TsukasaUjiie

Two VC's enter. One VC leaves.

And every time it's tested:

"mail('product-security@apple.com','Apple ID Password',"Thanks for your password! \n $data ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ \n https://github.com/jansoucek/iOS-Mail.app-inject-kit");"

[1]: https://github.com/jansoucek/iOS-Mail.app-inject-kit/blob/ma...

There's perhaps the risk of it becoming the major anchor in the web of trust. That said, you're probably right with respect to the other keyservers being no better.

The Australian National University teaches a course in Snap aimed at non computer science majors.

Whilst I was originally skeptical of the language and thought it might be "babyish" I was pleasantly surprised to see how expressive it was. Most of the labs use a javascript-y like object model behind the scenes and provide useful functional programming primitives (map/fold/etc <3).

The response from the students thus far has been pretty great. Some of them are looking into taking more programming courses as part of their degrees; often very separate from computer science. I'm not sure if we would have gotten this result chucking them straight into a CS101 course.

https://artofcomputing.cecs.anu.edu.au/

Neato. The idea of Facebook acting as a "keyserver" worries me a bit though.

I'm looking forward to when they inevitably (I hope) add support for visualising the Web of Trust

Didn't Level3 recently have Net-Neutrality issues with Verizon? While I think that botnets are a serious issue for internet security, I don't see how carriers have the authority or mandate to engage in selective traffic filtering without it contravening their support for NN.

If ICANN or the RIR's (APNIC, RIPE) were vested with the power and responsibility of maintaining botnet-blacklists then that might be better? I just don't think there's any legitimacy in carriers taking on this role.

"For another, conventional wisdom holds that reference counting and "pure garbage collection" (his term for mark and sweep) are roughly equivalent performance-wise, but the performance impact wouldn't be known until after the change was made, which might make it a hard sell."

AFAIK there exists RC GC's which are performance equivalent to MarkSweep, but these aren't super common out of academia? What is the state of GC performance in python currently?

"and more about MS abusing its market position and a massive failure to regulate." thats a pretty vague statement.

IMO its simply the fact that Windows/OSX have set a high bar of out-of-the-box usability and shine that GNU/Linux simply hasn't reached. Not that this is a bad thing, it just might be worth accepting that we can't compete on desktop.

Depends on how you look at it. Darwin is based on Mach with some monolithic BSD stuff linked in, I remember reading that Windows was fairly microkernelish but they've been pushing more things to kernel space.

thanks

If only I had my mbp with be to read them :'(

Sounds like an interesting framework, my quick search didn't unearth any docs for it though? The only reference on Apples website is "we added this to 10.10"

people were claiming (on reddit) that the bittorrent sync account w/ that key was created after tpb published it.

"Of course Ulrich Drepper thinks that dynamic linking is great, but clearly that’s because of his lack of experience and his delusions of grandeur." I find these kind of comments reflect veerryyy poorly on their authors..

iirc the WebTrust Audit required for such a system is in the ~$100,000 range. Why abandon existing initiatives to start another undermanned community based authority.

I think the focus should really be in jumpstarting CACert (overhauling its governance model) and building on its existing infrastructure and user/assurer base (As an assurer I'm probably biased here).

Of course this would be hard work and less self fulfilling than doing the F/OSS dance and re-inventing the wheel..

Ive found the longer android has been around, the less likely I've been to need to root it. This doesn't seem like a bad change?