Dylan16807

Yeah that argument you completely imagined and nobody implied is ridiculous!

Major performance bugs don't sneak themselves into releases and then prevent followup fixes from being promptly released.

The point of the post is not that grapheneos made the fix, it's that they had to.

It's a post about google screwing up their process and also pushing a bad update to a ton of people, and other people cleaning up their mess. I'm glad "open source is working" but that's a small part of the picture and I don't see why that would remove the point of the blog post.

> Oct 7th was Israel's 9/11.

And the way the US reacted to 9/11 was an enormous mistake.

Edit: HN title used to be "Around 2-6% of World Bank foreign aid got siphoned into crypto wallets"

Original post: While you're being rude and it would be worth cutting the first half of your comment, that's a good point that "2-6%" is still clearly an estimation.

Exactly 0? I said it's not "streamlined enormously" and that it's not solving any particular problem.

I would estimate that supporting both windows 10 and 11 is a single digit percentage harder than supporting just one of them. Whereas with python it became a huge deal to maintain versions in parallel or never upgrade to new features. Windows 10 versus 11 is like supporting a few minor releases of python at the same time, not 2.x and 3.x. And with IPv4 and IPv6 you're nearly doing double duty to have both.

> I have given a few. If you don't want to see it, that's fine.

Where? You said something vague about streamlining, and the only concrete example was something about "deploy ipv6" which Microsoft did back in Vista.

> Then use a SHA256-based repo, and use the cheaper signing scheme.

The scheme you just called a "screw up"?

As far as git is concerned, GPG is a black box and git feeds it normal git hashes, of which there is only one kind. This design makes sense.

For anything else, it depends on the exact scheme:

If git sent GPG the bits for the current commit specifically because it expects a better hash to be used, that would be silly to design on purpose (git should use a hash that meets all requirements). And it wouldn't protect history, which matters.

If git rounded up the bits of history, that would perform unacceptably badly.

If git used a better hash to secure history for signing purposes, and still had the normal hash elsewhere, that would be very silly to design on purpose because it should use the better hash for everything.

Microsoft can already put out an update to both windows 10 and 11 at the same time. They occasionally do this for bugfixes. That hits basically all Windows users.

The difference in effort between updating one versus two very similar code bases is minor, especially when "Windows 10" and "Windows 11" each refer to multiple versions already.

For drivers you only need one version to support both.

IPv6 has been built into Windows for ages. If you think they can force toggle it or something, that won't work at all and deleting Windows 10 wouldn't make it easier.

I can't think of a situation where consolidating Windows versions makes a big difference. I can think of useful situations based on getting rid of all other OSes and/or Microsoft instantly forcing out updates to everyone, but those are different scenarios and they come with severe downsides.

That's not true because of extended support, but even if it was true, what's the goal here? What benefit does the entire ecosystem share from getting people standardized on 11? Botnets get 25% smaller? That's not some kind of important threshold. Or developers can count on access to a newer mutex API or something? Whereas getting everyone on the same git hash or python or IP protocol streamlines things enormously.

What kind of isolation are you looking for? Vlans might still be possible.

That's why it says "about".

Huh wha? What problems are solved by getting all Windows users onto Windows 11 in particular?

> There is no reason that a signing scheme must rely on and trust those hashes!

Not "must", but it would be stupid to use two sets of hashes without a compelling reason.

You also have to trick the code git added to detect and block shattered-style attacks.

Still, eliminating the risk is a good idea.

Like what? Everything I've seen is that parts are legitimately much cheaper in China and they're making good money selling to the US.

> It's not in the comment I'm responding to,

It's in the original comment you responded to, and it's a critical part of the conversation chain.

"And yes, UK has some awful laws around this. Yes it has put people in jail just for planning a protest before. Yes you can go to jail for not disclosing your passwords. But what you read on the internet is almost laughably out of proportion - no, you won't get arrested for posting a meme about the king."

I'm not saying bad faith, I'm saying you misread their argument pretty badly.

Your citations support the problems they already admitted. The hair was split before you got here because they're distinguishing in-person and online actions.

They already said you can get in trouble for [planning] protesting. They said you won't get in trouble for online criticism. Your links about protests aren't proving anything.

> pre searching everyone and promising not to read it

Oh, like how bulk internet monitoring works. Ugh.

Anything you can't solve with code just means the AI is doing worse on the benchmark isn't it? That's why I didn't go into detail on that aspect.

And that one shot app is not going to be bug free.

Anubis at low difficulty isn't a roadblock to humans and it doesn't affect anonymity at all. Seems reasonable to me. Their mission isn't to help with mass requests.

You can't ignore the rest of the sentence. "every other task their business does" "everyone will be out of a job"

This means it has to handle basically all business tasks, so "arbitrary". I'm not sure what percent you have in mind by "many many many" but I would say it can't code half the things you need in an efficient and minimally buggy way.

You can't attack an existing normal commit.

But also collisions there aren't a big deal. People will cite short hashes when referring to things and that's not "broken".

It's not at all applicable.

I would say 250-260MB/s for a 16TB drive, and when 4TB drives were newer they were more like 160-180MB/s. That's about a 50% increase.

Doing the math, you're probably going from 5 to 8-9 platters, so 2.2-2.5 areal density, and a naive square root suggests it should be about 50% faster. So maybe track width is taking a fair share after all?

Though when I look at more sizes, it seems like 12TB drives were also hitting 260MB/s and speed has almost entirely stalled since, with 24TB being only a hair faster.

I'm not surprised at all. Most of the benefits in capacity per platter have been offset by higher prices per platter.

Additives like what?

We're talking about water that's released in general use, right? I would expect a closed cooling loop to have some biocides but have almost none of that leave the system.

And one datacenter had a weird bacteria that one time.

> That points to either mind-boggling incompetence or a deep and well-hidden conspiracy.

Why? I don't think military schools have a habit of invading nearby mansions and not much less was going to find him.

Stamp value still matters in the US for normal letters because of the janky way extra weight is priced. In particular, the current price of a max-weight letter is two stamps plus 5 cents.

It doesn't input and output letters. It's like if it communicated with a version of sign language. It's using all the same words but it has an arbitrary signal or two for each one.

So it can't spell for garbage because the tokenizer hides the real spellings from the LLM.