> The fact he's posting on X to begin with is a warning in itself.
Why so? The counter at the bottom of the post claims that it has been viewed 7.5 million times. I don't know how this translates into individual people; but still, probably a decent reach?
People are there for reach. Politicians, celebrities. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Jeremy Corbyn, Keir Starmer, Kaja Kallas, Ursula von der Leyen... If they don't see a problem, why should the Cloudflare CEO?
Up until yesterday most of us felt the same about "Going into Venezuela and kidnap the president of a sovereign nation" but here we are. Sure, it was also not out of nowhere, but I don't think anyone thought Trump needed such an abrasive distraction from the internal conflicts in the nation.
> to a point where USA might find it's all alone in the world.
I think the US might be misleading itself if it doesn't realize that it already is. We still care for the people, but the government of the US has truly shown that it cannot be an ally today, and the rest of the world already realize this, seems the US is the last to understand it.
I don't mean to downplay how terrible the current US administration is, but removing political leaders in Latin America has been a USA tradition and nobody really considers it odd. The US invading an allied country hasn't happened often.
Truly this attack on foreign soil is something without precedents for the USA. What's next, destabilize entire regions? Cause wars? Fund terrorists? Military occupation?
No matter what, let's not forget Ukraine is being attacked by evil Russia.
> Truly this attack on foreign soil is something without precedents for the USA. What's next, destabilize entire regions? Cause wars? Fund terrorists? Military occupation?
All those things have lots of precedent for the USA.
Oh. Yep. I’m just so used to HN seriously thinking Trump is some new kind of evil unleashed on the world— as opposed to just more of the same thing, wrapped up in a tackier and cruder wrapper— that I only read the first sentence and replied. That’s me being a bad HN denizen for the day.
But on the other hand, Trump's treatment of Europe so far – especially in his second term – would be entirely shocking to the sensibilities of any westerner anno 2015. I'm not so sure the US isn't already steaming willingly towards lonesomeness and antagonizing all of its former friends.
You’re right, but it’s like that kid at school who’s a bully and a d*ck but everyone tolerates and stays kinda friendly with because they’re a bit scared of him, and his parents have the best house for parties.
The US can probably go a lot further than they currently have, before a meaningful coalition of meaningful countries will do anything significant —even just economically or diplomatically— against them in return.
Trump has nothing to lose. He's almost 80, doesn't care for Europe or NATO, and is clearly desperate to be remembered for something significant.
Kidnapping Maduro doesn't really ensure his name in the history books. But if he annexes Greenland and/or Canada, then he's the next Jefferson or Jackson.
He might even rename Greenland+Canada to Trumpland.
> Kidnapping Maduro doesn't really ensure his name in the history books.
I genuinely think this one got them exactly what they wanted. They felt like manly men doing manly men things. Figuratively speaking, they got off on it, stroke egos, felt the excitement of watching the attack and feeling like being the ones who made it.
All those involved are very emotional guys. Not emotional as in liking romance, but emotional as in "driven by feelings and emotions". This made them feel good and manly.
I can't think of a realistic, non-cynical reason that doesn't begin and end with "oil" for even looking funny at Venezuela. The whole "drugs 'r bad" thing doesn't wash.
There are a couple of things I can think of. There's the human rights stuff with torture chambers and a third of the population leaving which doesn't seem to bother Trump but the Venezuelans don't much like.
Gotta be honest: "the human rights stuff with torture chambers" sounds like a bonus to a Trumpista. MAGA is not known for its progressive stance on human rights. More the opposite, really, as long as it's not them doing the suffering (or even being mildly inconvenienced).
You're thinking about it from a sane POV, but the people at the helm are insane. The only question is: would invading Greenland please Trump, yes or no?
Except that our transformation into "the bad guys" is already complete. We no longer have the trust or respect of most of the world. The "end of the empire" is already well under way.
Depends how it goes down, if a company goes into insolvency all security policies are off the table and random hardware can get shifted into lot bidding.
HDD can be written multiple times with random data if data centers really have to protect what their former customers wrote on them. I never looked at those details in standard contracts.
All you really need to do is write one pass of zeros on them. That will prevent anyone but a very dedicated adversary with expensive equipment from recovering any data, especially on TB scale drives.
Can still take hours per drive though, which is why a lot of people skip it.
I make a random 1MB chunk, then write that all over the drive, at overlapping offsets. I've been told that really clears it. On IDE-spinning-rust disks I trusted it, not sure if I should trust these modern SSD
A drive that supports Secure Instant Erase should be encrypting all data. When the SEI function is invoked (“nvme format -s 2”, “hdparm —-security-erase”) they key is thrown away and replaced with a new one. Similar implementations exist for NVMe, SATA, and SAS drives — regardless of whether they are HDD or SSD.
This puts a fair amount of trust and in the drive’s ability to really delete the old key.
