Allegedly Chainalysis users' names, emails and role labels were accessed.
570 karma · joined August 22, 2018
Copyright was fully intended to allow authors to control how their work is used.
The overall game is increasing costs to exploit so much that attackers give up. Fixing 10 most obvious bugs, just very slightly increases costs, they would just a few more tokens to find another bug.
As someone said "I had infinite bugs, I fixed 1000, I still have infinite bugs".
To significantly increase exploit costs software/security has -1 years to do:
- Defense in Depth - Sandbox everything - Zero trust - Canary tokens - Split data from code (lol) - App Whitelisting - Reduce attack surface - Etc.
In other words, the only path is investing heavily on the "game changers" we have already discovered... but we are too cheap/lazy/coward/incompetent to apply.
And if we feel specially brave, changing the liability laws regarding software. Open Source & Proprietary code is so crappy because no gets jailed or fined when one of its dumb decisions results in millions of people have their data stolen.
The more realistic claim it does not affect output quality.
Anthropic and fanboys defend that choosing "overcast" over "cloudy" does not affect a text quality.
Clearly, money and ambition clouds their judgment.
Most jurisdictions will prosecute you under terrorism laws for that.
The "adjectives" (far-left) are there just explain to the public what kind of terrorism they are talking about.
The EU constantly pushes that either you sell to all EU-member-states at the same price or nothing at all.
Would it better a payment commission (free apps do not pay but apple takes a cut on everything) or would it better to an installment fee (pay X euros per installation but no commission cut for Apple) ?
Well everything depends on the fee/commission values but after I put the pitch fork down I was left wondering...
It's was simpler to design/implement the AI tool if these interactions had state. When this was generalized to internet interactions this no longer made sense and was gradually cleaned up.
I think at the same time, the AI tool "protocol" to interact with the local system moved away from MCP model.
It's like the meme of nuclear energy help with climate change and the answer is "I don't want to solutions, I want to abolish capitalism!"
At the same time, that big advertising and crony politicians are fighting to impose digital ID for all internet communications... one of the strongest privacy advocates is being attacked with non-sense.
Expect EFF to be bought or attacked.
No, it's not.
Many governments ignored people's will for many years.
Some new political parties want to fix that, is reasonable enough.
Exist stuff (caches, CDN, etc.) could serve private information because the HTTP GET is cached without checking the request contents. The new standard can avoid this because old stuff does not know about HTTP QUERY.
Browsers try both stacks (Happy Eyeballs algorithm) so likely the IPv4 is working better for your visitors.
Since must people use IPv4 most of the time, IPv6 performance issues go unnoticed by the users, ISPs, CDNs, etc.
Also,the lack of enterprise tooling to help selected an appropriate model and tooling to run a local LLM does not help.
I have no idea of what entails but this seems more a quality of service issue (provided by the grid) and less about the consumers using the grid.
Recent examples are certification validation logic, one issue after an another... because it's a mess of thing to implement.
I heard something that helps better framing those discussions, use "familiar" instead of "simple".
An highly abstract way to access a database table, with ORM for example, can be simple because everyone is expecting it and knows how to do all tasks (changing schema, troubleshooting, managing transactions, etc.).
Doing userService.pgSql("select ....") in the same way can be simple.
By chance, recently in an architecture discussion document I added that one of aspects to consider is how easy is to remove (the whole thing) if it's not wanted anymore.
It was an obvious case because it was an AI capability, which can be become deprecated/useless/too-risky very fast.
The article is interesting but I think it deviates from a common developer experience as many don't work on Python libraries, which likely heavily follow patterns that the model itself already contains.
The usual trade-off of a well paid software development job is lack of job security and always learning - the skill set is always changing in contrast with other jobs.
My suggestion, stop chase trends and start to hear from mature software developers to get better perspective on what's best to invest on.
And why the mantra is always true?
You can find stable job (slow moving company) doing basic software development and just learn something new every 4 years and then change companies.
Or never change company and be the default expert, because everyone else is changing jobs, get job security, work less hours and have time within your job to uplift your skills.
Keep chasing latest high paid jobs/trends by sacrificing off time.
What's the best option for you? Only you know, it's depends on your own goals.
Here's a news link https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2025/01/23/use-of-eu-fund...
I don't have time/will to find more consolidating information but some EU-Elites regularly use NGOs to support their own policy goals, against member states governments and their populations. They always excuse themselves by saying they fund everyone... but one side of the issue usually gets more funds than the other.
If I recall correctly in one "EU wants to monitor the internet" regulations, EU directly funded targeted AD campaigns to convinced some Member state populations to support it so the government would change its intended vote. They were caught and backed off. Then they funded some NGO to do it :D
I really dislike that now I'm going to have two problems, managing other tools installed through a makefile, e.g. lint, and managing tools "installed" through go.mod, e.g. mocks generators, stringify, etc.
I feel like this is not a net negative on the ecosystem again. Each release Golang team adds thing to manage and makes it harder to interact with other codebases. In this case, each company will have to decide if they want to use "go tool" and when to use it. Each time I clone an open source repo I'm going to have to check how they manage their tools.
I think this is actually already in motion in board meetings, I'm pretty sure executives are discussing something like "if we spend Z$ on AI tools, can we avoid hiring how many engineers?"
I have tried cursor.ai, agent mode, and I see a clear big impact.
Most uncertainty in temperature does not come from measured temperature (weather stations) but from temperature estimations from indirect sources. In other words, last 50 years data is pretty much all good.