marcusb

11 ms·

91.
by marcusb 1y ago
This reminds me in a way of the old Noam Chomsky/Tucker Carlson exchange where Chomsky says to Carlson: "I’m sure you believe everything you’re saying. But what I’m saying is that if you believed something different, you would
92.
by marcusb 1y ago
... and Flo, Matt, and some dude named Haz. Did that not fit your narrative?
93.
by marcusb 1y ago
> do you still pay pay Ente if you self host the server as well as the photos ("S3-compatible object storage")? No. (I self-host Ente and use their published ios app.)
94.
by marcusb 1y ago
Also a wonderful zine!
95.
by marcusb 1y ago
https://www.sentinelone.com/cybersecurity-101/cybersecurity/...
96.
by marcusb 1y ago
> The TTL for NSEC records are presumably way lower than the TTL for the DS records. Possibly. It was still an outage they had to wait out the TTL for, due to the design of DNSSEC. > It’s theoretically possible that it would not have
97.
by marcusb 1y ago
> You don't get that under regular contracts either. Absolutely false. Of course vendors sometimes mark things WONTFIX, but Microsoft regularly produces bugfixes for supported products based on issues identified in support cases
98.
by marcusb 1y ago
No. If a vendor says “we aren’t going to support this product after X date - don’t call, don’t write”, that’s EoL. Doesn’t matter if they do one off fixes because they decide that’s the right thing to do - product is still EoL. You won’t g
99.
by marcusb 1y ago
> Microsoft has a long history of playing fast-and-loose with the truth. And that’s again the case with Windows 10 coming to its supposed “end of life” this fall. I can’t take an article seriously, whatever merits it might have, if this
100.
by marcusb 1y ago
I imagine it depends on which "top domain" list you use. I use Cloudflare radar. As of today, for their top 100 domains, 6 have published DS records: 2371 13 2 32996839A6D808AFE3EB4A795A0E6A7A39A76FC52FF228B22B76F6D6 3826F2B9 clou
101.
by marcusb 1y ago
> They could have done a quick fix by adding an explicit app.slack.com record. But instead they removed the DNSSEC signing from the whole domain, thereby invalidating all records, not just the wildcard ones. 1) That would do nothing to f
102.
by marcusb 1y ago
Agreed, but for this particular product, the number is probably a lot closer to zero than average.
103.
by marcusb 1y ago
They do validate signed zones -- that is true. How do they run their own zones? $ dig +short letsencrypt.org DS $
104.
by marcusb 1y ago
> IIUC, if Slack had done the correct thing, only wildcard DNS records (if any) would have been affected There's the problem - you DON'T understand. Straight from the post-portem that you clearly have not read: One microse
105.
by marcusb 1y ago
Having read the post mortem, I disagree. Slack engineers did something dumb, under pressure during an outage. Even if they hadn't, they still would have been in a degraded state until they could properly remove their DNSSEC records a
106.
by marcusb 1y ago
The primary DNSSEC standards, RFC 4033-4035, are 20 years old. It isn't "in its infancy."
107.
by marcusb 1y ago
That is an extremely uncharitable take for an outage that involved two of the most poorly defined and difficult to (correctly) implement DNS features (wildcards and NSEC records) that the three major DNS operators mentioned in the Slack pos
108.
by marcusb 1y ago
The API was horrible, though.
109.
by marcusb 1y ago
It's worth it - just check to see if any big events are going on in Gatlinburg before you book. We went there one time (without checking) during a hot rod/motorcycle convention. The traffic was insane.
110.
by marcusb 1y ago
Back in the 90s, a portion of Germany's ATC ran on Emacs Lisp. No floppies though. https://old.reddit.com/r/emacs/comments/lly7po/do_you_use_em...
111.
by marcusb 1y ago
We also have a lot of systems (references, the tort system) that just don't apply in any practical way to LLM output. I mean, I guess you could try to sue Anthropic or OpenAI if their chat bot gives you bad advice, but... good luck wi
112.
by marcusb 1y ago
> why would it be different with LLMs? Because LLMs are not competent professionals to whom you might outsource tasks in your life. LLMs are statistical engines that make up answers all the time, even when the LLM “knows” the correct an
113.
by marcusb 1y ago
I’m puzzled when I hear people say ‘oh, I only use LLMs for things I don’t understand well. If I’m an expert, I’d rather do it myself.’ In addition to the ability to review output effectively, I find the more closely I’m able to describe wh
114.
by marcusb 1y ago
> For the nth time, though, I also don't grant the premise that LLMs are violative of the IPR of programmers. I wish you all the best waiting for a future where the legislature and courts decide that LLM output is violative of copyr
115.
by marcusb 1y ago
> Adobe is one of the most successful corporations in the history of commerce; the piracy technologists enabled wrecked most media industries. I guess that makes it ok then for artists to pirate Adobe's product. Also, I live in a m
116.
by marcusb 1y ago
I generally agree with your post. Many of the arguments against LLMs being thrown around are unserious, unsound, and a made-for-social-media circle jerk that don't survive any serious adversarial scrutiny. That said, this particular
117.
by marcusb 1y ago
> Well that just doesn't sound true at all. That would be because it is not true.
118.
by marcusb 1y ago
I must be the luckiest person in the world, then. The three I purchased have been installed for five years now, with zero leaks.
119.
by marcusb 1y ago
I bought $25 versions of this on Amazon during COVID... We did not anticipate or have any of problems you described.
120.
by marcusb 1y ago
The styling of this reminds me of faces that cant and/or serif the hyphen. I checked a few, and in my very limited survey (Blado, Poliphilus, Trajanus and "related" faces for each that Monotype recommends) most type faces tha

More ›