vrighter @ vrighter @discuss.tchncs.de

Posts

0

Comments

1,053

Joined

2 yr. ago

one of the extensions has the description: "an easy flow to update passwords"

If that has to be an extension, then this sucks

is it just me who hasn't ever had any bluetooth problems?

could have been between the cat and myself. The cat still gets preference.

i'm kind of waiting for an implementation. The "protocol" is useless to me by itself

videos? everything flickers for me on wayland. X.org is literally the only thing keeping me from switching back to windows right now.

plasma powered. electric gas

the fact that it was found by luck, not methodically, to me implies that there probably are other backdoors we didn't get lucky with.

I already knew the answer. arch was not affected. hence why i asmed why it kept being mentioned.

I wasn't asking if arch was affected. I was asking why you keep regurgitating this clearly wrong information (if you bothered to google it, of course)

So no, google could not have answered my question. And if you do use llms for answers, I feel sorry for you

so.... they didn't distribute the backdoored package did they?

legion took the best parts of 2, and threw them away. It was quite disappointing

why does everyone keep mentioning arch?

we've skipped 7 and are jumping straight to 8. The process has been going on for two years now. 9 was released 2 years ago

nah man, gotta be more specific. When those stuff work on every application.

A screen reader protocol for blind people that requires the app to be recompiled and opt-in to being accessible to accessibility tools, is not a replacement for one that worked for every application. Old apps will become impossible to use for some people with accessibility issues. Though wayland fanboys would tell you to shut up and be happy that a protocol exists, while failing to acknowledge that the protocol is literally fucking useless by design.

mandrake, in 2004

alas, we're still a couple of decaes a way from being fast enough to compile it in the first place

because problems in the bank's software are the bank's responsibility. If they lose my money, it's their responsibility to get it back. Cryptocurrencies are the exact opposite, by design. If you're fucked, you'ee fucked. unless of course half the participants decide to fork, half don't and you end up with two "currencies" out of thin air.

Simple, it's not. If it were, they'd have been using them for decades (blockchains were invented in the 70s).

The consensus algorithm, which is not the blockchain itself, was invented later. But banks don't need to reach concensus with themselves. They all maintain their own data, and heavily guard it. So the only bad actor they could have is themselves. And they banks all keep watch each other.

so I put my trust in software instead. And by extension its developers. You're saying of all people, we should trust some programmers above all else. You know, the "move fast and break things" guys.

As a programmer myself, this thought is both terrifying and hilarious.

blockchains do not do jack shit with reconciliating records.