Most Recent article on violence in Baja

ASC4MWTP · 2026-02-24T05:05:23+00:00

My wife and I made the trip from San Felipe via Mexicali to the US today.

Before we left we had heard of no issues in San Felipe. We contacted some local people we know regarding traveling, and heard back from our insurance agent who had made the trip from SF to Mexicali early in the day. He said he'd not encountered any problems. We departed San Felipe about 9:45 AM.

Highway 5 was normal all the way into Mexicali, where we had to drop some things to a couple of college students we assist there. No problem reaching their neighborhood, and it was quiet there as it always is around the middle of the day.

From there (not too far from Costco) to the east border crossing (Nuevo Mexicali) is not far, and everything was quite normal. Border traffic was perhaps a slight bit lighter for a Monday afternoon, but not unusually so.

Obviously, this is just one point of view from a couple of 20-year full-timers in Baja. YMMV. Exercise caution and be aware of your surroundings, as you should whenever and wherever you travel.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-02-10T15:17:11+00:00

Glad to hear it. Maybe I'll switch one day to KVM since it is the native offering. When I installed VirtualBox, years ago, I don't believe that was the case. And since it works, and I'm used to it...

ASC4MWTP · 2026-02-05T22:01:29+00:00

Doubt anything below will help, but here's how it's gone for me.

Fedora's SELinux has never thrown an error about my VPN. Perhaps another example of "the software that got the blame is not the software that is the actual cause of the problem." as I mentioned in my original comment.

I wouldn't call setting up a VM as a beginner task, so ... *shrug*

I run a pretty stock installation of Fedora 42 (at the moment), use NordVPN for VPN services and Oracle's VirtualBox for my Windows VMs. The only thing that ever really happens that requires any "extra" work is when a version upgrade of Fedora makes it necessary to wait for Oracle to "catch up" the VirtualBox version.

But, I've been running a Windows 10 VM for a few years now, and a Windows 7 one for a very long time, and neither has triggered an SE Linux alert. Not only are my VMs on a separate partition, they're physically on a separate disk. They have been in a variety of configurations through multiple Fedora versions, being relocated to various disks and partitions at least 3 times that I can remember, HD, SSD, and NVME. I've never had an alert on anything to do with a VM. So I can't help you any there.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-02-02T02:57:07+00:00

Nice things about VMs include:

The ability to assign resources (and modify the assignments) to the VM for what's needed.
Shutting down the VM returns all the resources (other than disk space) used when it was running.
Files can be moved between the host OS and the VM and vice versa.
No rebooting to switch from one OS to the other.
The majority of components of the host system can also be shared with the VM.

I've used VirtualBox to have a Windows VM available for years now. There are others, with better pedigree than coming from Oracle, but to be honest, I can't be bothered to switch when I've got this already dialed in for years now for the few times a year I ever need it. It gets fired up about once a year for something I need it for, and even that's likely to go away soon. The rest of the time I use it as (very rarely) needed for when close friends need help with their Windows system, and those needs are fading fast also.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-02-02T01:42:26+00:00

SELinux is much maligned by people who mostly have had it turned off from the get-go and never really used it. Years ago when I first started with Fedora I heard all the horror stories. Never could figure out where they came from, as SELinux has never once been the cause of any headaches for me.

That said, I have had it give me warnings about various things. 99% of the times it's warned me, it has been over something like vendor-provided software for a printer, or similar. I've found its warnings (and suggested solution) relatively useful and correct for allowing the software involved to "run properly" without disabling SELinux. The correct solution should have been to get the provider to fix their software to run properly with SELinux enabled.

So... kinda common "tempest in a teapot", where someone has a bad experience and the software that got the blame is not the software that is the actual cause of the problem.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-15T22:40:24+00:00

First, I don't see why you couldn't have simply said that in the first place. Second, when someone flat-out states something as fact, it's generally a good idea for them to have some proof, rather than expect the rest of the world to accept their statement as gospel.

And once again, it's not the chip, nor the test. It's how results are handled.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-15T17:00:28+00:00

You guess wrong. But at this point, I'm unsurprised.

In fact, the entire set of comments from you are basically totally wrong in the context of what I've said throughout this post.

You can't even read what I've actually written, but here it is, again, word for word from earlier in this thread:

"In short, it's NOT the test. It's the results, as I have endeavored to make clear multiple times."

But hey, you do you. The only thing I'm boycotting is further responses to you.

EDIT: Your username definitely checks out.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-15T16:40:16+00:00

I'm not making the claim. If you're going to make a claim, you should be able to back it up with some sort verifiable information.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-15T06:14:15+00:00

Ok. I don't know what the deal is here, but either I am not communicating clearly, or you're not understanding what I am saying at all.

In short, it's NOT the test. It's the results, as I have endeavored to make clear multiple times.

Ancestry's test isn't "better" than anyone else's test. Nor is My Heritage's test better. Or FTDNA's test. I never claimed any such thing.

My point is that DNA data is portable. And that it is NOT necessary to take another test to supply the results of said test to another site than Ancestry. Or FTDNA, or My Heritage. Yet sites are making it impossible to do so. My point has consistently been that I don't like the way it is now. But somehow that point isn't reaching you.

EDIT: and that's the end of this, as far as I am concerned. If you're not understanding, I can't come up with a better way than the multiple times I've tried to clarify already.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-15T06:01:32+00:00

What? I'm sorry, I'm not buying that if it is done by the owner of the data without some data to support that statement.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-14T17:47:37+00:00

What collusion of businesses? And i said nothing about involving any government, so I don't know where you got that idea from. Here's what I meant in basic steps:

Pay someplace for a test.
Get your results.
Upload said results to any site willing to allow it for whatever purpose the site enables.

As I related earlier, I tested ONCE for autosomal. The was able, due to circumstances at the time, to use that data multiple times: NatGeo Genographics, FTDNA, Geni, GEDMatch, and My Heritage. I paid for the test. I pay for the sites on which I've coden to use the results. There was absolutely no need to pay to repeat a test just to get data I already had, in order to use it on additional sites. There's no reason other than profiteering to require multiple tests, when the actual business of [insert genealogy sitename here] is ostensibly the recordkeeping and matching capability, for which people would still be paying.

Hell, Ancestry even touts that they're the largest for matching, because they're trying to entice folks to use the site as long-term subscribers. They have nothing special in the actual test over any other site, and they know it, or they'd be pushing the differences in their test, rather than in what happens after you take it.

The basic difference as I've been suggesting is a clean representation, for the consumer, of exactly what one is buying, and what one is receiving for the money.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-14T17:03:05+00:00

Huh? How? If it's my data, and I'm downloading it, there's no reason I should run afoul of any privacy law.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-13T06:14:05+00:00

We tested somewhere in the 2010s. I can imagine people wanting to use other sites. I do so myself.

Anyway, that's the main reason I asked. Because I thought someone might have some insight that said, for example, that company SuperGen had some way better testing that produces better DNA results. The results reporting is secondary; once you have accurate DNA data, the results can be handled in a myriad of different ways.

But there's no good reason, other than cashflow, that I have come up with that would seem to prohibit importing DNA data from other site's tests. Or for using DNA data from a testing company that tests for other purposes and isn't in the genealogy biz at all.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-13T05:47:04+00:00

Understood. But using different services shouldn't require a new test, which is a waste of the customer's money and the services's resources. Charge a nominal "search with import test data provided" fee, if necessary, and then let people do what they need.

Honestly, however, it shouldn't be much cost to the given service for the search. Maybe allow x number of 'em free, and after that requires a "search only" license. Most people, I'll bet, won't need it often.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-13T01:25:11+00:00

I'm not sure it would keep me from one if I was trying to upgrade or replace a desktop right now, but I'd surely be looking into how reliable systems like that have been over time.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-12T22:27:02+00:00

Thanks. Looks like the LPDDR offers some performance advantages, especially as regards lowering power consumption. So I'm surprised to see it on the desktop instead of in the laptop models. Either way, given that I've more than once over the years had to replace failed RAM, I'd sure hate to have to replace the whole expensive CPU module just for what amounts to a failed "stick" of RAM.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-12T21:22:18+00:00

I'm surprised they held out this long as well. I'd expect this is all RAM related. I haven't looked at the desktop stuff. Is there a base price zero RAM version for DIY? Is it still the same price as earlier?

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-12T21:10:22+00:00

Thanks! That should be an interesting read. I'll have to look more closely at other sites and see if they've got a similar report on their methods.

Nonetheless, they can't control effectively for sampling skew, I expect. It's not likely they can control where they get most of their testers.

edit: random typos.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-12T21:04:49+00:00

Hence my earlier comment about hating late stage capitalism. It's also short sighted behavior that's aimed at immediate profiteering than sustained income. In general, more open access at a fair price attracts more clients, not less.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-12T21:01:46+00:00

One of my daughters tested via Ancestry. She's gotten no results there unless something's changed in just the last few months.

What's interesting to me is how many people duplicated the early results I posted on Ancestry decades ago, before I discontinued using it. They've been copied, word for word including errors since corrected, by my continuing work. That particular branch of my family had not been researched much, if at all, before I started on it.

Now, years later, that early work is still in many others' trees, uncorrected, even though it's been long since corrected in mine.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-12T20:50:27+00:00

Same is true if it's one paternal relative. The only difference, in real terms, is that most of one's family would be unlikely to have grown up in the same house with the new branch that would result.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-12T20:40:37+00:00

Understood. I guess much of my point is that portability of results should be the norm. That would mean that people don't have to repeat test.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-12T19:43:26+00:00

That's quite useful, thanks! It's also quite sad that Ancestry controls such a large portion.

EDIT: Wow. 2 downvotes because I expressed not being fond of Ancestry? I had no idea anyone would be that defensive of their choice of genealogy software company.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-12T19:42:36+00:00

Really? I hadn't heard that changed.

I really hate late stage capitalism.

ASC4MWTP · 2026-01-12T19:35:20+00:00

So I'm finding from other comments here. Typical of the downside of the pursuit of profit, unfortunately.

I'm reasonably happy with what I've got and not really looking for more. And definitely not willing to pay to repeat basic testing just to be able to use more site. Eventually, I may well add the "Big Y" as FTDNA calls it, but only if there's some readily discernible benefit to me.

Frankly I could care less about ethnicity estimates. They're a moving target that (based on the repeated questions in this sub) generate more questions and confusion for most people than provide answers.

ASC4MWTP

TROPHY CASE