blitmap

Wonderful that we can do these things during peacetime.

I get annoyed when I remove most of the default search providers, and then an update brings Google back. I specifically removed some of those providers so my searches would not be predicted with those services.

Merge DirectX into Vulcan (without killing it) and then I'll be convinced.

This probably doesn't contribute to the conversation but with the number of serious vulnerabilities that have popped up recently I'm not inspired to solve the truth table for the CPU vendor that leaves me the least exposed. As others have said - and I have seen - some of these can be exploited with Javascript in the browser. (I do not know much about Zombieland presently)

Looking forward to a less complex architecture even if it means cutting me off at the knees with execution speed (for a few years):

RISC-V

I contend that while everything about the client cannot be hidden from the server, the number of things that can be identified is increasing.

It's frustrating to me that browsers lend themselves so willingly to being fingerprinted, and it's up to the user to stay aware of and keep ahead of these new avenues.

I wish there were 4 modes:

- Standard/light mode

- Dark mode (website has facilities to test for this and style accordingly)

- Dark mode with fake or unknown values advertised to the website

- Dark mode with a user-custom filter applied (like below) that the website cannot test for (it sees untransformed computed styles)

> filter: invert(95%) hue-rotate(190deg)

Very much appreciated, sir :-)

I wish I could find a good text that talks about how removed from 'directly executing on hardware' you are. Modern [x86] processors are (as described) executing very much out of order or calculating things in parallel. I wish I could find something that spoke to the whole field of tricks at play. I'm sure there's a great depth of indirection I'll never understand.

I found his commentary constructive. I didn't realize we had gone through several periods of "this design is the most popular". I think he's expressing that people hop on bandwagons rather than understanding the concepts or disciplines behind the design. Design taken as seriously as architecture.

Okay - good riddance to him and the rest of the valley :-)

Well see that's the other thing: "Someday" they'll have to make these connections in case they are legally obligated to erase a data source and it's derivatives.

You know someday when we have consumer protection laws for things like this, a company will be forced to trace every piece of derived data on a user based off of what was unlawfully collected - and provably delete it. Instead of simply paying a fine and moving along with the new insights they have on you. Like an entrance fee to the club.

Sidenote: I bet you could make a business out of tracing derived data to comply with lawful orders.

I wish JS made it easier to sandbox itself with existing mechanics - like simply unreferencing a system API. I am looking forward to this.

Preface: I am not at all an expert on WiFi

In WPA2 you can send deauthentication "frames" to clients to get them to disconnect from the access point. Later I was told these "control frames" can now be encrypted, with an extension/modification to WPA2 supported in the better consumer wireless routers like Linksys?

In response to your Denial of Service point: Does WPA3 make it harder to disconnect clients? (or are you talking about simply overwhelming the airspace with traffic/interference/jamming?)

Google is in a position where they could have disallowed protocol downgrades, setting a standard without defining a standard.

I have not worked in C in a long while. Would you mark the assembly section as volatile to avoid the compiler & assembler doing anything to it? Is there any guarantee that the assembler will not aggressively re-optimize assembly-within-C?

I prefer this: https://casual-effects.com/markdeep/

I think it was difficult to find understanding in an exchange broker, so we distrusted them. We wanted to change the world and build technologies befitting the 21st century, and could not see how they might grow into monsters. So many good intentions built by a tech giant made of ourselves.

I am IT support for an organization that does long-term disaster recovery work. I directly support coworkers that coordinate some form of mass-care (clothing, food, and alternate housing). And I live near San Francisco.

I guess this depends on what your definition of a first-world problem is.

People die here because they can't afford care. People avoiding the larger milestones in life like owning a home and having children because it's untenable. This will cause larger, show-stopping problems.

- I am no security person myself. -

I always liked this idea: https://krypt.co/

Basically using an entirely separate device to authorize your access. 2FA devices still connect to the computer requesting access, I liked the idea that your phone act as the gatekeeper without ever touching your computer.

Problem is: It's a phone. Apple has done much but I wouldn't trust it either.

So -- I am finding amusement in this -- but ethics is very labour intensive. I'm sure we all wish we could dream up new projects in a vacuum without real-world consequences (simply for the fun of it).

I have noticed this too. I've switched to DuckDuckGo for everything and I haven't changed my habits. Started getting more captchas a couple weeks ago and I know I answered several of them correctly (I'd get tested 3 times in a row).

Possible fingerprinting?

This is an impressive undertaking, and hands-down one of the coolest things I have ever seen. :-)

I had hoped we were moving toward that with Universal Windows Platform apps. :3

See, initially I thought this was going to be a debate about "well this is legal, but is it just?"

+1 to you, sir. Having inmates train the voice recognition is (in my opinion) compelling an admission.

The only thing I absolutely hate is the import-as bullshit inspired by Python. I was told this was to assist static analyzers, but when you compare it to destructuring syntax you just get annoyed by the duplication.

+1 for pipeline operator +1 for a destructuring switch

I see 3 things here:

1) Qualified job candidates are scarce? Just... what? The only difference between here and there is when people lie and say they're qualified, the company is willing to pass this lie on to the government to say "the qualified candidates are over there". There are people who can do the work, and there are companies who want to pay less in total compensation. I feel like my entire generation was raised on a CS/SE pathway. How are there no qualified candidates? What decade will we be fit do to the work? Maybe I'll move to the third world and get rehired back. That's the entry-level job.

2) H-1B is not an loophole to get "loyal" employees. Again, you keep employees with competitive wages & benefits.

3) Companies should be shamed as much as the government for an exploitable process. The government must change for the people it serves. Companies can be dissolved if they're not supporting the area they base themselves out of (and benefit from).

I should have phrased this another way: I believe fraud happens.

I really enjoyed SCGI in Lua:

https://github.com/blitmap/lua-snippets/blob/master/scgi-ser...