mike_hock

A poorly documented or undocumented (debugging) backdoor in a chip marketed for ATMs and medical hardware, enabled by default, at the very least qualifies as reckless endangerment.

Great article for April 1st! No, wait. It's August 7th. Wat.

I already have a second usable device and I don't mind the extra weight that much most of the time. It's called a laptop computer.

As soon as we get to a point that Linux on the phone works at all, I'm happy to switch completely.

Here, "it works" literally just means it works. Not "GPS doesn't work," "camera only half works," "interop with Android/iOS apps that you're forced to use doesn't work." That doesn't mean "it works." And of course "only works for 2-3 years and then the device gets abandoned" doesn't mean "it works" either.

Thanks, I guess :D

It's not actually vulnerable.

You're absolutely right. I made a critical error. It's NOT vulnerable.

It' actually vulnerable.

You're absolutely right. I made a critical error. It IS vulnerable.

It's not actually vulnerable.

You're absolutely right. I made a critical error. It's NOT vulnerable.

> I've been able to formally verify that the Rust behavior is identical to the Postgres C behavior

I thought you wanted to get rid of the bugs!

I think this a positive effect of LLMs, especially once these capabilities get into the hands of criminals and hostile foreign states, i.e. they will do maximum damage with all the safeties off.

This will force everyone to finally take security seriously at both the development and operational levels. You can no longer keep sneaking backdoors into software and count on them remaining hidden for 10 years so you have a nice portfolio of zero days to exploit at any given time.

Thanks for the honest, load—bearing emojis.

Thanks for the PSA but I already knew that I wasn't gonna touch it with a ten foot pole.

> What if <common sense>?

I find it baffling that some people had to find this out the hard way. You already knew that it's — if not more work — then at least more tedious to study existing code than write your own.

People have been choosing greenfield rewrites over grokking legacy code since forever.

I don't buy that minor being "sad" is all nurture and no nature. No matter what tempo or rhythm you put on it or what instruments you use to play it, it may not sound sad, it may sound dramatic and powerful instead, but it never sounds upbeat and happy the way major does (or at least can).

It has been tacked on as a "totally not an integer" type because the integer system isn't extensible enough to accommodate it.

It could of course be added with an ABI break (bumping intmax_t to int128), but that's not being done because it would be an ABI break. Hence, not extensible in practice.

> C has a confusing array of machine-dependent types such as ptrdiff_t and size_t

What's confusing about them? They're basically what int and unsigned int were supposed to be. It's just that they realized they had produced a pile of unextensible shit so they had to add new names.

While they were at it, they produced the next version of unextensible shit so now int128 can't be added.

> You think the average user is going to explicitly whitelist

When prompted by the browser on first login/signup, yes, the same way the password manager works. With stored passwords, keeping the login cookie doesn't even add much value.

No, but it's the obvious starting point. You can then put additional laws on top banning fingerprinting out of band (if you care about window dressing), fund development of anti-fingerprinting technologies, fund Tor, run exit nodes in a transparent and publicly auditable fashion, etc.

It's not hard to make privacy work when you are the government rather than working against a hostile one.

I made no claims as to whether misdirection is happening or feasible, only that there are incentives for both sides to do so if it is, while there are no incentives for Russia to take on a much larger enemy while it can barely handle Ukraine, which OP was implying was the obvious explanation.

Interwebsite is solved by partitioning and login cookies are solved by explicit whitelisting.

Don't fall for the "we are just stupid" propaganda, which is used constantly by governments acting in bad faith.

Browsers already had settings for deleting cookies. There was never a reason for banners whose only function was pulling the ladder up from smaller competitors and concentrating power in the hands of an oligopoly that could siphon data directly from the OS.

This coupled with a law mandating ISPs provide a "change IP on demand" feature would have given users a sort of "Tor light" level of privacy. Strong privacy is trivial to achieve for a government that doesn't have a conflicting goal of total surveillance.

That's where the mutants live. Also, there's a thousand year old, old New York City buried underneath that had bathroom booths with phones in them.

NATO not going total war over a few airspace incursions does not prove a lack of resolve to defend its territories. Russia is also not salami slicing its way to anything if it's not causing meaningful damage or territorial exchange.

Conversely, Russia(n leadership) would probably love an overreaction by NATO to unlock the use of its conscripted army for "defense," which is not feasible in the current war of aggression.

The only loaded rhetoric is coming from you, I merely stated what the incentives are. Note that the situation is somewhat symmetric in that Russia also has an incentive to misdirect Ukrainian drones toward NATO airspace (which has happened).

It's one of those systemd features that are annoying and in the way when you're trying to accomplish a specific task but deal well with shitware. To be fair to systemd, these features can't usually be implemented without writing new rules for what you have to do to accomplish the legitimate tasks.

> Default Debian Trixie out of the box configuration without changing any systemd config file allows gnu screen to work as it always has.

As mentioned in the second sentence of TFA. Debian enables linger by default.

Move by whom? Drones straying from the intended route is usually caused by jamming from the other side.

Escalating tensions between Russia and NATO is in Ukraine's, not Russia's, interest.

Like all git operations that destroy history, it's a bit less scary than rm or unlink, because you can undo obvious fuckups using the reflog. Non-obvious fuckups will (by Murphy's law) only be detected long after the reflog has been GC'd, so it still risks losing work.

Git was written with Linux in mind, where curating a clean commit history is more important than the code itself and warrants the extra hassle.

An actually usable rebase would probably require something like a meta history. But then the meta history would accumulate fixup "commits" and typos in commit messages so the OCD people will want to change that and we're back to square one. In practice, the two times per decade it actually makes business sense to dig through the history to find when a bug was introduced instead of just writing the 5-line fix, you can live with a couple of imperfect commits and merges.

I certainly hope they'll choose C.

No, this is not the same as Cloudflare fascism. You're free to use any JS runtime to solve the challenge.

1.) It's definitely a giant leap from current technology to interstellar colonization.

2.) Other civilizations even in the nearest solar system would basically be impossible to detect. Even in our own solar system, there could be millions of undetected spacecraft right now. They're simply too small to see. To be detectable, they'd either have to be massive and massively disruptive, like Dyson spheres, which are and most likely will forever remain pure fiction, or they'd have to happen to use radio for communication.

3.) There are good reasons for them not to be using radio for communication. They might have discovered a different physical phenomenon that allows them to communicate in ways we can't detect. Or they might not be as reckless as humans and don't want to broadcast their presence and activity to completely unknown and potentially hostile other species.

Fizzbuzz is not the least bit interesting on a technical level. It's interesting because even though it's trivial to "cheat" (you can just learn/memorize Fizzbuzz specifically), it still works because people so incompetent they can't even write something as trivial as Fizzbuzz are unlikely to have heard of it.

Fizzbuzz is used to confirm an already present suspicion of complete incompetence, not to assess skill (ability to pass is not a meaningful signal).

I can't see any way this would beat regular steganography.