for PipeCam. As well as a Python script to control the camera, Fred made a web page to display the health of the device. It shows battery level and storage availability, along with the latest photo taken by the camera. He also made adjustments to the camera’s exposure settings using raspistill. You can see the effect in this side-by-side comparison of the default python-picam image and the edited raspistill one.

PipeCam underwater Raspberry Pi Camera
PipeCam underwater Raspberry Pi Camera

Underwater testing

Fred has completed the initial first test of PipeCam, running the device under water for an hour in two-metre deep water off the coast near his home. And the results? Well, see for yourself:

PipeCam underwater Raspberry Pi Camera
PipeCam underwater Raspberry Pi Camera
PipeCam underwater Raspberry Pi Camera

PipeCam is a work in progress, and you can read Fred’s build log at the project’s Hackaday.io page, so be sure to follow along.

The post PipeCam: the low-cost underwater camera appeared first on Raspberry Pi.

Petoi: a Pi-powered kitty cat

Post Syndicated from Alex Bate original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/petoi-a-pi-powered-kitty-cat/

A robot pet is the dream of many a child, thanks to creatures such as K9, Doctor Who’s trusted companion, and the Tamagotchi, bleeping nightmare of parents worldwide. But both of these pale in comparison (sorry, K9) to Petoi, the walking, meowing, live-streaming cat from maker Rongzhong Li.

Petoi: OpenCat Demo

Mentioned on IEEE Spectrum: https://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/humanoids/video-friday-boston-dynamics-spotmini-opencat-robot-engineered-arts-mesmer-uncanny-valley More reads on Hackster: https://www.hackster.io/petoi/opencat-845129 优酷: http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzQxMzA1NjM0OA==.html?spm=a2h3j.8428770.3416059.1 We are developing programmable and highly maneuverable quadruped robots for STEM education and AI-enhanced services. Its compact and bionic design makes it the only affordable consumer robot that mimics various mammal gaits and reacts to surroundings.


Not only have cats conquered the internet, they also have a paw firmly in the door of many makerspaces and spare rooms — rooms such as the one belonging to Petoi’s owner/maker, Rongzhong Li, who has been working on this feline creation since he bought his first Raspberry Pi.

Petoi Raspberry Pi Robot Cat

Petoi in its current state – apple for scale in lieu of banana

Petoi is just like any other housecat: it walks, it plays, its ribcage doubles as a digital xylophone — but what makes Petoi so special is Li’s use of the project as a platform for study.

I bought my first Raspberry Pi in June 2016 to learn coding hardware. This robot Petoi served as a playground for learning all the components in a regular Raspberry Pi beginner kit. I started with craft sticks, then switched to 3D-printed frames for optimized performance and morphology.

Various iterations of Petoi have housed various bits of tech, 3D-printed parts, and software, so while it’s impossible to list the exact ingredients you’d need to create your own version of Petoi, a few components remain at its core.

Petoi Raspberry Pi Robot Cat — skeleton prototype

An early version of Petoi, housed inside a plastic toy helicopter frame

A Raspberry Pi lives within Petoi and acts as its brain, relaying commands to an Arduino that controls movement. Li explains:

The Pi takes no responsibility for controlling detailed limb movements. It focuses on more serious questions, such as “Who am I? Where do I come from? Where am I going?” It generates mind and sends string commands to the Arduino slave.

Li is currently working on two functional prototypes: a mini version for STEM education, and a larger version for use within the field of AI research.

A cat and a robot cat walking upstairs Petoi Raspberry Pi Robot Cat

You can read more about the project, including details on the various interactions of Petoi, on the hackster.io project page.

Not quite ready to commit to a fully grown robot pet for your home? Why not code your own pixel pet with our free learning resource? And while you’re looking through our projects, check out our other pet-themed tutorials such as the Hamster party cam, the Infrared bird box, and the Cat meme generator.

The post Petoi: a Pi-powered kitty cat appeared first on Raspberry Pi.

До Париж и назад… с влак (първа част)

Post Syndicated from Selene original https://nookofselene.wordpress.com/2018/02/24/do-paris-i-nazad-s-vlak-1-chast/

Месецът беше октомври – месецът за сбъдването на една мечта. За едно невероятно приключение, наречено пътуване до Париж с влак (или по-скоро с много влакове, най-различни).
Мечтая си от малка да видя Париж. Когато времето дойде, назря и въпросът как да стигнем до там? След като заминавахме за Западна Европа, решихме, че искаме да видим още от нея, освен крайната точка на пътуването си. Затова избрахме най-добрия за нас начин за това – пътуване с влак.
dsc07508Влакът има много преимущества за мен и дава възможност за разглеждане на местата, през които преминава, повече от всеки друг транспорт – освен, разбира се, ако си с личен автомобил и можеш да спираш където и когато ти скимне лично на теб. Тогава обаче имаш други грижи. За разлика от самолета, от влака можеш да видиш всичко. Много по-комфортен е от автобус, с много повече пространство, възможност за разходки и т.н.
Колкото пъти споменавах на приятели с какво ще пътувам, бях посрещана от изумление и съчувствие. Има някаква преобладаваща настройка у нас срещу влаковете като тип транспорт, настройка, която не споделям и от години си пътувам с българските навсякъде из страната, където ми щукне (и където вървят). Да, много от влаковете ни са стари и прашни (макар че в последните 1-2 години пътувам и в доста нови и чисти), по-бавни, с невинаги удобно разписание. Колкото пъти обаче съм си преценявала плюсовете и минусите спрямо автобусите, плюсовете са били повече. А когато ми се е налагало да взимам автобус по липса на влак – например за морето в Гърция – не ми е доставяло особено удоволствие и сравнението никога не е било в полза на автобуса.
Та в общи линии избрахме любимия вид транспорт за мечтаното пътуване – не пътуване, ами цяло пътешествие… но и дотам ще стигна.
Когато се пътува с влак в чужбина, трябва да се имdsc08777ат предвид няколко неща. Първото и най-важно е, че, за разлика от в България, на запад това не е по-евтиният, а по-скъпият вид транспорт. За да не му излезе много скъпо на човек и да спести маса пари, е хубаво да си купи билетите отрано – при нас около месец предварително ни спести около 50% от цената и нещата се подредиха добре.
Второто е, че

пряк влак София – Париж няма.  🙂

Така че прекачванията са задължителна част от изживяването – и то във влакове на различни железници.
Как се организира такова нещо? Лично ние отидохме в офиса на БДЖ в подлеза на НДК. Един от популярните стереотипи е, че служителите на БДЖ са дебили, които си бъркат в носа, не си разбират от работата и грам не им пука за клиентите им. Е, за пореден път се убедих, че реалността е точно обратната. Служителите, при които отидохме, не само си разбират от работата, не само им пука за клиентите, ами и са страшно компетентни, услужливи и информирани хора. Те имат връзка с всички железници в Европа и в общи линии ни дадоха варианти за пътуването ни – с различни маршрути, часове, дължини на престой, типове билети и тарифи, всичко.
За различните влакове вземаха превес различни наши изисквания – цената на билета, типа спални места, времето на престой на дадена гара, скоростта на движение и т.н. И се получи един уникален маршрут, идеален конкретно за нас. Разбира се, имахме по-голям избор (и по-ниски цени), защото до заминаването оставаше цял месец.
Маршрутът на отиване: унгарски влак София – Будапеща спален вагон, който се трансформира в седалков през деня; престой час и петдесет минути в Будапеща; спален унгарски влак, но от друг тип (по-модерен) Будапеща – Мюнхен; три сутрешни часа в Мюнхен, немски влак Мюнхен – Щутгарт, шест минути по-късно – немски влак стрела Щутгарт – Париж. Влак стрела, да! 🙂
На връщане: швейцарски влак стрела Париж – Цюрих, пет часа престой в града, спален унгарски Цюрих – Будапеща, цял ден престой и обикаляне на Будапеща, а оттам – руски спален влак до София. Като цяло повечето свободно време за разходки из градовете остана за навръщане, защото така ни съвпадаха най-удобно влаковете, а и на отиване превес взе нетърпението да се стигне до Париж. 🙂

Пътуване с приключение

Бяхме предупредени, че руският влак често закъснява – затова и на отиване пътувахме не с него през Белград, а с унгарския през Видин. Хубавото при предварително закупените по този начин билети е, че ако някой влак по „веригата“ закъснее и не успеем да хванем следващия, железницата, която ни е забавила, ще ни върне всички пари – вкл. за новите билети. Разбира се, това доста би объркало плановете ни, затова избрахме руския влак само за връщане, когато не гоним никакви връзки.
Вагонът, в който се качихме, наистина ме впечатли – много ми заприлича на стария спален вагон, в който за първи път пътувах с влак в живота си, на тригодишна възраст. С килимите и пердетата, дори с легла от чисто дърво! Древен и същевременно искрящо чист и, вижда се, поддържан с пари и мерак. Явно не най-луксозният вариант, но както се оказа, пътувахме съвсем сами в него и това не беше еднократен случай – българите просто не пътуват с влак (понастоящем този влак е спрян именно поради ниската посещаемост).

Всичко прекрасно, напуснахме Видин с точно 5 минути закъснение и бяхме уверени, че нямаме проблем за Будапеща. Пътят продължи спокойно, през деня започнахме да се наслаждаваме на красиви гледки – там, където нямаше разпадащи се ръждясали съоръжения съвсем като в България. По някои неща си приличаме със съседката. :)) Иначе, най-красиви в Румъния бяха горите, както и времето, през което ЖП линията се движеше успоредно на един от притоците на Дунава.

Но в Румъния унгарският влак… започна да закъснява. И да закъснява. Час до границата с Унгария, където нещо запецнахме.
Отидох при шафнера на вагона (който едва се оправяше с английския, но въпреки това се разбирахме чудесно) с билета от следващия влак и го попитах ще стигнем ли навреме до Будапеща. Оказа се, че се очаква не само да не наваксаме закъснението, а то да се увеличи. Човекът извика началник влака – той говореше само унгарски и немски, но внимателно разгледа билетите ни, нареди да изчакаме и изчезна из вагоните.
Затаили дъх от тревога, зачакахме. След известно време той се върна и строго нареди на шафнера да ни съобщи нещо, усмихна ни се щастливо и пак изчезна. Оказа се, че

следващият влак ще ни изчака.

За наш щастлив шок влакът за Мюнхен чака 22 минути на гара Будапеща – Келети (една от четирите будапещенски гари) наша милост + още 2-3 души да пристигнем, да минем заедно с началник влака си на бегом пероните и да се качим. 🙂 Така на унгарската железница не й се наложи да ни обезщетява, а ние не изпуснахме безценно време и не объркахме плановете си.
Вътре за първи път попаднах в модерен европейски влак и онемях. Цветовете, дизайна, атмосферата, удобството… Купетата бяха кушет, т.е. шест легла по три на стена, но можеш да си платиш да си в купе с четири легла. Ако купуваш билет отрано, надценката не е голяма, а удобството си е. Тези купета са малко по-високи от българските, а прозорецът обхваща почти цялата стена и дава допълнително усещане за простор. Леглата са малко по-тесни от това, на което сме свикнали в нашите вагони, но въпреки това са удобни. Единственото, което не ми хареса, бе, че беше наистина студено, но може би именно благодарение на по-ниската температура спах много добре и в Мюнхен се събудих отпочинала.

Оттук нататък закъснения нямаше. Дори подранихме с пет минути. Мюнхен най-малко разгледахме от всички места, на които спирахме, защото нещо се размотахме из гарата, а после дойде моментът за немския влак.

За разлика от българите,

германците явно пътуват много с влакове.

Преброих 13 дълги вагона на влака Мюнхен – Щутгарт, може и да са били повече, но багажите тежаха, а ние бързахме да намерим местата си. Вътре – фантастично! И пълно. На екранчетата над местата ни пишеше докъде сме. Като гарата ни наближи, изникна дестинацията на следващите пътници, които ще заемат местата ни.
dsc07574А Германия… невероятно е да я гледаш, дори през прозореца. По принцип влаковете, за разлика от автобусите, се движат изключително гладко и равномерно (особено немските!), а светът се плъзга около теб като панорама. Допускат да ставаш, да се въртиш по коридорите, да обикаляш и снимаш… макар че има един момент, в който впечатленията са толкова силни, че забравяш за фотоапарата, защото просто искаш да усетиш света около себе си, без да мислиш за снимки.
Та, Германия… Разбира се, много различна архитектура. Разбира се, много различна природа. През сутрешните часове дърветата бяха обхванати от лека мъгла, която им придаваше магичен вид – като полека изпълзяващи от вълшебна пелена. Меки хълмове, меки дървета и меки храсти сред меката наситенозелена трева. Когато сред растителността имаше къщи, бяха скупчени близо едни до други и имаха високи керемидени покриви. В градските райони освен пословичната немска подреденост ми направиха впечатление и многото графити. Такъв имаше и на влака ни. 🙂

Шест минути на Щутгарт

По разписание най-кризисното ни прекачване беше на гара Щутгарт, защото имахме за него само шест минути. От БДЖ ни бяха уверили, че немските железници заковават минутата и няма как да закъснеем, а също така и че всичко на гарите им е така организирано, че няма губене. Още купувайки билетите, знаехме на кой перон ще спрем и до кой трябва да стигнем.
Все пак просто за всеки случай прекосихме тичешком наистина краткото разстояние и имахме dsc07576време да се почудим колко дълъг е и този влак… влакът стрела за Париж!
Той, разбира се, отново беше супермодерен като предишния. Вагоните бяха общи, а не разделени на купета, а в центъра им имаше екран, на който течеше последователно на немски, френски и и английски език интересна информация за пътуването, вкл. и скоростта на влака. А тя във втората половина на пътя, на френска земя, достигна

318 км/ч

Четири (?) часа на изумление, през които прекосихме невероятно много земя, гори, реки, езера, градове и села, спирахме на няколко гари, сред които и в Страсбург, където пак се сетих да извадя апарата.
Прекосихме Франция за отрицателно време и пристигнахме на гара Paris Est точно навреме…

Следва продължение…

Pirate Site Admin Sentenced to Two Years Prison & €83.6 Million Damages

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-site-admin-sentenced-to-two-years-prison-e83-6-million-damages-180221/

Way back in 2011, Streamiz was reported to be the second most popular pirate streaming site in France with around 250,000 visitors per day. The site didn’t host its own content but linked to movies elsewhere.

This prominent status soon attracted the attention of various entertainment companies including the National Federation of Film Distributors (FNDF) which filed a complaint against the site back in 2009.

Investigators eventually traced the presumed operator of the site to a location in the Hauts-de-Seine region of France. In October 2011 he was arrested leaving his Montrouge home in the southern Parisian suburbs. His backpack reportedly contained socks stuffed with almost 30,000 euros in cash.

The man was ordered to appear before the investigating judge but did not attend. He also failed to appear during his sentencing this Monday, which may or may not have been a good thing, depending on one’s perspective.

In his absence, the now 41-year-old was found guilty of copyright infringement offenses and handed one of the toughest sentences ever in a case of its type.

According to an AFP report, when the authorities can catch up with him the man must not only serve two years in prison but also pay a staggering 83.6 million euros in damages to Disney, 20th Century Fox, Warner Bros and SACEM, the Society of Authors, Composers and Music Publishers.

Streamiz is now closed but at its peak offered around 40,000 movies to millions of users per month. In total, the site stood accused of around 500,000,000 infringements, earning its operator an estimated 150,000 euros in advertising revenue over a two year period.

“This is a clear case of commercial counterfeiting” based on a “very structured” system, David El Sayegh, Secretary General of SACEM, told AFP. His sentence “sends a very clear message: there will be no impunity for pirates,” he added.

With an arrest warrant still outstanding, the former Streamiz admin is now on the run with very few options available to him. Certainly, the 83.6 million euro fine won’t ever be paid but the prison sentence is something he might need to get behind him.

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

Amazon Relational Database Service – Looking Back at 2017

Post Syndicated from Jeff Barr original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-relational-database-service-looking-back-at-2017/

The Amazon RDS team launched nearly 80 features in 2017. Some of them were covered in this blog, others on the AWS Database Blog, and the rest in What’s New or Forum posts. To wrap up my week, I thought it would be worthwhile to give you an organized recap. So here we go!

Certification & Security


Engine Versions & Features

Regional Support

Instance Support

Price Reductions

And That’s a Wrap
I’m pretty sure that’s everything. As you can see, 2017 was quite the year! I can’t wait to see what the team delivers in 2018.



500 Petabytes And Counting

Post Syndicated from Yev original https://www.backblaze.com/blog/500-petabytes-and-counting/

500 Petabytes = 500,000,000 Gigabytes

It seems like only yesterday that we crossed the 350 petabyte mark. It was actually June 2017, but boy have we been growing since. In October 2017 we crossed 400 petabytes. Today, we’re proud to announce we’ve crossed the 500 petabyte mark. That’s a very healthy clip, see for yourself!

Whether you have 50 GB, 500 GB or are just an avid blog reader, thank you for being on this incredible journey with us through the years.

…we’re literally moving at 1,000,000 files per hour.

We’re extremely proud of our track record. Throughout these 11 years we’ve striven to be the simplest, fastest, and most affordable online backup (and now cloud storage) solution available. We’re not just focusing on data ingress, but also adhering to our original goal of making sure that “no one ever loses data again.” How quickly are we restoring data? On average, we’re literally moving at 1,000,000 files per hour.

Even after all these years, one of the most frequent questions asked is, “How has Backblaze maintained such affordable pricing, particularly when the industry continues to move away from unlimited data plans?”

The cloud storage industry is very competitive, with cloud sync, storage, and backup providers leaving the unlimited market every single day: OneDrive, Amazon Cloud Storage, and most recently CrashPlan. Other providers either have tiered pricing (iDrive), or charge almost double or even triple for all the features we provide for our unlimited backup service (Carbonite). So how do we do it?

The answer comes down to our relentless pursuit of lowering costs. Our open-source Backblaze Storage Pods comprise our Backblaze Vaults, and the less expensive and more performant our Storage Pods are, the better the service that we can provide. This all directly translates into the service and pricing we can offer you.

A key part of our service is to be as open as possible with our costs and structure. After all, you are entrusting us with some of your most valuable assets. Still, it is very difficult to find an apples to apples comparison to what our competitors are doing. For example, we can gain some insight from a 2011 interview with Carbonite’s CEO, who gave an interview in which he said Carbonite’s cost of storing a petabyte was $250,000. At the time, our cost to store a petabyte was $76,481 (more on that calculation can be found here and here). If Backblaze’s fundamental cost to store data is one-third that of Carbonite’s, it makes sense that Carbonite’s cost to its customers would be more than Backblaze’s. Today, Backblaze backup is $50/year and Carbonite’s equivalent service is $149.99.

Our continued focus on reducing costs has allowed us to maintain a healthy business. And after accepting customer data for almost 10 years, we sincerely want to thank you all for giving us your trust, and allowing us to protect your important data and memories for you. Here’s to the next 500 petabytes; they’ll be here before we know it.

Update 2/5/18

Since publishing this post, we have posted the latest in our series of Hard Drive Stats, in which we summarize the performance of the hard drives we used in our data centers in 2017 and previously.

The post 500 Petabytes And Counting appeared first on Backblaze Blog | Cloud Storage & Cloud Backup.

[$] Monitoring with Prometheus 2.0

Post Syndicated from corbet original https://lwn.net/Articles/744410/rss

Prometheus is a monitoring tool
built from scratch by SoundCloud in 2012. It works by pulling metrics from
monitored services and storing them in a time series database (TSDB). It
has a powerful query language to inspect that database, create alerts, and
plot basic graphs. Those graphs can then be used to detect anomalies or
trends for (possibly automated) resource provisioning. Prometheus also has
extensive service discovery features and supports high availability

That’s what the brochure says, anyway; let’s see how it works in the hands
of an old grumpy system administrator. I’ll be drawing comparisons
with Munin and Nagios frequently because those are the tools I have
used for over a decade in monitoring Unix clusters.