35 karma · joined July 2, 2024
Due to unethical mafioso tactics of some of the "big tech" companies, commercial entities are not named.
All of the other fresh grad hires tried to use Ubuntu systems with a Windows XP mindset.
Having a central bank really is a great evil.
Zen makes serious claims about performance and sandboxing, but do not forwardly present writings on how they do these things, leaving us with the impression there are some tweaks here and there but not much more.
Highway robbery is highway robbery, uniformed or not.
const imagesBucket = nitric.bucket('images').allow('read', 'write'); Adolf Hitler FULL SPEECH in ENGLISH AI Reconstructed Audio 'Freedom or Slavery' (No Music)
https://odysee.com/@SpAIke:9/Adolf-Hitler-FULL-SPEECH-in-ENGLISH-AI-Reconstructed-Audio-'Freedom-or-Slavery'--(No-Music)-(1080p):eThere's no valid reason to not have this law. Any "intellectual property" excuses aren't going to fly, everyone already knows they're bullshit.
edited: slightly clarified legal possession
Obstacles & Patterns To Maximize Flow in IT Operations • Ben Rockwood • GOTO 2013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2IfgkL5_poAs someone who works with BSD Jails and preferably (though not as often) illumos Unix Zones, I look down my nose at those who would run VMs on these chips.
My org's competitors should go ahead and use VMs.
> from what I can tell loading in your own PK will override the built-in ones
How can one go about doing this? If you have any resources that can show how, please share them. The public key of the "platform key" is "fused" into the hardware, is it not?
When I see someone complain about unsupported/unsupportable chips in comments on online forums, especially one dubbed "Hacker News", I am puzzled how I in my middle school years acted out a pattern that is objectively smarter* than what I read in such comments. I also happen to first-hand know I am for sure not the only one with this vantage point. Those who comment about unsupported/unsupportable chips as if it is somehow an open source kernel's fault might want to take a moment to consider how others, and how many others, are viewing such drivel. For every one of us who take the time to point this out, there are 10,000 of us experiencing utter contempt, like as if we just got an unexpected whiff of some hot garbage.
[*]And, I honestly don't think I'm even that smart.
I have enough of an IT background that I'm not going to buy into a theory that is something like "choosing Windows" is actually "necessary". Maybe in the early 2000s, sure. But this decade? Bull-fucking-shit. We are in a year where everyone (or in Malaysia at least enough people) 35 years old has grown up around computers.
We are far beyond the point where there are any valid excuses.
Such as the keys to one's own house.
One of the devs there was talking to someone about "implementing any calls in .NET" as NetMQ (native ZeroMQ for .NET) using an exclusive pair socket to pass Apache Thrift back and forth to Rust codebase also using the exclusive pair socket. One of the phrases I heard was "all code we contribute is accessible to your existing .NET devs".
The term accessible may not mean readable or maintainable for the .NET devs in that context, but the corporate customers seemed comfortably confident they would continue to have a relationship with the firm so whatever.
Because if they aren't and something happens the mechanic is the one who ends up rotting in a cell. Put the same penalties in place for ODMs and OEMs, mandating that machine owners absolutely always can change the locks to their own property, and mysteriously every single problem we have ever seen with secure boot is no longer some obscure inevitable unavoidable technology issue.
"We sold you this house with a front door designed where our key will always let us in". Why do we put up with this shit?