xtajv

8 ms·

61.
by xtajv 10mo ago
This one's almost as good as "why don't we try paying software engineers by the line?"
62.
by xtajv 1y ago
This is legitimately reassuring. There are nearly-century-old journalistic guidelines and ethical codes about what you do and do not put into widespread news media. Posting explicit details about methods used in a celebrity suicide encourag
63.
by xtajv 1y ago
There's plenty of hasty generalizations going on in this comment. If you see this sort of thing happening in the U.S., the place to complain is your state's insurance board. Medicine is hard enough without people TRYING to do harm
64.
by xtajv 1y ago
Translation: Insurance companies intentionally injecting bugs into their own software to make requests that don't respect user input. Despicable.
65.
by xtajv 1y ago
Fire insurance protects against the rare disaster where there's a fire. Flood insurance protects against the rare disaster where there's a flood. Health insurance protects against the rare disaster where somebody's actually a
66.
by xtajv 1y ago
It pains me to mention this but I don't think it's responsible not to: https://github.com/meshtastic/firmware/issues/4030 At time of writing (2025-09-27, plus or minus a timezone), there does not ap
67.
by xtajv 1y ago
I dream that LLMs will be the disaster that finally convinces the software engineering field that code isn't so "soft" after all, and that software engineering should be licensed, bonded, and insured. Every single other engin
68.
by xtajv 1y ago
Oh no you're right- usually the handwavy argument that will be made is "Okay, hashing is never O(1) in the bitlength of the input... it's O(1) in the number of elements being hashed, and the rest of the complexity analysis is
69.
by xtajv 1y ago
Oh boy, this should be good. Mark my words, this will be followed by a "proof" of nonexistence, in the following form: "Well, let's build a list of attacks that I can think of off-the-cuff. And then let's iterate
70.
by xtajv 1y ago
> Network security is such an afterthought but it’s the best layer of defense you can have! I mean, it's an additional layer. Defense-in-depth is about having multiple.
71.
by xtajv 1y ago
I guess the term "defense in depth" has fallen out of fashion?
72.
by xtajv 1y ago
Usage of the slang "auth" is my current favorite indicator of complete cryptographic snakeoil.
73.
by xtajv 1y ago
It seems like trademark infringement.
74.
by xtajv 1y ago
https://hothardware.com/news/google-sued-by-original-pixel-o... IDK about you, but I went from "die-hard Nexus lover/Pixel preorder" to ungoogling everything in my life (including every piece of "fa
75.
by xtajv 1y ago
This is actually so needed. I've heard the phrase "minting your own tokens?!" used as an argument for (N)oAuth. The current state of affairs is honestly just sad.
76.
by xtajv 1y ago
Okay sorry nobody's said it yet. I'll say it. You cannot call it that. I will not be entering the workplace and suggesting that we use a product whose name is very easily mistaken for "the F word". It is an immediate non
77.
by xtajv 1y ago
Obligatory: Please do not assume that you will be able to accurately profile strangers based on metadata or "digital footprint"-type information.
78.
by xtajv 1y ago
Choose APIs that offer SLAs. <3 It's not about being picky. It's about communicating needs, and setting boundaries that are designed to satisfy those needs without overwhelming anybody's system to the point of saturation
79.
by xtajv 1y ago
There's nothing wrong with "accidentally-overengineering" in the sense of having off-the-shelf options that are actually nice. There is something wrong with adding a "fancy" feature to an off-the-shelf option, if
80.
by xtajv 1y ago
hey so idk if folks remember how DoNotDisturb got intro'd. (anybody else do "Lock-in" drills in school where we all had to be SILENT?)
81.
by xtajv 1y ago
No it doesn't. Some of us are just like, really particular about schedules. (The internet is full of weirdos, sorry).
82.
by xtajv 1y ago
> A scenario where the attacker controls the plaintext being sent but doesn't know what the plaintext is seems quite unlikely. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chosen-plaintext_attack#In_pra... comes to mind. (Not
83.
by xtajv 1y ago
P.S. I'm sorry to be grouchy about it- I just don't think folks realize that yes, 1. emergency infrastructure really does run over the same networks as everything else 2. That We carve out special lanes for emergency/911 p
84.
by xtajv 1y ago
Ok sorry, I'm going to state the obvious. The "Apple Critical Alerts" API is clearly intended as a replacement channel for cellular emergency alerts[0]. (If not a "replacement", then perhaps a "supplemental&quo
85.
by xtajv 2y ago
> So in fact with things like transgender it is things like the hypothalamus-pituitary link that is interfered with to shut down endogenous sex hormone production If by "interfered with",you mean "corrected to adjust for
86.
by xtajv 3y ago
> Part of the problem is that it's just so opaque. You send the token and the server replies "nope", with no further explanation. Catch-all HTTP 401s and 403s are there to thwart https://en.wikipedia.org/wi
87.
by xtajv 3y ago
I'm terrible - one might even go so far as to say that the telescope conjecture has collapsed .
88.
by xtajv 3y ago
why not both? :)
89.
by xtajv 4y ago
"I don't have to worry about $PARTICULAR_DISASTER_SCENARIO because I've already precomputed a strategy for that scenario by ruminating about it." != "I don't have to worry about $PARTICULAR_DISASTER_SCENARIO be
90.
by xtajv 4y ago
Bugs are just security issues.

More ›