marcusb

Yes, but service technicians that are paid by the job often find ways to do a job in far less time using a different approach than the manufacturer suggests.

An example: I used to own a Saturn S-series. The manufacturer estimate for replacing the alternator was something like 4 hours of labor, and involved removing the power steering pump (which was above the alternator.)

It was possible to replace the alternator in about 30 minutes by removing the front passenger wheel and mud shield, and then accessing the alternator directly.

It happens to the best of us!

yeah, it was a joke and what you just linked to was sarcasm and/or mockery.

I believe the comment you replied to is what is known as a "joke".

Or one of the seven endpoint agents, each of which has a kernel module and at least half of which are doing dodgy process injection and read process memory shenanigans.

I had a couple of customers that deployed 7 endpoint security tools of the "hook into processes and inspect everything" variety. The exact mix was customer-specific, but if you're wondering what that looks like:

* Stand-alone "best of breed" endpoint DLP

* Stand-alone "best of breed" EDR

* Process whitelisting tool

* NAC posture assessment agent

* Three different AV agents

This is not even counting their VPN client(s) or the third party disk encryption agent they used.

I marveled at how they even got all of the agents to coexist, let alone have enough CPU left for people to do their jobs.

As I said, “depends on the car.”

It might have been malicious compliance. It might also have been your coworkers having a reasonable (if incorrect) expectation that their coworkers at a leading tech company understood how to schedule meeting time using the calendar their company produces. Or maybe both.

I think the better rule is to empower people to remove themselves from meetings they don't need to attend. Inviting anyone and everyone in case they might be needed is a real problem at most big companies I've worked for or with.

> Emissions are tested on a standardized driving cycle that doesn't include full-throttle acceleration

Depends on the car. See Supplemental Federal Test Procedure US06[0], required by the EPA for light-duty vehicle certification since 2007.

It is also largely irrelevant in the real world: nobody is going to tune a car to have mediocre part-throttle performance but then go all-out on full-throttle.

0 - https://www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-fuel-emissions-testing/dynam...

There are at least two problems with this. First, the history of tuning suggests there is no level of stock performance that enthusiasts will be happy with. They will always want more than the OEM provides.

Secondly, there’s a reason you see this with EVs (Tesla’s “ludicrous speed” mode) but not ICE cars apart from “sport modes” and the like: the ICE cars can’t be offered with the knob you suggest, because the car has to meet emissions requirements at any tuning level, and any level of tuning is going to have a performance/emissions trade-off.

The "locks out tuners" bit is pure click-bait non-sense. Tuners will either work around the sensors (as they have for decades) or replace the ECU with any number of aftermarket models.

No, you're thinking of the other Steve. https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/steve-jobs-car-apple-ceo-l...

> A big wrinkle in AI evangelism is that proponents don’t understand the concept of human judgment as a “learned” skill

Which is ironic given how much variation in output quality there is based on the judgement of the person using the LLM (work scope, domain, prompt quality, etc.)

The author has given a few talks built around the same concept: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOiZatlZtGU

> “My trust policy has a vulnerability in it but I’m safe because the attacker can’t read my policy to find out”

The goal in preventing enumeration isn't to hide defects in the security policy. The goal is to make it more difficult for attackers to determine what and how they need to attack to move closer to their target. Less information about what privileges a given user/role have = more noise from the attacker, and more dwell time, all other things being equal. Both of which increase the likelihood of detection prior to full compromise.

Games? A good portion of the Steam catalog runs just fine on Linux.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4IjTUxZORE (2013)

Isn't this vaguely how the invite system at Lobsters functions? There's a public invite tree, and users risk their reputation (and posting access) when they invite new users.

Released yesterday: https://github.com/mergd/amzn-tariff

It does not have to be the way it is. Security vendors could do a much better job testing and red teaming their products to avoid bypasses, and have more sensible defaults.

Yes

My wife says the wrapped ones of any color look better than stock. She thinks the stock ones look like toasters, and that Tesla should have painted two red/orange stripes along the tonneau cover to complete the stock look.

I haven't seen anything like that where I live. I see the same businesses over and over, and often see them parked at or near the business in question.

I see them quite frequently where I live, usually covered in a vinyl wrap advertising some local business or other.

Undoubtedly. If you go poking around most any security product (the product I was referring to was not in the EDR space,) you'll see these sorts of issues all over the place.

Zip bombs are fun. I discovered a vulnerability in a security product once where it wouldn’t properly scan a file for malware if the file was or contained a zip archive greater than a certain size.

The practical effect of this was you could place a zip bomb in an office xml document and this product would pass the ooxml file through even if it contained easily identifiable malware.

The Soviet Venera program was really fascinating. It is quite impressive that they managed to build landers that survived even a short period on the surface of Venus, let alone return photographs.

https://www.astronomy.com/science/the-venera-program-interpl...

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

That's covered under point #1. I'm not claiming these tools are perfect. Neither are most people, but from the standpoint of an employer, the question is going to be "does the tool, after accounting for errors, make my employees more or less productive?" A lot of people are seeing the answer to that - today - is the tools offer a productivity advantage.

Chattanooga also has one of the larger (if not largest) municipal fiber networks in Tennessee, offering service up to 25gbps.

https://www.cnet.com/home/internet/say-hello-to-the-countrys...