mpldr
Re:No more boot loader: Please use the kernel instead
on Tuesday July 09, 2024 @09:34AM (#40915955)
UKI isn't by redhat but by the Kernel devs, iirc. No redhead certs required. If you want to run with secureboot, you can use your own certs, but you can also just skip SB.
A scalable approach to network reconstruction
Re:It's Time to Give Up on Email
on Monday March 04, 2024 @05:08PM (#39596805)
Yes, we must lock down everything and make it fully proprietary. Imagine having interoperable systems without vendor lock in!
Re:ADHD may have been an evolutionary advantage, research suggests
on Wednesday February 21, 2024 @06:22AM (#39452509)
> makes you more likely to […] have unprotected sex
As someone with ADD, I wish I could agree. Adding to that, ADD can also be reasonably economically productive if the field of work aligns with the requirements of the condition. IT usually happens to be one of them. Productive squirrel chasing, if you like. Just work on a different issue for a bit, learn something new, etc.
Re:The Matrix Trashfire
on Wednesday February 14, 2024 @09:25AM (#39370097)
> Developers could also do these processes. And they probably do, often. But they usually have their heads so far up their asses that they don't see how inscrutable this onboarding process is even for very technical users.
I would argue that as the one developing a system (frontend or backend) you can not perform something like that. The reason being that you already know all the small little bits, tricks, and band-aids. The only way to get proper feedback, is by putting someone completely fresh in front of the system.
Show HN: LYML – a configuration format with the expressed goal of being readable
Hey, this is my brain-fart from about a year ago which was kindly dragged back into my brain through a groupchat. I now want to move this forward and would like some feedback.Originally, this was conceived while looking for a config language for a different project. I wanted something "Open-BSD-y", type safe, and avoid the ini-hellhole that has one spec for every implementation. Thus, LYML...
Re:Goravel, Web framework inspired from Laravel in Golang
on Thursday July 06, 2023 @01:58PM (#36620116)
There was a reddit link posted under another thread, which had a very extensive list.
Re:Goravel, Web framework inspired from Laravel in Golang
on Thursday July 06, 2023 @08:39AM (#36614874)
Since this has generated quite some interest, the reasons I dislike Laravel are:
- so. many. godobjects.
- I dislike ORMs. I could not put my finger on it, while using PHP frameworks, because they were omni-present; but after using Python, Go, and C#, I found it to be easier for me to just avoid the overhead of an ORM.
- Terrible structure. Sorting classes by type is something I have experienced to be generally less helpful than sorting by "topic" (not a native speaker, so this might not be the correct word for it. I recently heard it compared to collecting cars, then disassembling them and sorting by tires, steering wheels, seats, and so on)
- Too much magic™. I understand that many like this about it, but I found it harder to understand what exactly the program is doing.
It's not a lot, but after literally years of PHP and having these paper cuts almost weekly, I was at one point fed up. I first switched to CodeIgniter, which I found more pleasant, but still not even comparable to the comfort that cherry-picking components gets you (yes, you can by using composer, but most people I have spoken to discouraged that in favour of Laravel's built-in fun).
Re:Goravel, Web framework inspired from Laravel in Golang
on Thursday July 06, 2023 @05:21AM (#36613327)
Laravel, the framework that made me quit PHP. Not sure the concept of "one framework doing everything" will resonate well with the wider Go community. I will keep an eye on it though.
Re:Google Analytics alternative that protects your data and your custo...
on Monday May 08, 2023 @03:52AM (#35859129)
The cookie law™ clearly lays out that technically required cookies can be set without explicit consent. Performance measurements are not a requirement though.
So if you are not using anything but essential cookies on your site, you don't need a banner.
Re:WebGPU Fundamentals
on Saturday April 15, 2023 @01:36PM (#35582690)
Please, let me know which one!
Re:WebGPU Fundamentals
on Saturday April 15, 2023 @01:26PM (#35582619)
At least for me a browser should be an interactive document viewer. Not CAD, not file conversion, not writing OS images to an SD card, not generating GCode. Ingesting HTML, CSS, and JS and turning it into an interactive view of that XML document nothing more, nothing less.
Re:WebGPU Fundamentals
on Saturday April 15, 2023 @10:13AM (#35580796)
I would be very different if browsers were tools to view documents though. I am not saying that browsers don't have a purpose. I just question that browsers should answer the question about what their scope is with a loud "yes!"
Re:WebGPU Fundamentals
on Saturday April 15, 2023 @09:47AM (#35580596)
https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=chromium
https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=chrome
https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=firefox
https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=webkit
Those are the main reasons. And seeing how browsers are essentially designed to run other peoples code with minimal to no vetting processes, I consider this a serious issue.
Re:WebGPU Fundamentals
on Saturday April 15, 2023 @09:43AM (#35580568)
Blink is my operating system and Linux is its bootloader.
Re:WebGPU Fundamentals
on Saturday April 15, 2023 @09:18AM (#35580372)
Question for discussion: when have we reached the point where the Browser Feature-creep is too much and we say "okay, a browser probably doesn't need this"? Because after seeing WebUSB and WebGPU I think my personal limit has been reached.
Re:Ask HN: Self hosted email, Cloud storage and dovecot
on Thursday April 06, 2023 @06:16AM (#35466435)
> Risk of being blocked by big players (gmail/O365) is real but IMHO very low if you follow BCP
Can confirm, only issue I have is with outlook.com because their MTA-STS validator is… for lack of a better word: wrong.
I decided that replying to mails from outlook.com is not part of my mailserver's offerings and if it's required others channels have to be sought out. I'm not going to violate established standards just so Microsoft can do things their way.
Re:Ask HN: Self hosted email, Cloud storage and dovecot
on Thursday April 06, 2023 @03:42AM (#35465479)
They should pay their engineers to fix their MTA-STS validation. Haven't done so in ages. If you think you're not up to selfhosting (which in my experience is quite feasible and comfortable): please choose a provider that is not one of the surveillance capitalists. Recommendations are Migadu and mailbox.org
Re:Embracing “Old” Tech
on Friday March 03, 2023 @04:27AM (#35007500)
This. So much this. It's fine to not use the latest version, but use a supported version. If the version is EOL, don't use it. Even if you have backports. Otherwise you will inevitably run into issues where the system is insecure by-design. I can't ssh into half the servers because I have to first enable insecure algorithms, the PHP version is almost old enough to drink, and the Debian mirrors don't even serve this version anymore.
Sure, the system is stable. Until somebody finds it, then it can be a threat to the entire network.
Re:Embracing “Old” Tech
on Friday March 03, 2023 @04:23AM (#35007481)
Hey, Kernel version 3 is not that old.
Re:Bearclaw – tiny static site generator with RSS
on Saturday February 25, 2023 @10:27AM (#34937343)
Looks cool! What are it's advantages over hugo?
Re:Adding Telemetry to Go-Lang
on Saturday February 11, 2023 @08:38AM (#34752208)
> If they are going to do it, it should only ever be on an OPT-IN basis.
They made their case against it, and I can even understand the reasoning behind it. Doesn't mean I have to agree though.
Re:An attempt at making opt-out telemetry easier to decline
on Saturday February 11, 2023 @05:40AM (#34751145)
I made this in response to the current Go telemetry issue, where the Go team wishes to add telemetry to the toolchain. After seeing this over and over and over again, I would like to propose a standard ENV that indicates that a user does not want to be tracked. Of course making this opt-in would be preferable for obvious reasons, but unfortunately that's just not the world we live in and this way at least would make opting out once and for all easier.