swinglock

It's not correct. A notable example is the water effects.

He says he likes the look, that's subjective and doesn't need arguments. You wanted to read another, technical article.

Next let's review their RAM usage while idle, shall we?

It would make the tampering more expensive, but not too expensive given the 100 million dollar reward, while also making inspection of the device practically impossible for users.

If you can't get to the insides without breaking it, the only devices verified to likely be safe would be unusable too, so the product would in practice be even more unsafe.

If the user first inspects it and then glue it on their own, that would work, but it wouldn't solve this problem. Evil maid attack is something else and obviously harder at scale.

Absolutely. Turn the warnings into errors too, build and test with sanitizers (ASAN, UBSAN, TSAN) when not measuring performance, and use static analysis beyond compiler warnings (Clang Tidy, Clang Static Analyzer).

Though the author doesn't look to be trying to write a great tutorial, rather prioritizing sharing what and how they learned something from their perspective.

I didn't expect there would be a Christmas party in hell.

How is the keyboard broken? Maybe I'm so used to whatever it is that I'm blind to it.

Much like the website, it's unavailable.

Have they stopped sponsoring terrorism?

No, it doesn't. You're arguing against a straw man. The primary motivation was in second paragraph.

Wire transfer is better?

If it takes seconds to compile it then the browser wins. The PoW only runs for seconds already.

"Sorry, this item's currently unavailable in your location."

Can you not design a PoW that is most efficient in a browser? Don't brute force hashes like Hashcash/Bitcoin, do something similar to RandomX instead but in JS. Browsers ought to run the fastest JS interpreters already so if interpreting JS becomes the bulk of the work, that attack might not work. Maybe even involve the DOM or whatever else makes sense.

It was more interesting when there were real tangible improvements. Game graphics has been like smartphones for a good long time now. Performance and feel (low latency and high consistency) still matters though, that is not solved, but it's also never marketed. Quality is not included with a UE license.

Windows does memory compression too.

I don't think it has overcommit at all, at least that's the default. That would be why you don't have Windows OOM killer stories.

Steam Support can probably get it sorted.

AF_ALG does ring a bell.

Neither was NixOS.

https://discourse.nixos.org/t/is-nixos-affected-by-copy-fail...

Because it's there.

Something breaking after 49.7 days is a classic. Someone counted milliseconds since start with a 32 bit unsigned int and some code assumed it couldn't wrap.

There are self-hosted options too. I can't vouch for any of them but many look competent.

Win32 and Wine being a lightweight alternative to HTML and Electrum is a fun idea.

This is why I used ReadItLater and now Instapaper. It's integrated in my ebook reader too.

Most users have JS enabled nowadays. Much of the web doesn't work without it. It was just an example.

No it does not. I've had this happen in legacy systems myself. The checksums of TCP/IP are weak and will let random errors through to L7 if there are enough of them. It's not even CRC and you must bring your own verification if it's critical for your application that the data is correct. TLS does that and more, protecting not only against random corruption but also active attackers. The checks you get for free are to be seen only as an optimization, letting most but not all errors be discarded quick and easy. Just use TLS.

Men in the middle including predatory ISPs can not only spy but also enrich. Injecting JavaScript and embedding ads is the best case scenario. You don't want that.

In addition even without bad actors TLS will prevent random corruption due to flaky infrastructure from breaking the page and even caching those broken assets, preventing a reload from fixing it. TCP/IP alone doesn't sufficiently prevent this.

IPv6 and CGNAT growth has finally started to suppress IPv4 prices. There was a huge pump when hyperscalers decided they needed more. But IPv6 keeps growing and is the majority of traffic in many networks. If you own significantly more IPv4 addresses today than you need, I would dump them on the market yesterday. Spend some of the profits to move to IPv6 if still needed.