Replying to myself here and including a link that just dropped:
Apparently the debate was more spirited than I thought. The argument appears to revolve around whether it’s OK to jump to the new stuff directly, or use a combination of the old and new.
I think this is how I can message people…
reddit cant afford [the V3 captcha system] but google lets them use it in exchange for AI/datamining
Had no idea they used that. I edited all my comments to crap then deleted them around the time the admin monkied with the backend database, and stopped using old.reddit to browse once I found lemmy. I once went through the effort of making a temp account to comment on someone else’s comment there because they had suggested trying something specifically dangerous and didn’t seem to know about it. I doublechecked later and the comment I wrote was caught in some filter, likely the result of the account being too new. I can’t imagine what garbage that site will be in the years to come.
abusive scraping
As opposed to the plain old scraping they do to train AI, and generate revenue by selling user comments for others to train AI.
I read a half-cocked internet theory that a certain someone might’ve purchased twitter just to gain access to an ex-gf’s personal tweets. I judged it as possible but unlikely, as that’s a lot of money to spend on such a thing.
Now, we’ve all heard stories about reddit blocking accounts for no published reason, and tracking folks down across accounts/IP addresses/etc. That code must be pretty expansive to do the things they’ve done. So one has the thought: if you’ve ever reached out to the reddit hive mind for some kind of support with a personal issue of any kind then that data about you is still floating around in their database and tied to whatever alternate accounts you have, even if it was the “good old days” when you did it.
Abusive scraping, my ass.
Alice in Chains - MTV Unplugged
If I had to pick just one.
I was never as good as I always thought I was
There are four version of x86_64: v1, v2, v3, and v4.
RHEL 9 dropped support for anything prior to v3. That means RockyLinux doesn’t cover it, either. AlmaLinux has support for v2 in version 10, but there’s no way of knowing how long that will last.
Some binary packages are starting to drop support for earlier version. The latest numpy out of pip will not work on a v1 machine. You can sometimes use the system package manager’s numpy to work around it, or constrain pip to use an older numpy. I don’t know what else is lurking out there.
If you’ve got visions of taking a really old computer that you happened to max out on RAM back in the day and bringing it back to life there are surprises waiting for you.
They’ve been beaten on enough that industry is moving forward. The advantage of knowing and being able to prove that the algorithms are insecure would be incalcuable, so groups who want to be able to break into systems aren’t going to volunteer the information. It’s to the benefit of everyone else that the algorithms be secure. The third section of that paper I linked does a pretty good job explaining the why and why now.
tl;dr: Smart people have dug into it, and we know what we’re going to know for now.
I don’t know what he’s talking about, but maybe he’s saying that the US already has quantum computers capable of breaking modern cryptography, and that it’s time to move to Post Quantum Cryptography (PGC). The process is pretty far along:
Both sites mention “harvest now, decrypt later.” That’s an attack where someone could scoop up all the encrypted traffic/files/whatever, and just store it until quantum computers are effective at breaking it. Because of the nature of the topic nobody who knows for sure is going to say, but it’s not going to be cheap to replace all the crypto out there with PGC so there’s a reason to think there’s a need even if nobody will confirm anything. I personally think just the possibility of the attack is enough reason to move if the algorithms are already in place. If you’ve got encrypted data and you expected it to stay unreadable for hundreds of years, then there’s reason to think that’s not achievable right now.
RHEL9 and forward require v3, and the numpy in pip as of a few versions back uses either v2 or v3 instructions, so v1 is silently broke for certain workloads. FreeBSD works on it just fine as do Debian based distributions as long as you don’t need recent versions of numpy, but there’s no telling what else out there just tries to run and fails with an illegal instruction.
Lots of rose colored glasses being worn here.
I will take modern rust prevention tech every day all day. The control modules and circuit boards are a hole in repairablity, and there’ll be a wall where nobody makes them anymore and the specs are not published (considered proprietary/trade secret/whatever), and that whole vehicle will just have to be scrapped. The world won’t ever see the end of old body-on-frame vehicles with crate engines. Speaking for myself the “rose colored glasses” is a wish for the best of both worlds. I wouldn’t doubt it’s out there being done somewhere, but I’m sure it’s cost prohibitive to do it, or people are doing it for themselves.
Maybe I’m just complaining because I don’t personally have the time/knowledge/workspace to do what I want in that area. C’est la vie.
I ended up creating an account just to block communities/users. At the time there was a poster posting to his own instance that was federated with lemmy.world, and he was reposting nothing but reddit posts, and the volume was such that they had to go. With no algorithm there’s no way to just see subscribed stuff without losing out on discovering new things.
And just a tip, Lemmy will let you export (to JSON) your configuration options to include who you’ve blocked.
Who defines the untrusted applications though?
¯\(ツ)/¯
If GNOME wrote it then they probably trust it. If you’re using GNOME, then you’ve accepted their security model on some level.
At least you know to go look for it. Attackers will only get more sophisticated:
according to their stated security model, untrusted applications must not be allowed to communicate with the secret service.
That won’t be a popular stance to take when someone eventually steals a bunch of cached, unlocked credentials off of D-BUS because of an oversight somewhere in the npm/aur/pip/cargo/whatever ecosystem.
More rabbit hole:
What kind of car?
They used to be. Go back far enough in time and you could climb up under the hood into the engine bay to work on it. All that went by the wayside to get smaller packaging, lighter weight, and better fuel efficiency.
Now you need special tools or special code readers to solve/diagnose all vehicle problems. The large scale farmers are dealing with this now with the large combines and harvesters needing a tech with special equipment to read all the codes where the older tractors from the 70s and 80s can be repaired.
Well, nothing to do but start at the first one and work our way down…
Hm. Had been thinking of it in terms of controlling the local file system.
Thanks.
people then concluded that FROST is harder to exploit in real-world scenarios than in the lab
What happens if there’s an extra 4GB of stuff laying around?
Try the c++23 standard. There’s been a lot of cross pollination. Contrived example follows:
#include <format>
#include <numbers>
#include <print>
#include <string>
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
double pi = std::numbers::pi;
std::string fstr = std::format("{}, {:>.2}, {:>.5}, {:>.10}", pi, pi, pi, pi);
std::string h = "Hello";
std::string w = "World";
std::println("{}, {}!", h, w);
std::print("This won't have a {},", "newline");
std::println(" but this will add it."); // Add a newline.
// Can't put a non-constant string as the first argument to
// print or println so they can be checked at compile time.
std::println("{}", fstr);
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
https://xkcd.com/681/