The Security Online article only cites Margitelli’s post on the matter. My assumption has been the article used the post as its single source. On one hand, watching MS fuck shit up for years, I want to believe Margitelli. On the other hand, researchers using weird tools and uninterested in reality are why curl is now a CNA.

I’m personally frustrated with Margitelli’s post because it’s all about abandoning responsible disclosure globally rather than naming and shaming (Canonical? Red Hat? Both? Others? If it affects all GNU/Linux I’d expect every single distro maintainer to be named and shamed). Responsible disclosure is our best solution to make sure innocent bystanders don’t get caught in the crossfire. When specific entities don’t abide by responsible disclosure we lambast those specific entities not the entire process built to keep users safe.

I think this was the best thing about Dredd (2012). It was just a one-shot or a short TPB as a movie, basically. It was a perfect Dredd story too.

Stephanie Pope said workers wouldn’t get anything better than the previous, rejected offer. I get what you’re trying to explain; that’s not the situation here and either way that’s the joke. Boeing corporate is being very disingenuous and clearly not negotiating in good faith. I’ve got another comment a bit ago on the article I linked calling out this exact situation.

Nice! That second one is just a repost of your first.

I wonder where the sources for this are? The hidden Margaritelli Twitter post?

Canonical and Red Hat have not only confirmed the vulnerability’s high severity but are also actively working on assessing its impact and developing patches.

The Twitter account has been privated and there are no news stories about it. Other communities where this has been shared are reasonably suspicious.

That’s not all GNU/Linux though. Either the OP doesn’t understand a very common container OS, Alpine, doesn’t use systemd (also Void Linux and others outside the container space) or it’s something else.

Last time Boeing execs said they “held nothing back.” Where the fuck did the extra 5% come from?

It could also be manipulated by someone who reports the dark patterns are inaccurate. If it were run by a single org or person, it could get sold to a company interested in gaming the ratings or used to bash things the owner doesn’t like. I’m not entirely sure what your point is. Every way to set this up is subject to bad actors. There are some checks and balances present in the website. Why are they inadequate and why should we not trust this site? Are you, perhaps, an industry dark pattern plant trying to get us to avoid something that could deter dark pattern usage?

That’s a huge misrepresentation of what Mitnick did and how the government mischarged him. He did a bunch of dumb stuff that was illegal. He was overcharged in very bad ways supporting ridiculous lies from the companies he broke into.

Really depends on whether you think inflation or corporate greed is the underlying problem. The average worker tends to disagree with Fed chair Powell that unemployment needs to be very high and profits skyrocketing. The average gambler tends to agree with Powell that power should be solidified at the top. When the average value creator was getting fucked every which way, the Fed said the economy was strong and we are not in a recession. The average rapacious hedge fund took advantage of the slow rise in rates to buy everything under the sun.

Same data, very different conclusions, all depends on your perspective. I can link solid center US publications to back the worker and solid conservative publications to back the corporation. Should the Fed have been raising rates over the last four years? Yeah, absolutely. Where is the disagreement and the complete lack of any other tool plus the root of rising prices as well.

In another post you’re actively looking at purchasing GPS systems. The satellites you’re sending info to are not available to dissect and I highly doubt the firmware of the devices you’re looking at is publicly available much less libre. Your trolling is not internally consistent so it’s clear you don’t have any clue what you’re on about. Good luck with that.

The claim is that audio and video are E2EE. I’m not sure how you’re unable to disprove that using the linked code, audit report, and COTS debugging tools. Can you expand on that? I see a lot of FUD without anything more than “they’re not libre” which, again, doesn’t do a great job of selling your point.

Interesting. I was able to access the linked whitepaper and repositories without trouble and the 3rd party stuff too. Do you have local config preventing you from downloading the source code to review?

While I can respect your distaste for non-libre software, you’ll need to back up the malware claim. There are real security concerns out there in common non-libre; labeling things that are not libre as malware solely because they are not libre muddies the waters and makes your message much less palatable.

This is complicated to unravel and has lots of similarities to the Tri-State Crematory Scandal.

Who owns a dead body? Does the state? Does the family? Take religion out of the picture for a few minutes as well so we can properly separate church and state. Someone dies without (available at that moment) relatives or a will defining what happens with the body. Alternatively someone dies and has not actually paid for the stuff stipulated in their will and does not have the resources to do so. What should happen? Something possibly like, in order,

• The family owns the body
• The facility where the person died owns the dead body
• The state owns the body if those fall through

Dead bodies can’t just sit around. They can cause serious health and environmental problems if not properly disposed of, so something has to be done. Remember, we’ve set aside religion, so a dead body is literally just a resource. It can be turned into cremains, it can be buried, or it can be sold for various uses. What should the state regulate here? What’s wrong with the state turning a dead body into some money? How much responsibility do families have in respecting last wishes? How much time and effort should the state put into investigating those? Do dead bodies really matter? How much land are we willing to turn over to cemeteries today? In ten years? In one hundred years?

Now if you bore with me this long and agree that dead bodies can be sold, I also strongly feel like there should be compensation to these families with interest for that shit. If you steal my resources and don’t tell me, the state already requires repayment. That’s what should happen here. It gets murkier once you add religion back in because you can’t really undo a lot of these things.

Dallas County is doing something wrong. But it’s way more complicated underneath the hood than normal Texas government shenanigans.

The article explains why this is risky. Were I in possession of a bionic limb, I personally couldn’t afford to replace it so it wouldn’t be worth the risk.

Once companies have branded their products, tidily and permanently painting over or erasing the logos can be challenging and expensive. Generally, a clinician will offer to customize a limb’s socket (the part that covers the residual limb). But many prosthetics techs are hesitant to alter bionic parts. Damage the product while customizing it, Dez Joseph, a prosthetist and orthotist in New York City, told me, and that could invalidate the warranty on a device that can cost as much as or more than a Jaguar.

Insurance also won’t cover the work, because it’s considered cosmetic, Joseph said. And because getting insurance approval for prosthetics can already be a battle, for some people professional customization is effectively impossible. Certain companies, such as Ottobock, offer gloves made to resemble hands (complete with wrinkles), which conceal any labeling, but Schneider and Joseph both told me that these covers can hinder some of the device’s efficacy.

Boeing execs said they held nothing back. The union members took that to be threatening. I genuinely wonder how much profit was actually reserved and how much executive comp is still available to drop into the pool. To me, “holding nothing back” means the company genuinely cannot to fund anything else without going into the red. Holding nothing back means fat was cut, executive pay was reduced, and shareholders understand their dividends are gone because the people that make them money need to get some too. Holding nothing back means some rainy day assets are sold and corporate, non-union members experience some austerity (granted you have to remain competitive so as to not lose your value creators so you can’t cut everything or they’d leave; executives are almost never value creators so they can have austerity measures). Holding nothing back means jobs could be cut if more hardship appears.

Something tells me Boeing was holding stuff back with that offer. It could be all the deferred stock executives have or the lack of shareholder expectation management. Not sure! We’ll never know.

Annnnnnnnnnnnd we’re done. Good luck! I highly recommend you take some time to understand how draft can mean more in the technical space. It might help you in the future when you are discussing things like drafts, specifications, and proposals.

You said

This proposal is a new iteration of the language and standard library. It would provide safe language features for preventing such problems existing in the first place.

Either it’s a draft or it’s a new iteration of the language. Can’t be both.

Right now, we have to compile the compiler for this ourselves. Pardon my skepticism; I’m not sure this is mature enough.

Edit: I’m talking about the project not the idea. Sean Baxter has shown up everywhere for awhile talking about this. I think his idea has a ton of maturity. I don’t know that the project itself has enough maturity to mainline yet.

Where does the document number come from? I can’t find anything about the SG or linked orgs that defines a sequence.