Jump to content


Member Since 10 Sep 2008
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 12:56 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: This is why the world of humans is becomming a nastier place ... In my honest...

Yesterday, 09:35 AM


And it's the consumer that drove this, people who said hey, I'm willing to take the risk to pay less.



People are willing to take the RESPONSIBILITY to pay less (be on time, or miss out. Self check in, etc etc).

I fly quite regularly, at no point did I see it clearly stated "These cheaper tickets are less likely to 'work' when you want them to"


Yep, we wanted to pay less.

We now have 0 in-terminal baggage handlers, it's all self scan, and self load.

We no longer get free food on flights.

We no longer have 'entertainment' in the terminals (all the 'free kids lounges' or arcade machines are gone to make room for more retail, who pay rent).

Once on the flight, I'm fairly sure they've 'added another row' of seats these days. (I'm single cm's shy of 6ft, and my legs LITERALLY don't fit between a QANTAS economy chair gap, last flight I had to stand for most of it, and sit in business class for landing; I'm not a 'big guy', just made of majority legs. )

All the 'in seat' movies and drop down theater screens are gone, they now rely on you using your own phone\tablet.

Hot towels and free mints for takeoff and landing seem to be gone.


I'm sure I could come up with more....


After all those sacrifices, I'd expect to pay less.

Cutting food, and cutting 100% of your in terminal baggage staff must have been a GREAT saving (to pass on, hint hint).


At no point would 'less reliability' have been what the consumer 'drove' the business toward.

In Topic: Universal Basic Income as a product of an Automated Economy

Yesterday, 09:07 AM

I dont have time to watch it at the moment, but this SOUNDS like it'd be relevant to Bill Gates idea, which I'm all for.

For every machine that replaces a human role, that 'bot' (company) must 'pay' 50% to 75% of the original workers income, to tax.


Use the new found 'extra tax' to lower it for everyone else, or to fund the now unemployed.


Business saves 25%, and government can afford welfare.


I thought it was brilliant.

In Topic: File level Encryption? I'm doing this the hard way....

26 April 2017 - 04:48 PM

and what about the ZFS checksums?  it seems that shouldnt have been a concern.  


i suppose your RAR solution kind of deals with that.  but how are you using it? 


- are you making multiple archives of folders as you go and dumping them to the NAS?

- how does the archive thing work — to make a new backup of a folder do you just somehow update the old .rar?

- any issues with the cryptographic strength of re-using (i assume) the same password?


First of all; https://blake2.net/

There's a decent wiki on it too.


I'm no expert, but from my research, the fact that it's one big file is still a concern; if the hash gets damaged, and it 'fixes my file' Its ALL toast, warm buttery toast.

Well, that 'slice' of it is, which might be on a single drive in the ZPOOL. (it was pointed out above that each 'piece' would need its own checksum)

However, the 'protect archive' feature of RAR5 does fix that somewhat.

Space is NOT something I'm shy on yet, meaning I can take my 400GB archive, apply a 50% "protect this archive" feature, and end up with a 600GB file, which can then handle 50% of its container being corrupted and still be able to be repaired.

In my experience RAR (the old rar4) was ALREADY pretty good at repairing damaged archives, had 3 or 4 'work' (better than 0 in the case of Zips), so this new 'protect' feature is golden.


I'm not making multiple archives, it's a hassle.

It's probably more ideal, however if I'm going to actually USE the backup server, I need it to be 'easy'.

Besides, it's mainly MY data that I'm worried about. 'Media' can usually be replaced. So it's (personal data) already in duplicate on my original PC.


The archive thing? That's a windows feature :)

IIRC, the archive flag is automatically set on ALL files (go into properties, might have to click advanced, there is a checkbox 'file is ready for archiving').

That flag is restored by windows if the file\timestamp is edited. (try it with a notepad file!)

WinRAR now allows you to "remove the archive flag" as it compresses. meaning, only new files will be compressed next time. As it's ignoring the 'non archive' files.

I'm yet to try, but it seems I could just 'add them' to the RAR.

Or, I plan to do a 'full backup' bi-monthly, and a 'Differential' backup using the 'archive'flag monthly; so those will be separate.

Messy if I need to restore, yep, but a copy is a copy, and I'm a single end user.


Cryptographic strength over this whole topic seems spot on.... RAR5 has gone 256bit AES, and unlike zip can encrypt filenames.

I mean my tinfoil hat is still a little bit ruffled by the idea that some secret agency might have a magic bullet into AES, but I'm no mastermind criminal or anything, It's purely a 'paranoia over nothing' scenario that lets me sleep at night.

To reveal to the world that AES is broken, would be a big step to steal my data and falsify a crime, lol.

So even IF AES is breakable, my 'diary', family photos, and CD keys, just aren't worth revealing that :P

In Topic: This is why the world of humans is becomming a nastier place ... In my honest...

26 April 2017 - 12:39 PM



What on earth makes you think airlines do not run on a shoe-string ?


An efficiently well run budget airline, Jetstar actually is a good example, is operating on a margin of between 4 and 6 % in a good year.


Would you run a business on that basis and have that one bad year that sends you to the wall ?


I wouldn't.




Well that's why you're not making profits like this:



Remember, when you're talking BILLIONS, hell even MILLIONS, 1% is a LOT of profit.

Profit is listed after paying things (people included).

In Topic: This is why the world of humans is becomming a nastier place ... In my honest...

26 April 2017 - 11:11 AM


Im of two minds on that one.
Traditionally, you're totally correct.
But in the world of 'yelp', and newspapers loving things like 'customer relations stories' and the fact that they ANNOUNCE IT OVER THE SPEAKERPHONE..... I'm inclined to disagree.
I think being able to advertise "Never leaving a passenger behind" would be much better overall marketing than "Free headphones and extra staff".

If 99% of passengers in Australia never experience being booted off a plane because of overbooking you'd be advertising a benefit of zero perceived value. It would be like advertising "We guarantee you won't be attacked by a llama on any of our domestic flights!"



In this world of viral marketing, that tongue in cheek comment might be onto something...