olliej

17 ms·

151.
by olliej 2y ago
No I think you’re misunderstanding my point, in your defense I was unclear: in an environment like JS you cannot leave anything as “it’s up to the environment” - the js engines must be 100% consistent which means the exact semantics of th
152.
by olliej 2y ago
From the article it sounds like it’s a change to scheduling priorities not what is running (from other comments it sounds like there’s a change in latency related to moving processes across cores in different packages?)
153.
by olliej 2y ago
There’s nothing in this post, why does HN continue allowing twitter links at this point? I guess it’s not really feasible to detect whether or not it’s a thread (in which case author should consider an actual site not this nonsense)
154.
by olliej 2y ago
It is necessary if you’re creating a standard. The Python implementation can do whatever it wants because “Python” does not mean “The Python Language Specification”. It means the one specific implementation, and whatever that impl does is d
155.
by olliej 2y ago
There were proposals almost 2 decades ago. They've never gone anywhere because proponents of type specifiers don't want to do the necessary corollary: specifying the type system. Typescript and similar can do it because they don&#
156.
by olliej 2y ago
Raising the delightful question of why carriers could install software on phones.
157.
by olliej 2y ago
Yup, that were in typescript, pascal (and rust, etc when they came out). But there was no real progress after years of them pushing this syntax, but failing to actually define a type system that was coherent, or a model that would allow it.
158.
by olliej 2y ago
Also E4X was only ever implemented in Firefox, never really got traction even in Firefox. But even considering the single implementation problem, it also was just not a good language model, nor was it well specified or defined and it brough
159.
by olliej 2y ago
Fun fact, E4X is the reason JavaScript has ‘for(of)’ instead of ‘for each’ (the reason we didn’t get ‘for (:)’ is even dumber - it would conflict with ‘:type’ annotations a few TC39 members were convinced would magically be in the language)
160.
by olliej 2y ago
TLDR: Verizon store demo app with a variety of system privileges was downloading payloads over http and was not performing any authentication on what it received. Not Google’s fault (beyond trusting carriers to not be incompetent :D)
161.
by olliej 2y ago
I really like these super detailed exploit breakdowns, and how they touch on circumventing the mitigations (largely because I wish people would understand that mitigations are just that - they make it harder to exploit a bug, not impossible
162.
by olliej 2y ago
Dammit :) (dangit?)
163.
by olliej 2y ago
“Landlords are using software to launder price fixing”
164.
by olliej 2y ago
They should avoid actually deploying the massively invasive and power hungry anti-feature as well
165.
by olliej 2y ago
I think the headline conflates a bunch of things to make clickbait. It does seems there are accurate and correct complaints about EPA violations, etc at the Boca chica site, and there are also accusations of mercury (and presumably other ma
166.
by olliej 2y ago
Reminds me of the “Indians go back to India”, Jesus was American, etc :D (I do wonder if there are non-English Christians who also seriously argue “Jesus spoke {my native language here}” - it seems to be a very US evangelical specific thing
167.
by olliej 2y ago
Minor addendum due to being outside of the edit window. The “um,” start to this was unnecessarily shitty/passive aggressive and I just noticed it when I was checking for replies, so apologies for that attitude. The issue I was wanting
168.
by olliej 2y ago
No, software updates in the EU could just start costing money, like software updates used to. Google would be able to continue “android updates are free” because they’re an advertising company and android exists for the sole purpose of ensu
169.
by olliej 2y ago
You know macOS used to be a purchase right? That didn’t end until Apple had the commission revenue.
170.
by olliej 2y ago
Consumer pays for the hardware, or are you suggesting the software updates should be paid again? This is a genuine question - Google pays for android updates to be free because the android business model is spyware to support Google’s ad bu
171.
by olliej 2y ago
It sounds like they called the police, that is not swatting. Swatting is a specific tactic where you abuse the minimal training and disposition to violence of US police forces to attempt to murder people by reporting that they’re armed and&
172.
by olliej 2y ago
Um, removing a person who’s giving a talk is a completely different action from the distribution of (potentially) unlicensed software. DEFCON may well have many reasons and legal recourses to stop a talk from occurring. But if they do not m
173.
by olliej 2y ago
Ah, so AWD vs 4WD is _definitionally_ the presence or lack of some form of locking differential? e.g if I were to take an AWD and weld the diff it would be 4WD (and not be too fun for daily driving)?
174.
by olliej 2y ago
The problem is C lacks an equivalent to C++’s constexpr (or preceding template insanity), so you can’t use functions in constant contexts, eg struct S { int foo[max(10, 15)]; } Isn’t possible in C, macros are the only opt
175.
by olliej 2y ago
I still dont understand the difference between 4wd and awd, but the article spends more or less the entire time talking about locking and limited slip differentials and how AWD generally don’t have them which is “why they’re not allowed”, w
176.
by olliej 2y ago
No shit, that was always the goal. Unless the employees came on under remote work it’s very hard for them to say the work policy is a change in working conditions, even if it fundamentally is. For instance I now have to drive to work where
177.
by olliej 2y ago
I kind of wonder when they actually stopped being manufactured? It seems like the kind of thing you'd build some large amount of and then just slowly whittle away the stock.
178.
by olliej 2y ago
I would like to have seen a comparison that actually includes -fno-exceptions, rather than just noexcept. My assumption is that to get a consistent gain from noexcept, you would need every function called to be explicitly noexcept, becaus
179.
by olliej 2y ago
A lot of people have answered no, which is likely the correct answer to what you're asking, but I wanted to be clear about exactly what that is? Take a hypothetical piece of code some_library_header.h: void library_function();
180.
by olliej 2y ago
macOS has sandboxing in the "prevent attacker from escalating from the compromised process" sense. It also has the concept of data that can only be read by apps that have the correctly rights - as in even if a process is running a

More ›