serhack_

true, shame on apple for the paper quality

I love sourcehut, and I can't really think anything to replace it. But here's my shot. It's a popular myth that independently from the project size, someone should always take the main stream product in the field than small projects because most of the people would use the main stream product and there's an higher chance that vulnerabilities get already exploited/recognized/fixed. Is that true or not? TL;DR: in the evaluation of such products (sourcehut but even self hosted stuff), should we also take account about the project history and the exposition to threats?

I would spend thousands of dollars for gitlab in terms of: 1) better UX for admin panel, I'm not sure what I've enabled and what not. Several buttons do not disable the rest of the settings, leaving me with some doubts (e.g. if I disabled grafana, why is there a setting that talks about where/how I store?) 2) a minimal version of gitlab without all the AI

the question is: do you know approximately a well known plaintext from a ciphertext?

Half baked product: https://weli.dev/blog/half-baked-product/

wasn't there recently another game that was starting with mosfet/pmos?

after discovering most of my content has been scraped thousands of times, I don't have any willingness to continue posting my blog. Well, yes, I was expecting that (you know.. by publishing content on the net, everyone could read it -- and profit off!). I've some content for some months, including some analysis.

I wish somebody could motivate me to publish them anyway.

Is it possible to achieve such level of precision of building something so complex without being worried around safety?

It's flabbergasting how this story is close to the reality. Bookmarked, I would love to see it printed.

I'm playing with it and it is impressive that is starting to have less and less problems than few years ago

I just wished there could be something easy to replace this equation editor, it's really smooth for people that are not really proficient with LaTeX

if anyone ever reads about this comment, please start to think about how to fuzz your software in a fast way. You don't need to correct or patch every bug, you just need to find where the algorithm A, B, C doesn't perform well, or where you have an allocation of 2 MBs for a linked list that should have been half of it.

I'm not a daily user of jetbrains product, but please. If there's any engineering/developers, start to use afl/cargo fuzz or whatever your fuzzer is, and spot bottlenecks, issues. I started to write software because I was looking at the quality of the very first softwares that were being fuzzed and it opened me some doors.

cool idea

nope, I was meaning the TeX source for the paper

https://info.arxiv.org/help/faq/whytex.html

off topic question: why is there no source attached to this paper?

I dream of a world of stagit + issue creation written in Rust. End