fangorn

I suppose the next logical thing is for them to say: "I fart in your general direction".

All this talk about software (in)security within companies reminds me of a typical conclusion after a data leak. When it's a large company, the conclusion is they may, and should, have done better, but it's inherently impossible for a large company to secure everything well enough. When it's a small company, the conclusion is they should have done better, but it's inherently impossible for a small company to, well, do better, they are too small.

Now, I'm all for treating ransomware, and generally all the large scale and/or state-sponsored hacks with a much higher priority, send the drones and whatnot. But this MUST be accompanied by more accountability on the commercial entities.

You're too small to secure sensitive data of hundreds of millions of people? Maybe you shouldn't have amassed this data in the first place. You're too big to secure everything? Well, did you secure ANYTHING? Did you follow reasonable procedures, did you, crazy idea, make sure you can't access critical systems from the internet and/or with a default password, etc.?

And if you fail, and fail you will, there's no perfect system, I believe there should be penalties not for failing, but for not doing enough to prevent it. To refer to all the plane analogies, if your wings are made of cardboard and everybody knew but pretended it's OK, because otherwise it would slightly diminish shareholder value, well, there will be consequences.

In aviation, you could go to jail for signing off on something that you know is not secure, if it causes an accident and people die. Specifically not for accidents, but for neglecting your duty to make sure that you've done all you could. For lying, deceiving, ignoring, faking, for being too lazy or too greedy to do things properly. Sounds familiar?

With large scale infrastructure under constant attacks, people dying because someone couldn't be bothered to do things properly is not an "if" any more. And better hope those autonomous trucks are very, very hard to hack.

I bought 3 EAP330s and TP-Link deprecated them after a year or so. No more firmware upgrades for their (then) top "enterprise" access points. Rumour says they weren't happy with the chipset, so decided to abandon them altogether (just this model, cheaper ones were on different chipsets and support was available for longer). Last time I checked there was no OpenWRT support of any kind. They did hang when I had port aggregation enabled and seemed to run rather hot. But feature-wise and non-trunked-networking-wise they were fine, supported what I was looking for, no cloud, I didn't even use the controller, you can just manage them "the old school" way. But don't count on years of support.

I liked writing Perl a lot, but when it came to reading, let alone fixing, other people's Perl, it was always a bit of a nightmare. That's one of the main reasons I was reasonably happy to move away from it - nobody seemed to heed "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should" mantra. Sure you can write good Perl, and I always did my best in that area, but it was not the reality for most Perl programs out there. CPAN also turned to a bit of a mess at some point, and in general dependency management was non existent, really. Containers could help alleviate this pain now, to an extent. Still, it would need to seriously improve to lay any claims to being able to write modern stuff in Perl.

Just one letter changes and this whole project goes to sh*t.

I don't think you can have an open source product. In this particular case, Elasticsearch is an open source project that Elastic is a custodian of and has been monetising by building products around it: support, consulting, proprietary extensions, hosting and maybe other things.

Now an industry behemoth has decided to directly compete with one of their products. That's tough, especially that it's done in a typically heavy handed way, but... Elastic's reaction seems highly disingenuous, basically a PR dance around "we love open source but we didn't realise it allows competition to eat into our revenue stream".

Elasticsearch is great precisely because it's an open source project, not a product. Otherwise it would be a yet another proprietary black box thingy, with a hefty price tag and a bunch of corporate users. As a project, it thrives, enjoys trust, dedicated community, contributions, enthusiast adoption effect, and so on.

I'm sure they could still make plenty of money from their other products, introduce new ones, maybe even get a huge new stream of support contracts from AWS customers. Instead they decided to cannibalise the main source of their success: their brilliant open source project.

Won't Apple silicon eradicate hackintoshes eventually? I mean, you won't be able to just buy Apple's components and assemble a computer. If you were, it's really just a Mac, isn't it? I imagine they'll support x86_64 based systems for a few more years, but there won't be new drivers or support for new cpus, etc.

I wonder if it occurred to someone at Apple, if it's somewhat an added benefit to them.

I just deleted my account, which I shouldn't have had, and I got an email saying: "We send these emails to help you get the most out of SlideShare.".

Couldn't agree more, that's the most I got out of SlideShare.

Was it legal "to take a closer look and see the links they are sharing"?

I think it may be a deliberate example of poor quality writing that should not be compensated.

SpaceX?

Only one thing to say: shut up and take my money!

I wonder if this means one can now obtain a grant from Ministry of Culture to cultivate this officially recognised tradition/heritage activity. Imagine a career not stemming from what one learned creating demoes, but in actual creating demoes. Even if it was lousy money, just the concept is mind boggling.

Plus, there would be no shortage of potential donors, from broadly speaking the same field, that would be happy to sponsor this culturally important organisation (aka demo group).

Never would have crossed my mind typing my hands off on good old C64...

I never said anything about ethnicity. Maybe "tech with critical security related software components developed and hosted in China, by Chinese nationals, thus clearly subject to draconian Chinese laws and potentially exposed to Chinese government and military influence" would be more precise. That's as close to "Chinese tech" though, as makes no difference.

I would expect a more stringent approach to something used by a government to actually conduct "governing", and in the time of crisis at that!

What about the remaining 0.09% ? ;)

That's great, you should have that option. "Option" implies choice, however. I should have an option to meaningfully not agree to it. And "don't use Google services" doesn't actually cause Google to stop collecting data about an individual. Nothing short of "don't use internet" does, and even then only to an extent.

I've started reading "privacy agreement" for Google's "do not track me" browser extension the other day and it just seemed grotesque.

In, or rather around, passive houses they are meant to block light during summer. That's why it's recommended to plant trees that will shelter your house from the sun thus lowering temperature inside (and your cooling energy requirements, if you've got air-con, etc.). During winter they shed their leaves and let the sun in, providing the opposite effect. Of course that's in climate zones that actually have summers and winters. Granted, you don't need entire forest for that.

Naturally, that works for most kinds of houses, not just passive ones. It's just especially important for those, if you want to achieve their stated (very low) energy requirements levels.

Next in Internet of Shit: "smart" car ransomware. Coupled with autopilot, because why not.

Sure, but: "Florey had not patented penicillin, having been advised [...] that doing so would be unethical"[0].

Anyone else immediately thought: "OK, but they patented it, and the spin off company will presumably licence the tech for exorbitant sums, should it ever reach that phase of course, so it'll just be another expensive 1st world thing. No money? Bite the dust."?

And yeah, I know, patents encourage inventions and promote discoveries, we're all the better for their existence, they are literally the best thing since, well, invention of sliced bread.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penicillin#Mass_production

I find that my non-verbatim searches on Google return mostly garbage, so I'm not sure I would call "please stop displaying garbage" the best feature of Google. Maybe a "last thread" feature. That said, I've recently started switching to DDG.

Not sure how many constitutions around the world have a "Secession Procedure" section, but I suppose not too many. I know UK sort of has one in its "unwritten" constitution. I understand that Spanish government cannot simply ignore the constitution and must do something, I'm sure they could have come up with a better something...

I expect in vast majority of cases of gaining independence from a country with existing constitution it wasn't something along the lines of: "OK, so you want independence? Fine, just wait a bit until we change the constitution". Then again, and sadly, it probably wasn't happening without violence either.

Here's a list of unilateral declarations of independence, some more successful than others:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unilateral_declaration_of_inde...

And let's not forget that a lot of cases of gaining independence happened after someone lost a war. Maybe let's not go there?

"boris" "johnson" "fruit" hm, was it create or... cake?