97 karma · joined June 25, 2018
They call it a tool and so people leave reviews like any other tool.
No, we won't be making games together. We are not in this together. We will never be.
Simply because some sociopaths have stopped seeing themselves as active members of the society, doesn't necessarily make them neither a majority nor a healthy group of people.
To honor basic human rights is "poisoning"? That's some strong projection.
Don't get me wrong, Godot did ban few accounts. Those totally weird hecklers who made issues and PR's trolling against basic human rights.
Again, if you have a proof of a ban campaign of ACTUAL contributors, please show it.
I mean, the hypocrisy of using a jet plane instead of driving for 40 minutes in your "environmental green" car is a thing[2], but shouldn't be enough to randomly ban journalists.
[1]https://twitter.com/EliotHiggins/status/1603454821700452365 [2]https://nypost.com/2022/08/22/elon-musk-planes-9-minute-35-m...
So yeah, sorry for those who believe that it's going to return some "purely algorithmic" code and won't just randomly copying code.
Also, https://twitter.com/mitsuhiko/status/1410886329924194309
Wow, just wow... this has to be regulated FAST.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthotyros
Now for the important part. Region locking is completely idiotic. If i was living abroad, i wouldn't dare to buy, for example, imported greek feta. White cheese is not the kind that matures. They are very delicate has to stay fresh. Surely there must be standards of HOW a certain kind of cheese is made but not where.
But, i know, those few dicks. Not. The. Company.
Never a company policy, just those few bad people giving it a bad name...
This is plain face control.
Between drowning refugees and immigrants in Mediterranean sea, shooting them at the borders and throwing whoever survive in concentration camps, it's only logical to go after the local dissidents too.
Yes only a part of patches would be marked as such. That, major or minor, part would simply mean that people won't have to reinvent the particular wheel, as happened in this case. People won't be missing critical _discovered_ changes, the vulnerability would be discussed, recognized in its totality (PoC, documentation etc) and proper patches will be offered. There have been cases where LTS backports were old revisions of bad patches.
I think that baking LTS kernels is unnecessarily closer to an artistic approach of doing things.
If there is a commit that refers to a "memory leak" why shouldn't be, at least superfluously, checked, identified and have distros informed? (e.g 2ca068be09bf8e285036603823696140026dcbe7)
If the crypto fix was assigned early as a vulnerability would have stayed unpatched for that long?
Still, i think we do have in hand a very characteristic issue that even without knowing the details, simply by searching commit messages for "crypto" "key" "buffer" etc it should alert somebody to give it a second and third look.
It's understandable that almost every piece of kernel code could potentially be a bad actor thus it would be tough to identify if every fix has security implications or not.
Still there must be a middle ground around common exploitation methods.
It's a matter of corporate strategy and has nothing to do with each worker.