growse

23 ms·

301.
by growse 2y ago
> 2)timezones should be completely abolished. They also cause confusion. If you live in California, instead of getting up at say 8am you get up at say 3pm. There is never any confusion with anyone globally about scheduling anything. Good
302.
by growse 2y ago
There's risks both ways :) > What is the ideal balance between protecting the key and respecting the user's choice and freedom? There's no right answer to this. The eternal struggle of mankind is living with the fact that
303.
by growse 2y ago
> I somehow can't just wrap my head about that they are. Passkeys are just resident webauthn credentials. Nothing more complicated than that. > and that's why you have to use a proprietary device with custom hardware from a
304.
by growse 2y ago
I just looked on github (where I have 4 passkeys registered), and I noticed that the bitwarden one has a little "Synced" flag next to it. The tooltip says "This passkey is eligable for backup by its provider", so sites
305.
by growse 2y ago
> You could do this with a third-party cloud service (and pay subscription fees for it), but in this model it seems consumer-unfriendly to me to not allow me just to back up and transfer my own keys, especially when it's not possibl
306.
by growse 2y ago
You can. But then you miss out on credentials discovery.
307.
by growse 2y ago
The other upside is that you can store them in either HSMs or software-backed stores (password managers) or hybrids (like your phone). It's trade-offs all the way down!
308.
by growse 2y ago
> The platform lock-in is a real problem we already see. Even password managers that sync the private key most of the times do not allow to export the key material. I'm struggling a little bit with the use case here. Yubikeys and ot
309.
by growse 2y ago
Where does it say that you have to trust Google / Apple? Passkeys are webauthn credentials. Store them in whatever webauthn store you like. I use a combination of bitwarden and iCloud.
310.
by growse 2y ago
> But other software is also hypothetically insecure. This is not my point.
311.
by growse 2y ago
Once upon a time, there was only one web browser too.
312.
by growse 2y ago
The size of libsystemd is immaterial in the case of xz. The attackers had control of xz, and wanted to load it from sshd. There's lots of projects that link xz, big and small. Patching sshd to include any of them would have implemented
313.
by growse 2y ago
Lots of things enabled the xz exploit to work. If the lesson you take from xz is "systemd bad" then you've really missed the wood for the trees.
314.
by growse 2y ago
> and they're all portable... I think that portability is a deliberate anti-goal of systemd. > In contrast, if you want to use, say, run0, you must run systemd as PID 1, No, you must run something on pid 1 that implements the spe
315.
by growse 2y ago
Why is this an argument specifically against systemd, rather than all large software projects? Linux kernel, gcc, glibc - all bundle "a large amount of functionality under a single system" - does this make their design fundamental
316.
by growse 2y ago
Let me get this right: you see an article on a new thing, which you have no problem with, but have an angry rant in the comments section anyway? And now you're baffled by people's reaction to that? I'm not sure there's m
317.
by growse 2y ago
And people are also telling you that tight integration is not a mandate. Having a bunch of stuff designed to work together does not mean that they're tightly coupled and can only work with their specific implementations. We've a
318.
by growse 2y ago
So aim your ire at the distributions who (I agree) cocked this one up. "Take a library dependency to implement basic functionality" is not a systemd mentality, it's pernicious throughout software development - see leftPad as
319.
by growse 2y ago
I think dynamic linking pre-dates systemd by quite a number of years.
320.
by growse 2y ago
> If you don't read my posts please do not respond to me. Look at the first post I made and carefully read it. I read your OP. It does not contain a technical / security criticism of run0. It's an angry, hand-wavey, vague
321.
by growse 2y ago
> Systemd is DESIGNED to be an all or nothing deal. ^[Citation needed]
322.
by growse 2y ago
You can have a well-integrated system without having tight coupling between components. Interfaces are a thing, and a high level of integration just means having a good collection of interfaces between well-defined conceptual components wit
323.
by growse 2y ago
Multi-touch was such an enabler, because it meant you could do an on-screen keyboard properly, which meant you could replace the physical keyboard with more screen . I remember everyone scoffing at the "lol you can't type on it&q
324.
by growse 2y ago
There's plenty of people / groups willing to work on Redis without direct monetary compensation, as the plethora of forks have shown. They don't need to be 'asked'. The only problem is that the people who bought the
325.
by growse 3y ago
Wasn't the value of centos that it was bug-yor-bug compatible with RHEL but without the license fee requirement?
326.
by growse 3y ago
Thanks- commit then rebase reorder is a simple but great idea!
327.
by growse 3y ago
It’s not perfect, I agree, because code is trivially copied (unlike material things). But like I said, this is not about the code. The wider point about subverting expectations still stands. Yes, we re-organised into tofu/valkey/w
328.
by growse 3y ago
I'm interested in #2 here - I've often struggled with writing a test to identify a bug, and then using that new test with bisect to find the commit where that test would first fail. Has this technique got a googlable name?
329.
by growse 3y ago
The bait and switch is the community and social elements, not the code. Inviting the local community to come and improve your space that you opened up for everyone to exist in, and then suddenly locking the doors is both entirely legally ju
330.
by growse 3y ago
How do you break ties?

More ›