tptacek

29 ms·

871.
by tptacek 4mo ago
Wait, you can just pay for the shingles vaccine, before you're 50? Where do I do that? I had shingles in my 30s. It was the sickest I've ever been.
872.
by tptacek 4mo ago
It's also a dead letter: browsers won't implement it (they did at one point, and then withdrew it).
873.
by tptacek 4mo ago
OK, if that makes you feel better. Most of the 9/11 hijackers weren't low-IQ individuals; they included engineers, architects, schoolteachers, and pilots (for real); many were recruited out of universities; many were bi- and trili
874.
by tptacek 4mo ago
That's a huge amount of money for a vulnerability.
875.
by tptacek 4mo ago
Draper sabotages Ginsburg because he couldn't possibly care less about Ginsburg and is irritated to be saving his feelings by pitching two different campaigns when he knows he has it in the bag. I know the Mad Men wiki says otherwise,
876.
by tptacek 4mo ago
My point is that Anthropic does not in fact have a lot of money riding on whether or not they use Zig, or probably really anything else that happens with Bun. In the meme, Anthropic is Don Draper, and the author of this blog post is Ginsbur
877.
by tptacek 4mo ago
No, it didn't. SSH adoption was nearly universal with a year or two of its release. TLS was nearly universal on commercial sites long, long before LetsEncrypt. SSH and TLS are not comparable in adoption to DNSSEC.
878.
by tptacek 4mo ago
As you can see, after 30+ years of effort, we are nowhere close to 50%, or even 25%, of deployment on real sites.
879.
by tptacek 4mo ago
I don't think it's the case that serious orgs are generally doing DNSSEC. Rather the opposite. https://dnssecmenot.fly.dev/
880.
by tptacek 4mo ago
I don't know what the idiom is in chem, but if I was a chemist and you used idiosyncratic layperson spelling, I would get signal from that.
881.
by tptacek 4mo ago
The points in the article aren't great. It opens up personal and stays personal. As people in this thread have pointed out, several of the falsifiable bits turn out to be false. The big thing though is, you get to the end of it and hav
882.
by tptacek 4mo ago
I agree with you about the Bell Curve stuff, I believe that's where you're coming from, I think where you're coming from is a good place, I don't agree with you (or rather: think you're way overstating) the diminish
883.
by tptacek 4mo ago
This is the problem with populism; it's thought-terminating. Do the math on this. Liquidate a mega-billionaire to cover Chipotle's payroll. What happens next year?
884.
by tptacek 4mo ago
What DNSSEC progress?
885.
by tptacek 4mo ago
I don't think this is a valid argument, and I think the search bar will show my bona fides on the "racism" angle of this. I don't think "proud IQ denier" is a strong rhetorical position. IQ is, among other thin
886.
by tptacek 4mo ago
I don't even know who you're replying to anymore; who are you quoting? You get that you and I are the only people reading this, right? You're not going to convince me; you already opened this conversation up by acknowledging
887.
by tptacek 4mo ago
Exercise for the reader (out of genuine interest): find the most important cryptographic paper published in the last 15 years that uses the British spelling.
888.
by tptacek 4mo ago
Which is an SES effect; SES effects are all generally "highly politically relevant".
889.
by tptacek 4mo ago
This isn't responsive to anything I just wrote. Are you generating these comments?
890.
by tptacek 4mo ago
Nobody is even rhetorically asking you to trust NIST.
891.
by tptacek 4mo ago
No, nobody is asking you to trust NIST.
892.
by tptacek 4mo ago
Sir, this is a Wendy's. You're giving me a phone book's worth of RFC cites here but not a lot of indication that you spend a lot of time reading RFCs generally. The RFC we're discussing on this thread is an ancillary pub
893.
by tptacek 4mo ago
You're making my point for me. Nobody in the whole world is asking for you to take NIST's word for anything. The problem here is that literally the only information you have to work with is Daniel Bernstein, a notorious standards
894.
by tptacek 4mo ago
Again: it's not their cryptosystem. They didn't design it. They had no hand in its design, or in any of the research that led up to it. They proctored a competition in which everyone involved was unsurprised by the outcome. A pret
895.
by tptacek 4mo ago
Again: you pretty clearly don't understand the article you're citing. And that's easy mode compared to LWE vs RLWE. I don't think there's anything productive to be gained from us continuing to talk.
896.
by tptacek 4mo ago
I'd call this an instance of the genetic fallacy, but it's even less tethered to reason than that.
897.
by tptacek 4mo ago
The article you're talking about literally opens "I think Dual EC is a backdoor". You don't understand it. You don't know who Paul Hoffman even is. Why would we keep discussing this?
898.
by tptacek 4mo ago
It's brilliant! There's no such thing as time!
899.
by tptacek 4mo ago
You don't understand the article you just quoted. It is certainly not the case that I published an article in 2015 questioning Dual EC. You might be the only person in the world with an opinion about Paul Hoffman, by the way. I had to
900.
by tptacek 4mo ago
Schneier said the same thing I did. I literally got my take from Schneier. You don't even have the Schneier Facts right!

More ›