quotemstr

4 ms·

31.
by quotemstr 22d ago
The whole AI-O-Sphere is allergic to using sandboxes that are actually robust
32.
by quotemstr 22d ago
What makes you think this task won't fall quickly too?
33.
by quotemstr 23d ago
5) Otherwise-sober people on X will say "oh my god i was a doubter before but now it's real omg" before the new model smell wears off and they realize the new thing is stupid in ways models have been generally stupid 6) accus
34.
by quotemstr 23d ago
> no easy way to tell a reserved 2LD (open for 3LD registrations only) apart from a normal 2LD on .name And that's one reason why the public-ness of a hierarchy level belongs on a DNS record on that level and not some separately-d
35.
by quotemstr 23d ago
It's a good metaphor and I refuse to let AI ruin it for me.
36.
by quotemstr 25d ago
What makes you think Rust is automatically better? (Also, "Rust or native" is a strange dichotomy. What's not native about Rust?)
37.
by quotemstr 25d ago
There's no security benefit to doing this versus demand-downloading hashed-locked components on need.
38.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
This equivocation on the word "exist" doesn't work anymore. It's not 2018 anymore. Normal people with common sense understand that keeping politics separate from technology isn't the same thing as existential violen
39.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
No, it is definitely possible to make great software without inserting messaging on irrelevant issues into it. Whatever the quality of Omarchy, DHH is right about parts of the free software world becoming entangled worth various irrelevant
40.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
Oh. Correction noted. That's all water under the bridge now though. You can't hold grudges forever.
41.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
Why would he resign over that? He's threatened to resign over removing DOS support, but has no problem with pdumper.
42.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
WASM is totally unnecessary. Vanilla seccomp is sufficient and runs at full performance. What is it with people trying to stick WASM in places it's not needed?
43.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
Browsers have been sandboxing their tabs since 2008. Don't sit there and tell me that bwrap, sandboxing, whatever is some kind of recent innovation with uneven distro support. And yes, bwrap needs root or namespaces. So what? So does s
44.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
The technology works fine if you use it in a disciplined way. The problem is that people don't! You're necessarily going to break programs if you put them in restricted environments. That's not the same as the restriction tec
45.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
There's no good reason a proc macro can't run in a no-IO sandbox by default. None. Doesn't require a language change. Doesn't require some microvmcapabilityeffect BS. It requires looking people straight in the eye and sa
46.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
No, the reason people haven't been doing this -- and we've had technologies for ages -- is that it's a huge pain in the ass, a "tax", that it's hard to get developers inside a company to pay, much less particip
47.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
MicroVM this, effects that --- can we discuss security without needing to invoke bay area buzzwords? The idea is "least privilege", and we desperately need it in computing. The precise technical mechanism we use to achieve it is l
48.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
I'm honestly baffled as to how EU regulators can see Apple's behavior as compliance. They're doing everything they did before, perhaps changing only to temporarily turn down the intensity a bit.
49.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
Different RISC-V dialects might as well be as different from each other as English is from German. Sure, the cognates, family the resemblance, and common(-ish) alphabet make some things easier, but if you're shipping a manual, you sti
50.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
If some drainage good, maybe more drainage better?
51.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
Even if it is temporary, so what? Can't you just repeat it? And wouldn't clearing these drainage channels be harmless (modulo risks of any surgery) even if the theory didn't pan out? If I had early-stage Alzheimer's I&#x
52.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
Why?
53.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
Interesting they'd recommend Decentraleyes: its default configuration disabled all HTTP link prefetching, which hurts performance in a way not apparent from the extension description.
54.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
Sure, but you have to take pains to make sure that journalctl -f doesn't skip events or print some twice. It can be made to work, for sure, but it just seems easier to print logs via a daemon instead, especially because if you go throu
55.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
So write amplification on btrfs doesn't matter?
56.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
So, yes, journald does in fact do bulk copies of log files on rotate. btrfs is hardly some fringe FS and its COW-flag behavior is documented and well-known. I'd expect extensive work on journald's storage engine to have uncovered
57.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
> it's only used in a workaround when clearing FS_NOCOW_FL fails. Clearing FS_NOCOW_FL doesn't work on btrfs for non-empty files. So what do you think journald is doing when it notices that it can't clear the flag?
58.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
journald does do a rewrite of the log file on rotation, so you're paying that IO anyway even if you ignore the dumb hash table updates. https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/8f4cd7de43d1e6e94687... WAL
59.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
How do readers get log entries that haven't made their way into one of the parquet archive files? If the tip is some kind of live-update DB, that DB has to support concurrent readers who can't block writers. Or would you just make
60.
by quotemstr 1mo ago
SQLite has the problem of a malicious reader being able to hold up writers. Maybe that's fine in most cases, but in a system log, I don't think that's acceptable. IMHO, options are to indirect through a daemon anyway (e.g. us

More ›