nagvx

The section on http://www.libressl.org/ that starts with: "LibreSSL releases contain several parts" lists said parts, with links to manpages for those parts. For example: https://man.openbsd.org/openssl

I think you are deliberately missing the point of the last line. Of course free access to a wide variety of education is a good thing - no one is doubting that.

But gatekeeping recognition for that education behind a paywall ensures that we are judging students not solely on their ability, but also on the size of their wallet.

There is nothing "anti-human" about acknowledging that, in an educational era of plenty, our systems are still failing those without the means to pay.

Do you have a link to said program?

But would they provide resistance? As nice as the idea of a fully-free distro is, I have the impression that free distros have a minuscule userbase compared to their non-free counterparts. For an already niche distro, this sounds like a significant handicap.

If someone came along and offered a hardware-compatibility repo or redistribution, would the Guix community work with them, or would the relationship be more distant, or even adversarial?

I'm personally very interested in the project, and have no desire to poison the pure core of Guix, but I need my hardware to work.

What you describe sounds like search result spam, which is neither irrelevant or a good thing for the consumer.

Downvotes are appropriate. HN isn't the place for in-jokes or pop culture references.

>don't yearn for a boss to tell which is which.

This is not what is being said - I will quote the parent commenter:

"Here it seems that an influence / behaviour change campaign could be waged relatively cheaply against a relatively small number of people, exist completely outside the normal rules for fact checking or veracity, and the majority of the population would have no idea about it."

This is talking about being "bubbled", and how different collections of people are seeing completely different things, and because both sides don't know what the other is looking at, they become alienated from each other.

Furthermore, there is another problem - while a singular lie can be countered, a thousand different lies told to a thousand different communities is much harder to defend against.

It may be worth mentioning, if you want to avoid systemd, that Guix has a Scheme-based init system called Shepherd:

https://www.gnu.org/software/shepherd/

You don't need to fork the entire OS, though - just provide the relevant non-free packages on top of the regular OS.

Guix devs themselves have hinted that "adding impurity to a free OS is much easier than removing impurity from a non-free OS", so I suspect they may not be categorically opposed to the idea of non-free packages.

If we're plugging functional package management, we may as well mention the other significant project in this space - Guix:

https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/download/

Essentially, all the benefits touted above apply here, but it is worth noting that Guix is a younger project. The author was originally a Nix dev, but found the DSL to be too awkward to use in practice, and opted to use Scheme through and through. Yes, Emacs bindings are available.

Also, Guix can now produce Dockerfiles, if that floats your boat:

https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/news/creating-bundles-with...

Why was the title changed? The old title was not great, but at least informed us that a) the article was about PaX/Grsec, and b) was trying to present another side to the story.

HN has replaced this with the title of an obscure Linux project, and an awkward and unhelpful metaphor - capitalisation kept, of course, so readers can wrongly assume that "Ark" is the name some piece of software. Yes, it's original, pure and untouched. No, it's not helpful, it's just worse in every way.

I understand that editorialising titles is a bad thing. But if a human is taking the time to make a judgement call on what is or is not editorialised, why not take a few extra minutes to create a more neutral title?

While your point isn't invalid, having to contact my bank and work through the process of setting this up is another layer of hassle that I don't have to deal with on another, more flexible provider.

The issue isn't with the currency, but the lack of pre-paid plans and how that interacts with flat conversion fees.

It's also easy to overlook the euro issue when the majority of popular hosting providers charge in dollars - and I can already see people making this mistake in the thread.

Note that Scaleway bills in euros, not dollars, pounds, etc. They also have no pre-paid policy, so you cannot pay a lump sum upfront to get many months usage. This means that you could be hit by significant monthly fees if you are paying via another currency. But of course, different banks have different policies, and YMMV.

My €3/mo was (IIRC) more like €5/mo once conversion fees were taken into account. This €2 flat fee would not have been a problem had I been paying for 12 months at a time, but Scaleway do not offer this, in contrast to many other hosting providers on the market. After inquiring, I was told there was no current plan to change this policy.

Has there been any update to the status of GuileEmacs? I have read that it aims to be "the future of Emacs", but I rarely see mention of Guile from the Emacs community.

>so blatantly self-serving without being upfront about it

Is advertising actually self-serving if it isn't upfront about what it being advertised?

This statue is not like a traditional billboard emblazoned with a brand name - the only mention of SHE appears to be on the placard at the foot of the statue. Even then, the mention is ambiguous, as how many people will recognize 'SHE' as a stock tracker rather than just a word with emphasis?

I broadly agree with your sentiment, and I understand there is something discomforting about its origin. However I believe the statue would come across as far more tasteless if SHE were upfront with their branding.

This is a comment that seems to pop up quite a lot in discussions of the capitalist status-quo. (Often in a more confrontational manner, unfortunately.) I want to point out that having a solution is not a prerequisite to talking about the problem - if that is what you were implying - that is getting things backwards.

>They can't keep counterfeits off (I just recently got a 'samsung' battery that would only charge to 80%),

Are you sure that it is counterfeit? 80% is a common charging cutoff point for Li-ion batteries to minimise wear-and-tear. Usually it is enforced in software.

Excuse my ignorance, but couldn't a cell that had exceeded its write limit be cycled out for a spare, thus permanently storing a portion of your data in a way unaccessible to any further writes, random-filled or not?

Why no proper mention of ATA Secure Erase? It's not an Apple feature, it's a low level SSD feature designed for this.

However, LSoE is not the same as Goldsmiths, which is the college mentioned here. London colleges are generally good but there is quite a lot of variance - between "great" and "the very best".

Could you offer some specific, searchable product names?

This is not true. VT-d and ECC were thought to be removed, but these features were simply unlisted, not removed. Intel Ark now shows them as available, e.g:

http://ark.intel.com/products/97143/Intel-Pentium-Processor-...

Please correct me if I'm wrong - isn't this a terrible business decision? It took a small team a year to make a product that is apparently taking the market by storm. Their secret sauce is apparently not some special algorithm, but common-sense automation. If the barrier to entry is actually this low, and they advertise the fact widely enough, they will soon be joined by competitors trying to do the same. They may be ahead of the pack, but they lose their selling point and their advantage faster than they would have done otherwise.

Why give away your hand like this?

>represented an analogy for the threat of global nuclear war; however, since 2007 it has also reflected climate change,[4] and new developments in the life sciences and technology that could inflict irrevocable harm to humanity.[5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doomsday_Clock

It has been this way for nearly a decade. It's also plausible that they are linked - climate change destroying natural resources (land, food, etc.) certainly has the potential to inflict political instability and conflict.

I wasn't assuming you were talking about "eradicating racism from planet earth" - that's a bit of a strawman. "Stopping blatant racism" is moving the goalposts, because "blatant" wasn't part of the original context.

As you say, you can stop someone overtly declaring their racism, but that doesn't mean they won't still covertly (or even unconsciously) continue with racist behaviors. Which is why it isn't so "clear", because even a simple situation with coworkers, you can be facing an uphill battle.

Anyway, I would wager we both broadly agree and this is now just a semantic argument.

I generally agree with your idea that "don't be an asshole" is an incredibly subjective and unhelpful rule of thumb. However your comment that "being racist is pretty easy to nip in the bud" is just absurdly oversimplified.

A racist may live in fear of the criminality of (insert race here) without seeing the bigger picture of poverty that causes it. A racist may have a majority of bad experiences with (insert race here) without realising their own prejudice was to blame.

Racism isn't "being mean", racism is potentially diverse set of prejudices and overly broad opinions that are founded on faulty logic or incomplete data. Racism can be propped up by an entire web of social beliefs and a lifetime of personal experience. Racists don't think they're "being mean", they think they hold sane, justifiable opinions against other "mean" or even "inferior" groups of people. Indeed, it may "not even occur to them they are being offensive".

The long and sordid history of racism around the globe can attest to the fact that racism is not something "easy to nip in the bud".

It's - '' - 'U+0003 : <control-0003> (END OF TEXT [ETX])', which is (apparently) invisible on some browser setups.

You're always going to get collisions, the serious ones are with other technical topics/brands/etc. No one is going to mix up a programming language and an airline.

When you feed them unambiguous queries like that, yes. "stdlib" is a very unique word specific to the domain of programming. Things get trickier with terms that have more overlap, and irrelevant results tend to creep further up the page.