ori_b

26 ms·

571.
by ori_b 3y ago
Unlike aspartame, we understand the physics of electromagnetic radiation. It's the same type of radiation as sunlight, but lower energy and lower intensity.
572.
by ori_b 3y ago
You say that as though bureaucracy is equivalent to formalism. It's not.
573.
by ori_b 3y ago
"It's not a mess! it was designed by committee!" I'm not sure what to say here. The kubernetes docs and code speak for themselves. If you actually think that it's clean, simple, well designed, and easy to operate, w
574.
by ori_b 3y ago
Unfortunately, the above statement also applies to kubernetes.
575.
by ori_b 3y ago
Have you discussed this with your VCs? Which methods of maximizing revenue have they agreed you will be leaving on the table in perpetuity? What will happen if you don't make the returns they expect? Do you have a controlling share, or
576.
by ori_b 3y ago
Do you think that (outside of a few special cases) they're using anything near the network bandwidth available to them? I would expect in the 1% to 10% bandwidth utilization, on average. From my vague recollection, that's what it
577.
by ori_b 3y ago
I don't think I've seen this style of communication generally work as a viable substitute for social skills and good will towards colleagues. Wrapping of criticism in praise is a poor substitute for genuinely praising good work, a
578.
by ori_b 3y ago
There's also something to be said for not working in environments you dislike if you don't need to. Especially since cultural mismatches grate and lead to underperformance. Given that I have consistently gotten thanked for how I g
579.
by ori_b 3y ago
Yes. If you like that kind of culture, feel free to seek it out. I would not enjoy that kind of workplace, and if I accidentally join a place that leaned very heavily on that communication style, I would likely leave quickly.
580.
by ori_b 3y ago
This comes off as passive aggressive. I would avoid this kind of phrasing, unless your goal is to needle people while maintaining plausible deniability.
581.
by ori_b 3y ago
> If you are calling out your colleagues for doing bad work, or not the way you would do it work, you should try to rephrase into praise w/ direction. “I really liked how you tackled this, have you thought about this approach?” Ins
582.
by ori_b 3y ago
Have you looked at capabilities, like E, Mont-E and its descendants? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-capability_model https://monte.readthedocs.io/en/latest/taste.html#cooperatio... htt
583.
by ori_b 3y ago
This is the #1 reason I enjoy using the plan 9 rc shell[1] for scripts. There's exactly one place where word splitting happens: at the point where command output is evaluated. And there, it's trivial to use any character you want:
584.
by ori_b 3y ago
> Or by isolating the browser from third party software. Android does not let applications mess with each other. Android lets applications mess with each other. That's how the accessibility features work.
585.
by ori_b 3y ago
I don't use personal devices on corporate networks. If they want a phone with remote attestation, they can pay for it to sit in a drawer. Though, at this point I am the founder of my own company. Any software we use will not require at
586.
by ori_b 3y ago
Or, just don't do remote attestation. The cure is worse than the disease.
587.
by ori_b 3y ago
> WEI is really about denying the user full control of their own device. If you give people full control of their devices, you will have bots. Do you believe eliminating bots is more important than general purpose computing? Worse than
588.
by ori_b 3y ago
In other words, it's virtually impossible to use right without also being the entity that hands out phones to users.
589.
by ori_b 3y ago
WEI doesn't prevent bots. Bots would just need to script an attested browser via tools like AutoHotKey -- the only way WEI would prevent bots would be by preventing you from running the browser on an operating system without 3rd party
590.
by ori_b 3y ago
Note that this doesn't even prevent people from using tools like AutoHotKey or their moral equivalents to make malicious requests from browsers. It only makes it impossible for legitimate users to run their own code -- people who want
591.
by ori_b 3y ago
They asked for permission from the coordinator and got it. It's that simple. There's nothing open to interpretation here. The next time you coordinate a disclosure, you can run it differently.
592.
by ori_b 3y ago
Rather difficult, in the sense that people continue spreading falsehoods about their relationship with embargoes, which makes it difficult to participate in responsible disclosure. See this thread for examples.
593.
by ori_b 3y ago
Incorrect. They had explicit permission from the researcher involved to commit when they did. Here's the full discussion, if you want to read it yourself. https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=152909822107104&w=2
594.
by ori_b 3y ago
This is untrue. OpenBSD pushes to release as early as possible, but if they're on an embargo, they've respected it.
595.
by ori_b 3y ago
Was your point that you agree with me? If not, I don't get it.
596.
by ori_b 3y ago
Yes. Does yours not? Tools like Agda, Spark, Idris, and Coq move the tradeoff around towards "probably correct", and I welcome seeing some of their features become gradually available. Getting things right the first time is useful
597.
by ori_b 3y ago
Can you explain how that's not an aspect of developer experience? It seems to be like trading off between type system correctness (you can go all the way to needing full formal proofs of correctness, resource use, etc) and ease of gett
598.
by ori_b 3y ago
What is the purpose of modern language design, if not to improve developer experience?
599.
by ori_b 3y ago
They're not the first company to do that. https://panzura.com/ did something similar.
600.
by ori_b 3y ago
> In fact, I would guess more humans to answer this way to a misleading question then ones who wouldn't. I would expect most humans to shrug and say "dunno".

More ›