cxr

16 ms·

241.
by cxr 10mo ago
Since a company building it themselves hasn't gotten it in the form of a binary from someone else that they're just passing along to you and their use is commercial, they don't satisfy either condition of GPLv2 3(c), but they
242.
by cxr 10mo ago
That's not what they're saying. On the shelves are three insulin pumps: one with a 5-year warranty, one at a bargain barrel price that comes with no warranty, and one accompanied by a written offer allowing you to obtain the sourc
243.
by cxr 10mo ago
> "type extension" (i.e. inheritance) is used to create extensible message hierarchies, which then are polymorphically handled by procedures accepting a VAR parameter of the most general message type. In this handler, the messa
244.
by cxr 10mo ago
This is an "all else being equal" argument except without saying so explicitly, and it falls apart if that doesn't hold. Your claim is that no matter whether dependencies' source code is acquired by git-clone or npm-inst
245.
by cxr 10mo ago
That's been possible with Moddable/Kinoma's XS engine, which is standards compliant with ES6 and beyond. < https://www.moddable.com/faq#comparison > If you take a look at the MicroQuickJS README, you can
246.
by cxr 10mo ago
It wouldn't fix the issue of semantics, but "language skins"[1][2] are an underexplored area of programming language development. People go through all this effort to separate parsing and lexing, but never exploit the ability
247.
by cxr 10mo ago
> It's hardly an end-run around VCS to specify an external dependency's VCS sha, and resolve that at build time Not "hardly". That's very literally an end-run around the VCS. This is not a productive discussion.
248.
by cxr 10mo ago
Eschewing with lockfile-based package management schemes actually takes less work. < https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46008744 >
249.
by cxr 10mo ago
> If I had specified this repo's git url with a specific version number or sha directly in my package.json[…] that's not really an end-run around version control at that point Yes it is. Git doesn't operate based on packa
250.
by cxr 10mo ago
> I assume by "underlying version control system" you mean apt, rpm, homebrew and friends No. Git.
251.
by cxr 10mo ago
> I think you missed the mark a bit here. This wasn’t a dependency that was compromised, it was a dep that was malicious from the start. You're making assumptions that I am making assumptions, but I wasn't making assumptions.
252.
by cxr 10mo ago
At this point, the existence of these attacks should be an expected outcome. (It should have been expected even without the empirical record we now have and the multiple times that we can now cite.) NPM and NPM-style package managers that
253.
by cxr 10mo ago
> Is there any evidence SFC explicitly approved of those names? I haven't been able to find any. Yes. The trademark policy I linked to says, "Please be aware that GitHub and GitLab are exceptions to this Policy because they ar
254.
by cxr 10mo ago
Now that's an oversight! Since the Git project holds the trademark here, they better make sure they do what trademark holders do and have licensing arrangements in place with GitHub and GitLab regarding their use of the trademark. Af
255.
by cxr 10mo ago
GitHub is not Git. This doesn't really have anything to do with Git at all. This shouldn't be called GitForms. The Git trademark policy says they don't want people to name things like this. > you may not use any of the M
256.
by cxr 10mo ago
I have secretly held the belief for a while that the Java implementation should be mechanically translated to TypeScript and then fixed up, annotated, and maintained not just primarily but entirely in that form; the requisite R&D/t
257.
by cxr 10mo ago
Few know that Firefox's HTML5 parser was originally written in Java, and only afterward semi-mechanically translated (pre-LLMs) to the dialect of C++ used in the Gecko codebase. This blog post isn't really about HTML parsers, howe
258.
by cxr 10mo ago
I wouldn't call either of these tools that either. Using View Source reveals that there's a pretty obvious build step and confronts you with massive minified blobs. There's no way a person is going to be able open that HTML
259.
by cxr 10mo ago
> My problem was not being able to sync the localstorage data between PC and smartphone That's what remoteStorage is for. < https://remotestorage.org/ >
260.
by cxr 10mo ago
> I get the impression lots of folks would really like it if the actual C code making up linux stayed in place forever. Like it would be a good thing if humans exploring the cosmos in the year 3025 were still logging in using pam, writte
261.
by cxr 10mo ago
For a single binary that will actually run across both architectures, see < https://cosmo.zip/ >. Original discussion: < https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24256883 >.
262.
by cxr 10mo ago
I don't feel that the person I responded to is lying or being intentionally deceptive.
263.
by cxr 10mo ago
It's a tooling issue. No one has done the work to make things work as smoothly as they could. Traditionally, cross-compilers generally didn't even work the way that the Zig and Go toolchains approach it—achieving cross-compilatio
264.
by cxr 10mo ago
I didn't see an explanation in the README that part of what the first GIF[1] shows is an effect created by video editing software (and not a screencapture that's just demonstrating the program actually running). "Screen imag
265.
by cxr 10mo ago
Adrian Sampson (the author of that now 10-year old blog post) has a online course for actually teaching compilers: < https://web.archive.org/web/20210208162458/https://www.cs.co... > Discussed severa
266.
by cxr 10mo ago
This would be a much better comment if it weren't for the snark and fake quotes.
267.
by cxr 10mo ago
No one who understands what "MITM" means should have any expectation that I/O with a device owned and administered by a third party can be trusted (whether they do it by subverting PKI with internal certificate or not).
268.
by cxr 10mo ago
> Doesn't seem obvious unless your dutch. I don't know what that means. > if breaking the behaviour of innerHTML is not a concern for your software why keep it at all? For the reason that they said.
269.
by cxr 10mo ago
It seems obvious enough that parent is talking about changing the behavior of innerHTML within their own application, not for browser makers to change the implementation. It's unfair to take the most uncharitable interpretation and up
270.
by cxr 10mo ago
> This is pretty similar to the Sanitizer that I wanted to build into the browser: […] But that is NOT the Sanitizer we ended up with.¶ And the reason is essentially Mutated XSS (mXSS). To quickly recap, the idea behind mXSS is[…] No, th

More ›