cr3ative

Hey, if you want to add OAuth and JWT to that idea for some reason, boy do I have an RFC for you https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-thain-ipv8-00.html

I'm not from Cloudflare, or particularly a fan of theirs, but they are doing a few things about this, including a new WAF capability: https://blog.cloudflare.com/full-transaction-waf/ and automatic protection for all customers https://blog.cloudflare.com/php-vulnerabilities-waf-protecti...

These were rolled out before the exploit became public.

I would wouldn't describe that as damning.

No, my example is one of where you end up if you start doing granular definition (and demanding to know where the line is, to the point of absurdity).

A broad stroke based on community trust and your own self-evaluation of a very simple rule is acceptable here.

If a contributor wishes to poke the edges of the policy to try and find the line of acceptable AI/LLM usage in the project, they are probably not the kind of contributor they want.

I don't feel like any further definition is required. You would surely know if you had used an LLM, AI or agent while creating the code. Keeping things broad allows for simpler enforcement, otherwise you end up in the weeds arguing if seeing the Google AI search summary counts as LLM influence.

A tractor, probably.

Ha, and I completely missed the "Linux" part of your post, sorry. I do enjoy both. Apple, like you say, is a nice default for me because they clearly care about privacy to a reasonable extent.

Plus, the HDMI-CEC "just works".

"This is a concern broadly and future looking" does not in any way mean LG TVs are doing it now; there would be proof of this if they were, it would be easy to catch.

Apple TV.

That is an _incredible_ claim, please back it up.

The blog mentions AI and untrusted input sanitisation. Hope your day gets better.

I think I would argue that linking to the security problem(s) and then writing about their style and how they probably came to be counts as discussion, but to each their own.

What would you characterise the two linked security reports as, if not holes?

Yes, they would have been able to if the proposal had gone ahead.

Thanks, I also found this unclear.

No logs provided. No replication case. A month old, un-responded to issue. The template for a bug report filled out completely incorrectly.

What is this doing here? If OP is the person responding, could they not at least have provided those details to help the bug report become more well rounded?

The mind boggles. While this isn't a great example, I'm worried about the direction "developers" are going in.

I always suspected this was possible but having it demonstrated is excellent. I would assume this would be of most benefit on an OpenWRT box which _does_ support hardware offload!

“I’m able to parse a marketing term” isn’t a great claim here. Pointing out it’s an unclear term largely abused is valid.

What an incredibly bitter piece, just full of unnecessary snips.

The terms: https://www.emotioncomputer.com/terms-of-use

And privacy policy: https://www.emotioncomputer.com/privacy-policy

Are literal placeholders. They haven't filled in the minimum information to make these useful:

"These Terms shall be governed by and defined following the laws of __________."

I am _very_ cautious around launches where they haven't got these basics correct. It's one of the first places I go to see if I should trust a new organisation or not.

This headline has annoyed me. macOS Tahoe 26.3 has been working absolutely fine for me, and probably millions of others.

It isn't working for _you_, and you don't know why yet. This isn't yet useful information and doesn't indicate that the entire OS is broken (universally).

Right. This is almost unreadable. There are words, but the author seems to be too far down a rabbit hole to communicate the problem properly…

> Bom's spokesperson told the BBC it had received about 400,000 items of feedback on the new site, which accounted for less than 1% of the 55 million visits in the past month.

This is a _remarkably_ bad attempt to make the complaints look reduced in comparison to usage. Amazing that any organisation would try this line.

Unfortunately, that person is Dave Plummer, whose very questionable history and memory of his time at MS should not be given much credit.

You're right, and thanks for the note - gave me a chance to reflect. I think what I mean is more along the lines that while a right to reply would have been polite, it isn't required of a blogger, and wouldn't change the substance of the post much, which is largely about a pattern of behaviour rather than specifics. Michael's attempts to dismiss/discredit the post based on a process which generally only applies to the press is what sits badly with me.

This expectation that someone should approach you for comment (and the suggestion that the fact they haven’t matters for neutrality) is misguided.

These accusations could all have been avoided by not moderating a community in which you stand to have a direct reputational gain.

You inserted yourself in to this situation. There is an easy path out of it.

Airsoft fields are generally private property.

They enforced ARC without any notice which failed deliverability by about 50% for my catch-all address. I only noticed when someone told me they had emailed and it didn’t come through.

I just don’t trust them now. That was a huge misstep.

And 90% of unsourced statistic-based claims are made up on the spot.

You disappeared for two years, your account got broken in to, and you’re wondering why it might take perhaps more than one week to untangle this?

It’s amazing they’re entertaining the idea of recovering it at all honestly.