bobleeswagger

> There's a world of difference between

No there isn't. This is entirely subjective and you're acting like they said "Fuck our customers" when they just shared data. Anything you want to imply beyond that says more about you than it does about any part of Docker.

> The first implies that they have up to 2% of users which they don't respect, and undermines their apology.

Where does this implication come from? Why is Docker not given the benefit of the doubt when they are already extending an olive branch...? This isn't Microsoft.

I guess if you want to change things, you should shoot for a position in PR at docker. Otherwise, you look like a rube for acting as though they "could have done better with one sentence." I bet you're fun at parties.

> 'We're sorry we mistreated you, look how small you are to us.'

They could choose not to share any data, which is what most companies default to.

You're complaining about something so small as if they aren't handling this entire thing beautifully at this point. They noticed their mistake, and corrected it swiftly to keep the community from bifurcating. What else do you want, exactly?

I think it's a focus thing. Way too many holes to plug at current rates.

My important stuff goes like this:

PiBox w/ Mirrored SSDs -> Server w/ RAIDZ2 (at another wing of the house) -> Windows NAS -> Backblaze Unlimited

Multiple SSDs and HDDs would have to go down at the same time, and there are hourly snapshots up to a month in case a roll back is needed.

If you're relying on a third party in any case except total catastrophe, you're just waiting for that moment to come! This is why Backblaze is at the end, I depend on them when I have failed to provide availability myself.

I don't think the timing is random considering the climate. I have a feeling these seventeen will land softly compared to 99.9% of those caught up in recent layoffs.

> one of the largest tech companies in the world

Bigger isn't better my guy

It's not Microsoft based?

> Many people talk as if there was factually no underlying issue with the bank

These people are led by propaganda. Modern banking is evil and the fact we put up with "losing lotteries" like this is so despicable.

Think your response is brave? At least someone is speaking up for the minority.

At this rate, we're all headed for a world without modern banking, caused by modern banking.

Keep defending the establishment, they'll never save you.

Apparently we're blowing this out of proportion.

What proportion is valid when the same problem keeps happening?

> I don't understand why people are blowing this out of proportion.

I don't understand why people like you don't see the writing on the wall.

Fractional reserve banking is the problem. If you don't see it, I don't have time to explain it.

Linux ISOs

I looked at my home architecture (home lab) and grew from 4TB to 1/4 PB in about two years, with a concentration on self-hosting and digital sustainability. I should reach a petabyte within 5 years.

Ultimately I had a poor grasp of what scaling compute effectively looks like, but I feel much more useful when working with cloud resources due to better foundational understanding in that time. It all started with me putting too many services on one server, and everything webbed out from there.

I think it's going pretty well so far, has gotten me in the door at my last two jobs.

Frigate takes 5 minutes to setup and try. There's really no excuse these days but these companies will keep walling-up their gardens.

I bought a PiSound to tinker with the Midi interface a bit, had no idea it was this powerful.

> the game is particularly uninviting

This is what made games so much more interesting back in the day.

Games that tell you what to do the entire time aren't more "inviting." They just want your time so you'll buy horse armor when they offer it.

Me at 14: WTF APPLE IT'S MY MICROPHONE

Me at 30: Cool.

> if the interview process is so broken

Hiring is guessing. Firing is knowing. If the hiring process worked, we wouldn't have layoffs like we do.

> If you cannot, within the time, demonstrate any ability, why should you be hired?

It is more likely that the interview process is broken and missing the right candidates, than it is that the interviewees are all mediocre. Most interviews are very non-inclusive the same way that the main track of school is becoming less and less inclusive. Different people need different methods to bring out the best in them.

"If you wanna hire great people and have them stay working for you, you have to be run by ideas, not hierarchy. The best ideas have to win, otherwise good people don't stay."

- Steve Jobs

I think the real disconnect with the 'inclusive culture' boom comes because humans are involved so heavily in the process. The _idea_ is great, we want to be fully aware of our internal biases and avoid having them color our perception as much as possible so we do not shoot ourselves in the foot.

In practice, I have yet to see inclusivity programs at corporations be anything more than virtue signaling, and an opportunity to exclude others under the guise of "inclusivity" wink wink.

Remember 'affirmative action'? It's palpably Orwellian that inclusivity is newspeak; what we call it now.

Isn't linux a good example of this? Everything is a file.

What does consent have to do with a commercial photo shoot in a public magazine?

> It seems to me like that would require a separate HOTP device for each password database entry

That would be a paranoid level of implementation. As it sits, the HOTP device is only _sometimes_ needed depending on the caching policy. Fix that broken implementation first, then we can figure out how to update the threat model to account for an adversary that has already infected your computer.

> You seem to think there's some practical way to do it, but there isn't.

It is an implementation detail of the password manager itself. Any password manager can update their implementation to ensure the second factor is always needed when decrypting the vault. I'm not sure why you think this is an impossible feat. It's a choice that can be made.

> You can not have offline caching and otp enabled at the same time.

I'm not sure why you are having such a hard time understanding this is an implementation detail of the password manager that can change at any time. You are treating this like it cannot be implemented differently. It absolutely can.

> Even if the 2FA was used for decryption, it wouldn't really make you much safer

If the second factor is stripped for some arbitrary time, you don't have 2FA anymore. Your argument that "any adversary can read the vault from memory" is a weak one, we might as well not have passwords with that attitude.

The point of a second factor is that BOTH need to be present to get to the secrets. If one of those factors is stripped away for "convenience" we're misunderstanding the point of 2FA entirely. I can't make this any clearer.

> To my knowledge it isn't possible to protect a file with a rotating key.

This is my point, it is an implementation detail of the password manager to integrate OTP or another second with decryption of the vault. Any password manager can implement this.

From the perspective of the user, you are stripping a factor for some arbitrary period of time. It's a broken implementation.

Wouldn't this be an implementation detail of the password manager? Either way, I hear you that this is asking for new functionality. Still, I don't think most people think that a factor disappears depending on the caching policy of the vault on your machine. It's quite a footgun.

I get what you're saying, but the implementation of 2FA is still broken. If we don't fix that, we can't fix what comes next either.