jj4211

Yeah, AppArmor is a lot more straightforward. I could buy an argument that technically the SELinux approach is more flexible, but it's hard to imagine someone needing that much flexibility in the general use case.

I can understand why something like Android could get more mileage out of SELinux' model, but most scenarios are very capably modeled by AppArmor approach and much easier and less fragile functionality wise.

Or at least by not being the shittiest, it's kind of a pragmatic balance, yeah some shittyness but only as much as they must incur for some publishers/developers to approve being in their ecosystem. Sharing a game library within a household is more complicated than I would like for example, owing to DRM restrictions. Steam has gone out of their way to try to make it more possible, but it's still a pain by its nature.

GOG takes a harder line that is easier for me, but misses out on a fair number of titles as a result. Which is why I prefer throwing the money at GOG to very strongly make clear my preference.

I can see concern over how much overzealous support Steam commands, and can see GOG and itch.io as strong alternatives, particularly better catering to DRM-free compared to Valve.

But Epic.... nah, every time an Epic decision maker speaks publicly it reaffirms that they should be the last option folks are considering. Always seems to be sour grapes about why they aren't the best and why it's just unfair that people reject AI slop and bragging how they AI slopped up some stuff and how excited they are to AI slop it up more over time... Never sparing a moment for excitement over in any way improving things for the actual customers, but always about how they could do better business and be lazier.

Gabe mostly looks good by contrast with Sweeney, and grading on a curve I can at least get the excitement. Of course also going beyond the store front into things like actively pushing Linux, Wine, and VR capabilities, even when they admit flat out it might not be the most profitable investment of effort. Also packaging up things nicely for handheld and couch usage in ways that just most folks never bother with the required polishing touches.

The thing is the market share is owed not to anti-competitive behavior, it's mostly about almost every other comer having some bullshit agenda that actively makes them put forward a worse option.

GOG being an exception, mostly held back by lack of resources rather than the sorts of things Jim Sweeney want.

I'm wagering that Epic Games considers those things to be the things that Valve actually does right.

Which is their whole problem, they value the shittiest facet of Valve and think the 'good stuff' is where they screw up, and bemoan that Epic can't get the worst stuff going because Valve is an option in the market.

While the stock policies have been refined to model more of an average user's usage, the facility itself remains a PITA when people do trip over it. File operations that mess up contexts, use cases that don't quite fit the policy, use cases that are well recognized but SELinux blocks it by default anyway until you change an sebool.

By being a security mechanism bolted on after the fact, various operations fail in ways that are mysterious because they can't inject explanatory information into the failure path. Further the audit log that you pretty much always need to consult when something fails for mysterious reasons in case it might be SELinux isn't even readable by the user that got dinged. So I can't even code in a way to check if SELinux was the reason and guide the user, instead I have to provide a diagnostic utility they have to 'sudo' to explain to them, or be vague and say 'check if selinux is somehow involved. So I end up despite doing my damndest to not run with privilege asking users to run something with privilege to check a security mechanism.

The existence and usage of audit2allow is a big sign of problematic design. How to fix something you see in auditlog is hard for people to understand, so they just audit2allow to amend policy, but instead they should have done a chcon because now they have a crap rule allowing something they shouldn't, but SELinux is still enabled so all good!

The whole label based concept is a fun whole other dimension of things for people to worry about. Messed up so often that we have a nice convenient 'restorecon' to basically apply the way AppArmor does things to the filesystem in that moment.

The curve could follow someone's journey with complexity, starting out with the prejudice that SELinux is bad, then letting SELinux happen and noticing no issues, and then moving on to realms where they actually have to touch the goop of SELinux instead of the canned distro SELinux setup covering their use case.

I think for a long term committed relationship, if one person is decades older than the other, the older one must not care much about the quality of life of the younger.

Might be all fun and games in the moment, but you are on a trajectory to probably inflict elder care on that partner down the road. Being tied down to a tired old person instead of someone that can keep up with them.

Maybe if the older person is rich enough to ensure others provide the care and the relationship is open, or if the relationship is mutually agreed to be a short term one before the age related deterioration is likely to really set in. But generally I don't think this is the case.

I would counter that "AI clean rooming" is not clean rooming, because they are feeding the actual code to imitate directly. Even ignoring the training, it has, verbatim, the object code and is trying to make code that compiles to match the object code. It isn't deriving the functions to a spec and the using the spec to go back to code.

I would further counter that the Compaq case dovetails with the idea that APIs are broadly not copyrightable in and of themselves. Compaq cloned a thin ABI layer, which was not considered substantial by itself, so the argument rested with whether the implementing backend necessarily infringed in resemblance or if resemblance derived from merely following a similar asked. If you clone an entire application down to the human presentation, I think no "clean room" argument would overcome that you cloned far more than some thin application to library interface.

Oh, based on my experience, there are plenty of people convinced they can't do anything without Claude anymore. Also based on my experience, I would be ecstatic if they actually stopped trying to do work because they sucked both with and without Claude.

Maybe not enough to fund their financials, but that was going to be a tall order anyway.

Yeah, that can be tricky. Under a previous manager where mostly he was ignored and I worked straight with the middle management, I had gotten the hang of the people inflicting the politics and crap and was significantly able to directly counter it to avoid spurious bullshit.

Then when that manager got laid off, and I got a new "I'll shield you" manager, who largely just takes whatever crap he's told and passes it on and says it's better to just take it than risk making waves. So I end up having to waste more time than I used to.

But absolutely was valuable in an early manager who took on the politics direct while I just did my work in early career. Of course he got fired for keeping documentation on a certain executive making a terrible call and actually sharing it with the senior leadership team when that terrible call went bad. Senior executives canned the executive, but let him fire the manager on the way out. Guess if there's one thing worse than an executive incurring risk, it's a snitch.

Even wilder, their fate stemmed from taking over McDonnal Douglas. That company was in bad shape because of their shit business leadership. After being acquired by Boeing, they got put in charge because investors thought they would be better at the business side despite having just run a company into the ground.