11,919 karma · joined May 8, 2013
Twitter: https://twitter.com/mholt6
Personal: https://matt.life
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/mholt; my proof: https://keybase.io/mholt/sigs/X_pNtQp3_Et_7qwkBKVjmZv4dl7vP8bX83hu4N9lyz8 ]
(I do not use Keybase)
I also understand the burden of moving to a new server stack. It's a lot to swallow and a new way of thinking about things!
Anyway, we only mention config adapters in a few places in our docs: we automate our JSON docs, which are at the heart of Caddy, and we try to invest considerable effort to document the only official config adapter format: the Caddyfile.
I'm writing an application that lets you view historical data, and the problem is that most/all map services show only current data. It would be nice if the map reflected the year of the data we're layering on top.
So if you want to make some money, there's an option for you!
> All data is routed through an HTTPS Proxy, which records the direction of data transfer without reading the encrypted content.
squints
> Certain parts of the request and response that are publicly known are revealed: For responses: HTTP response code and Date headers. For requests: Domain, Path, and Connection headers.
Um, domain (the Host header after establishing the connection), path, and headers (including Connection) are all encrypted. They claim this is public information but it's not.
I need more time to read into things but I'm skeptical thus far.
[0]: https://www.amazon.com/Diamond-Boy-Creation-Diamonds-Tracy/d...
HTTP/3 implementations vary widely at the moment, and will likely take another decade to optimize to homogeneity. But even then, QUIC requires a lot of state management that TCP doesn't have to worry about (even in the kernel). There's a ton of processing involved with every UDP packet, and small MTUs, still engrained into many middle boxes and even end-user machines these days, don't make it any better.
So, yeah, as I felt about QUIC ... oh, about 6 years ago or so... HTTP/2 is actually really quite good enough for most use cases. The far reaches of the world and those without fast connections will benefit, but the majority of global transmissions will likely be best served with HTTP/2.
Intuitively, I consider each HTTP major version an increased order of magnitude in complexity. From 1 to 2 the main complexities are binary (that's debatable, since it's technically simpler from an encoding standpoint), compression, and streams; then with HTTP/3 there's _so, so much_ it does to make it work. It _can_ be faster -- that's proven -- but only when networks are slow.
TCP congestion control is its own worst enemy, but when networks aren't congested (and with the right algorithm)... guess what. It's fast! And the in-order packet transmissions (head-of-line blocking) makes endpoint code so much simpler and faster. It's no wonder TCP is faster these days when networks are fast.
I think servers should offer HTTP/3 but clients should be choosy when to use it, for the sake of their own experience/performance.
Modern apps are so obnoxious and distracting and unusable it’s getting ridiculous. Tapping a verify link in an email would slide the email screen out, then slide in a browser, wait a second or two, then slide out the browser, then slide in the play store, then wait a moment, then slide in the app itself, which then had to update the screen after another second or two. Multiple screen changes flashing before my eyes made even me feel dizzy and confused. My mother had raised eyebrows and shook her head like she just got lost.
Then once you get in the apps, there's so many distractions that make the UI unusuable. "Hey did you know about this?" "Tap this to do this thing!" "Look over here!" not to mention various notification and permission prompts. The permission prompts are especially concerning because now there's so many of them to even start using a messaging app, for example, that you train yourself to just click through them instead of scrutinize them.
We've essentially gotten rid of text labels on icons, making it anyone's guess as to what the icon with the 3 colored circles does, or an icon with a shape, two lines, and another shape that I can't even describe succinctly. So many gestures make navigating the software a guessing game. My poor mother was like, "So to go to the last app I do this" only to gesture "back" in the same app, "Oh, I meant this", only to bring up the app selector. Nothing is discoverable anymore. Those little "learn how to use your phone" tutorials do nothing for you in "the real world." My father, who used to teach Commodore computers to his community, could no more figure out how to use a phone than his students could a Commodore.
We were in much better times when computers came with 100 page manuals and you had to go to a class or ask a techie how to use them.
I'm not even going to talk about the privacy problems in all this software.
I had to keep apologizing to my parents for my industry making the experience so bad and downright confusing.
Because it doesn't work. o:-)
(Introduces a slant/bias to the data.)
https://twi.github.io/blog/making-go-telemetry-opt-in-is-a-m...
Jurassic Park keeps coming to mind. It must be safe as long as you observe the signs, because it's an institutionalized park, right?
I don't know at what point I, as a first-time visitor to such a park, would start to question whether what I was witnessing was unusual or just part of the show.
Is there a way to query all DNS records? (I was surprised to learn that isn't the default.) This would be really helpful for troubleshooting people's Caddy questions (which are actually DNS problems).
Anyway, it looks like an image map.
I've been letting people use semi-supervised development previews of Timelinize[0] for a little over a year now -- it is unfinished, unpolished, buggy software, but I wanted to get it in people's hands while I stand by in real-time ready for feedback, to prove out the concept and see if I am even on the right track. I let users know it is in the very early, rough stages, and to really just follow the instructions and do the happy path for now.
The feedback is lukewarm, and most users are disinterested at this point. Which is unfortunate, since I believe that a fully functional application would actually draw them in, because a few testers did actually express amazement at the basic idea of what they saw the software do for them in an initial trial run. Most feedback got lost in the weeds of the known bugs and unfinished aspects, though, which didn't really tell me anything I didn't already know, and it just discouraged testers from trying more/again.
Could be a did it wrong. But at this point I'm having to forge ahead in my nights/weekends and basically finish writing this very complicated piece of software in the hopes it'll be something great, even though it doesn't exactly have direct competition that I know of. (Ultimately, though, I just need it to be great for me and my family. I am just hoping others will find it useful too.) When I finally do release a public beta, it had better be good. That's what I know now.
PS. Looking for a different name that doesn't sound like Tylenol -- according to repeated user feedback.
That's the point of the article, luckily enough. "Disk Encryption is important for disk disposal and mitigating hardware theft, not preventing data leakage to online attackers."
> So what benefit does encryption at rest bring? Won't a hacker be attempting to take data when it's online (and therefore not resting)?
Yes (again, illustrated in the article).
(AGPL is open source right? ducks)
While I think there's something to it, after seeing the app, though, I question its legitimacy. It claims to scan your biosignals by placing your thumb on the phone screen and it has a progress bar that variably increases at the exact same bezier curve rate every time, and then it computes the optimal vibration program for you. But phones don't have hardware or at least the APIs to do that, I'm pretty sure?
But I can't argue that it has seemed to help tame migraines, placebo or not.
Most of the methods taught in the US are "gold relief" methods, which is basically glue with golden pigment mixed in. It doesn't look great but is modern and quick. "Gold flush" methods take a bit more time and are more authentic, but still don't use the traditional materials shown in this article.
Does anyone know where to get these traditional materials for use in classroom settings (i.e. in bulk, preferably discounted)? Not massive scale, just enough for a few classes. The kits have such a tiny amount and are so expensive, even a bulk discount of ~10-20% would be ideal.
Too bad nothing will improve because of this.