In reality it's macOS shipping the outdated certificates, and it affects various other command-line tools, like Curl.
845 karma · joined March 14, 2017
In reality it's macOS shipping the outdated certificates, and it affects various other command-line tools, like Curl.
The report seems to claim the opposite:
> Looking at the bug itself, it is also very likely that this unsoundness has not caused memory unsafety by accident. While it looks easy to trigger, to exploit this you need an intentionally malicious Drop implementation.
The comic was published on 9 February 2007 [0].
The PS3 was first released in November 2006. I haven't watched the video yet, but its description says "2010 saw the first hacks for the Playstation 3".
It's annoying, but thankfully it's a single checkbox in the settings to disable it (uncheck "Suggestions from sponsors").
Plenty of websites already have comically huge pointless images (often then scaled down to tiny sizes for display). No need to make the problem worse.
That said, if I was building a small ugly toy Python implementation, I would probably also not implement long integers. Or the power operator. At least not in the first iteration.
"6 % of the annual worldwide turnover"
A) Claude really produced this counterexample
B) A mathematician working for Anthropic solved a problem mathematicians have been working on for more than a century, and then credited it to Claude for PR purposes
If you believe B is more likely, why would you then believe a proof in the form of a chat log, when said chat log could itself have been faked by Anthropic way more easily than solving the mathematical problem in the first place?
But all of this is ultimately completely unrelated to the concept of "unsafe". You can delete your home directory just fine in safe Rust/Go/Python/etc. You can write a compiler that emits broken code in the same languages; even in a 100% pure functional language with 0 side effects and a perfect bug-free implementation.
Your tests run in an entirely separate process from the compiler (and from cargo). This makes it very different from memory corruption in the compiler:
- The test process can only corrupt its own memory.
- You don't need "unsafe" to run tests. Just the ability to start another process.
- If you're cross-compiling, you wouldn't even be able to run the tests on the same machine (without emulation/compatibility layers)
Does roc run tests in the same process as the compiler?
We don't really know that.
It may have been the first person able to complain - given you couldn't even file a support ticket without getting through this prompt!
"You" here means another app that integrates their API (or you as an individual using the demo on their website). How the other app gets it is up to the other app - ideally it also just queries it directly and requires location permission.
This is matching your phone's location to the already public train data.
Or their API - it also expects device location data:
> At a minimum, requests to the detect endpoint _must_ contain a device's location measurement. Additional fields can be included where available to improve the accuracy of the returned results as outlined below.
Edit: On second thought, that's only needed if you want to run rustc itself on the old hardware, which is probably not super useful given the main reason you would need to do this is if LLVM can't target that hardware.
For building code written in Rust for such old hardware, this would be sufficient.
Do you have some examples? I have developer mode enabled and have never seen any apps complaining (and I have used a lot of different banking apps).
The actual cookie banner merely says "We use cookies to improve your user experience. Learn more" and has a close button.
You'd struggle to find a POS terminal that even has a reader for them in the UK. I've only ever had to enable them in the US or Japan.
I assume you would also have some sort of icon that indicates all of the changes you made have been synced (or the opposite, an icon for when they haven't yet).
Though of course, it doesn't help if the user outright kills the app or pulls the plug or whatever. But I think in that case they should expect to lose some data?