asveikau

Reminds me of the stories of 1990s JRPGs being sanitized for US release, per Nintendo of America. eg. in FF6, Shadow drinks sake. In US FF3, he drinks milk.

> The only way to ship the same code between linux, macOS, and Windows would have been to either use something like Qt or the JVM back in the 2010s.

Correction: you didn't know how to do it. That doesn't mean nobody could.

Hence, electron came on the scene and enabled people without that particular experience or skills to create desktop apps.

Grumpier people like me rolled their eyes and said people should just write desktop apps similar to how it was done in the 1990s, to which the answer was generally "that's too much work". If this is changing, I would guess it's because AI is now doing that "too much work" for them.

In a C function returning a string, two or three idioms are common for signalling an error.

One is to return NULL for errors.

Another is to make the string result a parameter and use a return code to signal error.

A third, less common but still out there, is an error parameter.

Failure to observe these is on the caller. Forcing the caller to consider the error is probably where rust shines.

But a good C programmer is thinking about these idioms when they encounter a function signature for the first time, or they write one.

For all of my time being aware of this industry, it has generally been understood that privilege escalation bugs are common. This has always been a thing. A lot of people say, commonly and for many years, that if your security depends on there not being privilege escalation bugs, you don't have security.

Technological innovation on both sides of the iron curtain happened due to public investment. If you doubt the US role in this, I'll remind that silicon valley and many of its key accomplishments are outgrowths of military spending.

No government spending, no nice things.

I was recently randomly thinking of Cyrix. I never had one but in retrospect I think they were better than their reputation. A lot of people thought of it as a cheap knock-off, so lesser quality. I think I thought that way until I got one of the earlier generations of AMD Athlon a few years later, in the 1 GHz era.

> TCP Use-After-Free: CVE-2026-98432 / CVSS 9.8

I know it's customary for HN to edit titles to remove extraneous information, but removing "Linux" here really takes away something useful and relevant. This is a Linux vulnerability. If you're running *BSD or Mac or Windows, not affected.

I forgot entirely about superfish. That takes me back.

My recollection is part of what uncovered it was that the malware broke WebSockets on Lenovo laptops.

I think higher end Lenovo laptops with cleaner windows images were not affected. And a lot of knowledgeable users wipe the OS anyway.

It's not for national security. It's to protect Detroit.

Our domestic industry should be laser focused on being more competitive with Chinese vehicles, but if they could do relatively little R&D and keep the status quo going at high costs to the consumer, they'll do it.

One of the problems with cryptography implementations is that a bad one will be indistinguishable from a good one on the surface level. Totally broken crypto will superficially look and work as if it it works, and most people won't look deeply. This has been commented upon for years.

I think it's funny when people show poor knowledge of English grammar and confidently label their own exposure gap as a flaw.

Maybe it's a bit stuffy or formal, but yes, "the named sequence" is 100% something a real English speaking human would write. And if it's a sequence of frames forming an animation, it can absolutely be a named animation sequence.

It's pretty trivial to do this. Before the official patches were out on other platforms I did it on a few machines.

I think what you're finding is that people who don't care about low quality of LLM outputs also don't care about licensing. If you're in the faction that supports all of this, you don't see a lot of people around you still caring about licensing or quality.

But the more dominant the "legal because computer, and how dare you ask me?" attitude is, the less we'll see enforcement. People should demand action, rather than call it a clever business plan.

Folks who were on here praising Uber or Airbnb for skirting the law 10 years ago, this was part of the problem.

I think there is a rise of "this is legal because we used a computer to do it." A HN audience will not appreciate this sentiment, but honestly, a company should not provide tools to do this because they should have a filter. They should say "I won't provide tools to break constitutional rights".

Somewhere along the way, tech stopped asking questions like that, and now, people are hostile to the suggestion that the question should be asked.

The issue is when people flag neutral information as having a political bias.

Unpopular opinion for this site: Most true facts are not affected by the existence of AI. Most things in life do not need adjustment for "the age of AI".

For decades, eery tech boom cycle is filled with people who don't understand the mythical man month, or that LOC is not a productivity metric. The AI boom is no exception. AI has not invalidated this.

Yes, but in the case of prosecutors it can be very messed up. When someone is wrongfully convicted and there is very unambiguous exonerating evidence, prosecutors will fight overturning convictions.

It's bad enough to wrongfully send someone to prison, but to keep fighting for wrongful imprisonment when it's shown they made a mistake is downright evil.

This attitude is also very common for law enforcement or prosecutors.

I agree with what you said above, but not this. Jev was discussed "all over" by people chasing hype. I think that is actually a narrow set of people.

I'm sure that obs can export to something that can be used to stream to rumble.

How was latency for all of this?

It's because from a kernel perspective this part literally needs root:

> just trying to execute the command within the child container's filesystem

There is no such thing as changing your root filesystem or your uid from an an unprivileged process. There is no "just do it in user mode" either.

So they must have a root process somewhere doing it for you.

I just started googling, apparently for podman the setuid root binary is newuidmap

That cannot be true. You need to tell the kernel about the namespaces, cgroups, and the new root. Otherwise it's not a container, and there is no reason or mechanism for a child proc to respect it. And if you let any old unprivileged process do this, you open up security problems.

Based on the headline I expected to have opinions about this, but this is about Japanese elections, and I don't know anything about the political factions of Japan. These things don't always translate exactly across international lines.

I would guess that they do that by having a root daemon which authenticates requests from a unix domain socket, possibly using SO_PEERCRED.

Or a setuid binary

Care to give some examples?

A lot of the more important syscalls involved do require root.

If you're old enough to remember some techniques that people used before docker (like chroot(2)-ing daemons for security), the "containers aren't real" observations are not really new info. When containers came on the scene it felt like an outgrowth or evolution of that technique, which was extremely crude and simple.

I think the only thing in the "weird things" list that don't necessarily apply to another container system on linux would be the go-specific issues.

> using "some company in India" made it rather dismissive of the warning, actively taking the company's side(the bad "no keys were issued" defense), whereas just saying "some idiots" had it generally approve the message.

But you know your audience better than ChatGPT does. Whether people react better, worse, or indifferently to the India angle will depend on the biases of the recipient.