I don't think there's a generally correct answer for this question (please refrain from attempting to convince me or others otherwise), rather I'm curious about your own hunch.
"#DnD combat quantifies the bodily integrity of all its participants through “hit points,” with the roleplaying conversation unable to proceed beyond combat itself until the enemies’ hit points are reduced to zero"
To those concerned about #slack now using your chats, including trade secrets, NDA stuff, etc., to train their #llm: #WTF did you expect using a third party with full content access to discuss those things? That they'd be gentlemen and not read your mail? That they somehow wouldn't try to find a way to monetize that juicy data? I am flabbergasted that people working for corporations just as immoral could have been that naive...
@bpavuk Judging by my timeline a lot of people seem to care now; I am confused as to how they either a) didn't see it coming at all (read: naive in face of overwhelming prior examples) or b) managed to actively "not care" until it was "too late" (Hint: It was "too late" the second you put data in, not when you learned that they are using it). "a)" I can imagine, like a character in a bad novel, though it's a tall order; "b)" on the other hand... My brain does not work like that. At all. Of course there is always c) The people now clamoring are not ones that did, in fact, choose (they might have still been forced to) to use slack in the first place, but are merely expressing their indignation by stylistically putting themselves in that position to increase emotional involvement. Those are... vacuous...
Surely I can't be the only person whose first reaction to seeing a company is named "Hugging Face" is to wonder if they sell Alien xenomorphs bloodily bursting out of human abdominal cavities as a service?
i regularly maintain sync between canoeboot and libreboot, ensuring that they have the same functionalities (with canoeboot excluding certain behaviours/code)
this change, on both projects, makes merging changes between them much easier, by reducing the number of merge conflicts
libreboot build system audit 5 is ongoing, and i'm keeping caoneboot in sync throughout.
@libreleah Let me just say that I am very happy that you continue t.o support canoeboot, while I'm inclined to agree with you assessment of the RYF policy, it is great to have the option on more limited hardware (some of which I happen to own ;-) )
given how complex and, by extension, vulnerable, the modern "web" has become, are there any sort of "gopher 2.0" projects out there that aim to provide a reasonably nice browsing experience, without having so much flexibility that you can cut your head off?
@bobdobberson Search queries are customarily sent via "GET" requests: <gemini://example.net/search?the%20user%20input>, there are search engines relying on this. Gemini deliberately does not include a method for sending large blobs of data, there was an effort on a companion spec called "Titan" that'd allow essentially "PUT", but implementer interest was low.
@bobdobberson The example I gave is right from the spec: https://geminiprotocol.net/docs/protocol-specification.gmi#input-expected CGI is completely orthogonal, as that is a question of how the server is implemented. People use "GET"-requests for search engines, chat, etc. And SSH client certificates for auth/login. Sure, it has fewer features than HTTP, because that is the entire point, to have as few features as possible and prevent future feature creep as much as possible at the same time (e.g. the response header cannot be extended in a compliant way).
Question for #infosec crowd. I've always stayed away from TouchID (or similar) due to not wanting Apple (or other companies) to have access to my fingerprint. Am I wrong?
@mr_oova Most fingerprint detection systems built into mobile devices (not sure about TouchID specifically) store the biometric data locally, often in a "secure element", so, at least pro forma, the vendor does not get access to it. However, since the vendor controls the entire OS around it, one has to assume they can get access, at minimum when you unlock the device. Stationary scanners tend to be connected to databases directly, they don't even pretend otherwise. Also: In many jurisdictions you can be legally compelled (usually incarcerated until you comply, more or less indefinitely) to provide your fingerprints to police, which is often not true for passwords. They are easy to obtain against your will anyway (for example I have the fingerprint of former minister of the interior of Germany, Wolfgang Schaeuble, as a literal stamp right here: https://shop.digitalcourage.de/stempel/stempel-schaeubles-fingerabdruck.html), and you have a limited number of fingers you can lose (physically, or through aforementioned shenanigans) before that becomes a problem; Not to mention how many systems get very suspicious if you insist on using a different finger from their default, because the staff do not understand these implications. In short: Stay away from biometrics. They seem convenient until they really aren't; And they can be stolen, faked, and abused easily (especially bad compared to the nimbus of "security" they enjoy).
@markusreuter Kannst darauf wetten: Da hat sich eine_r persoenlich zur Aufgabe gemacht gehabt, so eine Instanz hinzustellen und das an allen Vorgesetzten vorbei (mit Kopfnickendem Einverstaendnis, aber ohne echten Plan) einfach umgesetzt. Und jetzt geht die Person entweder in Rente/Pension/einen anderen Laden, oder bekommt staendig mehr "wichtigere" Aufgaben auf den Schreibtisch und hat deshalb einfach keine Zeit mehr dazu und sonst interessiert es halt keinen ausreichend. Die zweitwahrscheinlichste Version ist, dass das irgendjemand von den "Alteingesessenen", aus einer anderen Abteilung nicht gefaellt (Kostet nix -> Ist gefaehrlich oder illegal und support gibt's dann ja offensichtlich auch nicht, und ohne den geht ja garnichts; Brauche ich nicht, also warum machen wird das? Etc.) und weil dass dann ein Riesenrad wird laesst man es lieber wieder sein.
@Crell@brokenix I'd say it's a logical consequence of the corporation/legal person taking the blame/paying the fine. It doen't come out of the coffers of the decision makers. In my view things would get a lot saner if we applied "a captian is responsible for the conduct of their crew" and regularly sent the C-level to prision along with everyone proven to be part of a malicious action. I suspect building a huge corp would lose much of its appeal along the way, too...
Re-organizing the #Homelab and currently stuck on #HardThingNo2, naming things. My #aspie brain thinks it'd make most practical sense to name things by function, e.g. workstation01, firewall01, cluster01node01, etc. (which adds the question of how many leading zeroes), would like to name things with geeky references e.g. FUCKUP, Ozma, 7of9, etc. (which runs into issues as soon as you try for a coherent theme of enough components...), and is worried that from a security perspective something memorable yet unrelated to its function might be wise, e.g. blue charybdis, amber cyclops, periwinkle gorgon (But then I'm not running a spy agency here... as far as you know :-P).
@zrail Yeah, I'm currently leaning towards something similar, but I can't shake the niggling feeling that I need a perfectly coherent system. Not sure yet which part of my brain will ultimately win (But if past performance is the best predictor for future performance, then I'd bet on ending up with something entirely bland and rational. /me eyes current printer0)
@agh3 Very true. Though I suspect no amount of documentation and ease-of-understanding will eventually suffice to trump the convenience of simply outsourcing everything to global-corp-inc. I'm just really torn between embracing my inner child, engineer, or paranoid here :-P
@mforester For the longest time I used Star Trek characters, tpau is still chugging along just fine. And I used to work at a FAANG-level corp where the primary and secondary email server were called data (so far so good) and lore, so I guess I wasn't in the wrong crowd there :-P But that also taught me the value of systematic names; When you spin up dozens of machines elastically then naming them isn't only pointless, it actively hinders swift error localization, because your brain goes through that additional level of indirection. function-location-somewhatuniqueid is really helpful. But then so it is for an intruder, a host named auth-something or db-something is sure the get attention fast during a breach, which is why some security departments actively mandate something like IP-, MAC-, or GUID-only, which in turn is nightmare to debug yet again... None of which applies much to a homelab, except insofar as I want to play with "realistic" toys. sigh My brain us just stuck in the evaluation loop; It's a familiar feeling, though :-P If someone has a link to a reasonable "current best practice" document I'll take it, otherwise I'll just go with boring+functional again ;-)
@Uselessgeneration@repaircafe Not sure I've even encountered a mention... To me that's either a socket or a bayonet (if I feel fancy), but that may well be something that is only right within my own weird brain :-D
It turns out that in Norwegian "Gå løp" literally means "Go run". Not sure if those words in Norwegian are used together in such way very often, but at least I found some examples.
I'm amused that this sounds almost exactly like "Gallop" in English (BTW, there's a word "Галоп" in Russian that sounds almost identical to "Gallop".)
@loke@avp According to wiktionary the common Proto-Germanic word is "*hlaupaną" which goes realtively directly to things like German "laufen", Sater-Frisian "loopen", Swedish "löpa", Norwegian "løp", etc. while the Old French "galoper" stems from Frankish "*wala hlaupan" (running well).
@Cyberagentur 14 Tage Schweigen im Walde... OK, hier sind zwei Hints: 1. Ich habe einen gravierenden Kardinalfehler begangen, und 2. die erste Nachricht lehnt sich deutlich an Ihre an.
