4 ms·
This is among the worst takes I’ve ever seen, to the point that I might adopt this as an interview question to avoid ever +1ing a hire who thinks in this way.
by jen20 4y ago
This is among the worst takes I’ve ever seen, to the point that I might adopt this as an interview question to avoid ever +1ing a hire who thinks in this way.
If you need broken old stuff to run, the onus must be on you to disable the security, not the other way around.
- junon 4y agoYeah the fact it is the top comment is concerning.
- kastagg 4y agoThere are situations where "abruptly stops working" is not just inconvenient but catastrophic. To make intelligent decisions about these trade-offs it's necessary to consider possible outcomes in detail. That depends on how software is used in a larger system, not just whether it's using an encryption algorithm that is still in fashion. When you weaponize interviewing decisions to enforce cultural homogeneity and agreement with your own opinions, you are reducing diversity and excluding people who are intelligent enough to recognize nuances that break rules of thumb.
- jen20 4y agoThere are cases where the rule of thumb does not apply: general purpose operating system distributions is not one of those cases. Anyone that can explain both the trade off and when it is appropriate to make would be unaffected by this. The default must be security - we don't live in the 80s anymore.