kragen

48 ms·

901.
by kragen 1y ago
Nobody who knew Leonardo called him "da Vinci", any more than you would call Jessica "from church" ("Hey, is From Church coming over tonight?") or Venezuelans would call Hugo Chávez Frias "Mr. Frias".
902.
by kragen 1y ago
Yes, I think the end user is in a better position than Google to decide who to trust. Some end users will make bad decisions, but Google's interests are systematically misaligned with theirs.
903.
by kragen 1y ago
No, it's not a stretch at all. The user experience is the same, except that Debian and F-Droid apps don't come with antifeatures built in. The only friction is around who to report bugs to.
904.
by kragen 1y ago
That's a good point.
905.
by kragen 1y ago
No, that is not the definition I was using. "Sideloading" is a subset of installing, not disjoint from it. If Google were to prevent installing, it would prevent sideloading, but it would also prevent installing from the Play St
906.
by kragen 1y ago
It is implemented via LLVM.
907.
by kragen 1y ago
Yeah, fat pointers are definitely a viable approach, but a lot of the existing C code that is the main argument for Fil-C assumes it can put a pointer in a long. (Most of the C code that assumed you could put it in an int has been flushed
908.
by kragen 1y ago
Either Fil-C or a different implementation of the same idea seems essential to me. A great deal of software has been written in C, and without some way of running it, we lose access to that intellectual heritage. But pervasive security vu
909.
by kragen 1y ago
Perhaps an unintentional one: https://lithub.com/what-we-talk-about-when-we-talk-about-thi...
910.
by kragen 1y ago
> 2. Having an approved channel for verified app loading is a valuable security tool and greatly reduces the number of malicious apps installed on users devices I would instead say that having a trustworthy channel for verified app l
911.
by kragen 1y ago
Because Google isn't trying to prevent installing, just "sideloading".
912.
by kragen 1y ago
Yes, but the compromise didn't have to be an industrywide conspiracy with penalties for manufacturing light bulbs that were too long-lasting and inefficient. But it was. Consumers could have freely chosen short-lived high-efficiency
913.
by kragen 1y ago
Debian has had a "first party store" since the early 90s, and the truth is the diametrical opposite of "they're sufficiently unpopular that people don't think of them as the primary source to get apps". It&#x2
914.
by kragen 1y ago
I think they're using me_cleaner, which does appear to work, but using software to disable a hardware backdoor is inherently unreliable.
915.
by kragen 1y ago
Probably not, no, and AFAIK Leo is a nice guy who doesn't deserve to be deprecated in that way.
916.
by kragen 1y ago
Oh, is .cbz that simple? Does it use the file order of the zipfile members or some other order? ( https://acbf.fandom.com/wiki/ACBF_Editor_-_Creating_Metadata says it uses alphabetical order, which is the wrong order
917.
by kragen 1y ago
Nope, that's his actual surname. He wasn't born in the 16th century.
918.
by kragen 1y ago
That's possible. I've also had this happen with Wi-Fi captive portals; I assume redirecting all the port 22 traffic to port 22 on the router was an unintentional side effect of redirecting all the port 80 traffic to port 80 on th
919.
by kragen 1y ago
I agree that the error is common. Try to make new errors instead of repeating common errors.
920.
by kragen 1y ago
No, it really doesn't, as in most cases where people invoke it.
921.
by kragen 1y ago
Hmm, that's a good point about Spotlight. Does it do LSA? A web search suggests that the answer is "not by default".
922.
by kragen 1y ago
Yeah, it definitely prohibits you from applying latent semantic analysis, so you could probably violate the license by indexing it with Elasticsearch, but that's a less common thing to do with source code than opening it up in an IDE.
923.
by kragen 1y ago
Clever, an unenforceable copyright license for free software that prohibits you from editing the source code using an IDE with autocomplete.
924.
by kragen 1y ago
By "standard PKI which is deployed everywhere" do you mean SSL certificates? That would make you vulnerable to dozens of poorly secured CAs throughout the world; any attacker who could penetrate one of them could then use that
925.
by kragen 1y ago
I've often called people on the phone and stuff. It depends somewhat on what's at stake. Authenticating users with SSH passwords puts much more at stake than using public keys, since an attacker who can get you to send your unen
926.
by kragen 1y ago
They might be able to spoof your DNS, for example if you're using their Wi-Fi, so you get the wrong IP address for the right hostname, but not your mail server's SSL. You could pass the host key fingerprint across an existing sec
927.
by kragen 1y ago
Maybe what rarely works well for NoMoreNicksLeft is having a gigabyte of JPEGs in a single HTML chapter inside the epub? In that case you could do something like divide the files into 373 "chapters" of 6 pages each? One of the fr
928.
by kragen 1y ago
More like echo $(for page in {1..1119}; do for side in R V; do echo "000$side-$page.jpg"; done; done)
929.
by kragen 1y ago
Nitpick: "da Vinci" wasn't our homeboy's name. That just means "from Vinci". He was "Leonardo", like many other people, so we added "da Vinci" to clarify which Leonardo we meant, just like
930.
by kragen 1y ago
In this case presumably the main difference is not PowerShell vs. bash but iwr vs. wget? Because I think this is roughly equally bad (untested): for page in {1..1119}; do iwr "https://codex-atlanticus.ambrosian

More ›