dsr_

Does any distro disable ASLR by default?

If you were to do it by hand, nginx doesn't come to mind as a likely candidate.

MAY is the correct choice.

https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119

Most services have privacy policies that boil down to:

- we promise not to share PII (defined as narrowly as possible)

- we promise not to share payment information except with our payment system

- if you pay us, we promise not to train LLMs on your data

- you agree that everything else can be used for any business purpose, including marketing, intelligence gathering, and "sharing with our 1735 trusted partners".

... and gives me a message on my primary phone: "This number has been used too many times."

Because it could eventually be detected as click-fraud, and ad networks hate paying out for click-fraud.

It's usually quite possible. Movie theaters make their money on food and drink, so arranging an extra screening for the cost of 50% of the seats in a given room is nicely profitable.

Depending on the theater's manager, they'll either want someone to guarantee a minimum or to have a single fee paid up front.

There's nothing quite like knowing that everyone in the theater is a friend.

It is built as a module in Debian.

lsmod shows it is not loaded on any of the Trixie or Bookworm machines I have checked, Intel or AMD.

> That article is from 8 years ago, accuracy is dramatically better today. We see a few percent error rate.

Your reading comprehension is not good.

The 2018 study is for "traditional" voice recognition, followed by a human transcriptionist, followed by physician review and signoff.

And it has much lower rates of errors than the 2025 study on LLM transcription.

Really, I think the problem is that the LLM transcribers pretend that they can do the work of the humans. Keep the humans, the accuracy would be probably be on par with Dragon. But then there's no reason to deal with LLM "hallucinations" at all, and the cost/value argument falls apart.

CAIS eliminates educated people who reduce errors, in order to shift profits to ... well, you.

You had it 20 years ago: doctors spoke into recorders, transcriptionists turned that into notes, the docs reviewed them.

The first study I cited replaces the "spoke into recorders" stage with non-AI voice recognition.

The second study replaces the "spoke into recorders" stage with LLM voice recognition, and... crucially... also replaces the educated transcriptionist step with nothing.

I imagine that the real problem is that the voice recognition can be classic or LLM and it just doesn't matter as much as having two humans in the loop instead of one. But that's not a story which gets you to replace cheap voicerec with expensive AI.

Money.

Pre-AI voice recognition (2018), followed by 2 human reviews

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle...

=> the error rate was 7.4% in the version generated by speech recognition software, 0.4% after transcriptionist review, and 0.3% in the final version signed by physicians. Among the errors at each stage, 15.8%, 26.9%, and 25.9% involved clinical information, and 5.7%, 8.9%, and 6.4% were clinically significant, respectively.

AI "scribes" in a perfectly replicable best-of-all-worlds scenario (2025): https://bmjdigitalhealth.bmj.com/content/1/1/e000092

=> Omissions dominated error counts (83.8%, p<<0.001), with CAISs varying widely in error frequency and severity, and a median of 1–6 omissions per consultation (depending on CAIS). Although less frequent, hallucinations and factual inaccuracies were more often clinically serious. No tested CAIS produced error-free summaries.

On the gripping hand, people who work in the management end of the US healthcare industry can't be trusted with healthcare or information security to begin with.

This feels like a market which hasn't settled into long-term profitability and is being subsidized by investors.

> successful founders are busier

I thought it was supposed to be "passive".

Demand at an unsustainably low price does not imply demand at a sustainable price.

Remember that the difference between "Flock can do whatever the hell it wants" and "Flock is required to delete your data at your request" is a law. Citizens vote for legislators. If you want this to be a higher priority for your legislators, buy them off.

Or vote for/against them, that might work too.

Which is why Firefox has memorized that this site needs 170% zoom.

A thing can be nifty and clever and thus interesting and elicit positive feelings... about the process.

I don't think anyone will listen to this for the pleasure of listening to music.

AI crap can be much more listenable-as-music but nobody likes the process or the product.

My custom XFWM theme has square corners on windows without focus and large-radius rounded corners on the one window with focus.

The square corners are part of a 2 pixel wide border (one black, one white) because who needs to waste space on handling things we aren't manipulating? But the title bar is high-contrast, because you'll go looking for it when you want to switch windows.

The round corners go with a fairly thick border in a customizable color, usually something very bright in the yellow, orange or cyan ranges. When you sit down, you should immediately know what is active.

Same result, either way.

Phone mechanisms which worked for me:

- the original Motorola StarTac "Star Trek Communicator" flip.

- the Danger Hiptop / Sidekick II rotating screen-over-keyboard

- the Motorola Droid slide-out keyboard

- the OnePlus 7Pro slide-out selfie-cam

Only that last one was motorized, but mine is still working. Holes and divots and islands and any other kind of screen interference is strictly inferior.

There are definitely some vendors who respect an unsubscribe request, and some who don't. No way to tell ahead of time.

I won't buy, ever again, from someone who doesn't respect the unsub request.

Even worse, most of their products weren't special:

- available faster from Amazon

- available cheaper from AliExpress

- sometimes both faster and cheaper from the manufacturer

And Massdrop didn't provide exceptionally good customer service or warranties.

The best thing I bought from them was a pair of JBL LSR-305 powered monitors for $180. Great bedroom speakers at about a 50% discount.

The retailer's problem can be solved through diversification. If you sell enough different things, and they are all of good quality, people will come back to shop for other things that you sell.

The manufacturer's problem needs more capital, because it is also solved through diversification. If the total market for space oscillators is 120,000 a year, with about a 2-3% annual growth, making the best space oscillators has a cap. You'll need to figure out how to turn your expertise in space oscillators into neighboring products - space modulators and electromagnetic oscillators, perhaps - each of which is an R&D investment itself.

If this meeting doesn't include devs, I don't know what the context of anything in the article is supposed to be about. There are no major new ideas in business that don't involve software.

If it is not the case that "devs" is not functionally equivalent to saying "DevOps", then "DevOps" doesn't exist. You have an operations group, and you need their buy-in, so they should be invited to the meeting.

> "I haven't heard any customers request this." "We can't use Python for that, it's too slow." "That introduces too much complexity." "We tried something like that before and it didn't work." "DevOps won't want to support another service." "People are used to the way it works now."

> None of these people are wrong or stupid. And none of them have added any value.

Bzzt. Since all of these people are correct and smart, it is now your job to have great answers to their objections.

No customers requested this? Prove that there is a market that wants it.

Can't use Python because it's too slow? Show a proof of concept that is fast.

Too much complexity? Demonstrate that it's the minimum amount of complexity to achieve all the requirements.

Tried it before unsuccessfully? Explain what's changed since then.

DevOps won't want to support it? Burn down the company and start again: you've managed to undo everything that the word "DevOps" is supposed to convey.

People don't want change? Nah, people like change when it is obvious to them that the change is good. People don't want bad changes, and their justifiable default assumption is that a new change is a bad change. You'll need to overcome that.

And if you can't convince these acknowledged correct-and-smart naysayers, then be glad you didn't chase that rabbit. Come up with a new idea tomorrow.

Nobody sensible runs the latest kernel; nobody running PG in production should be afraid of setting a non-default at either boot time or as a sysctl. So this will, most likely, be another step in building a PG database server (turn off pre-emption if your kernel is 7.0 or later and PG is pre-whatever-version).

At worst it might become a permanent part of building a PG server and a FAQ... but if it affects one thing this badly, it will affect others.

If you can inject arbitrary malicious routes, you can make ACME requests for a new cert.

Because BGP works, is understood, and has been debugged by thousands of people and billions of sessions between dozens or hundreds of implementations.

So the benefit of changing out all that infrastucture needs to be much higher than the cost.

More useful for most people: is the company you are considering doing business with run by one of these fine upstanding folks?

If you put everything into a monolith, it looks simpler than if you have components that have to speak protocols to each other.