r00ty

I seriously think we need to ask serious questions if we're able to shift people point to point further, faster by first going 4 miles towards space for a fraction of the price of moving more people at once on an electrified railway stopping at multiple destinations, picking up and dropping off along the way.

Something cannot be right. How can they not compete and be profitable? What am I missing?

Outside of major cities in the UK trains tickets are ludicrously priced.

Will Trump pardon them and force Microsoft to rehire?

I got a new work laptop recently. First one I've ever had that didn't have an Intel cpu. Company is a decent sized multinational.

I think it's already turning. But at the same time I don't think the US can afford to let Intel fail entirely.

They could lock out any other os but windows if they wanted. Mobo makers just need to limit to secure boot only, not allow legacy boot. Only allow the Microsoft key and Microsoft to stop signing the Linux shim. Then it'd not be possible to install Linux or anything else really.

Not going to happen short term. But definitely a possibility.

They removed that a long time ago. I mean think about it, evil is a pretty strong term, most people don't want to be evil. That they chose to remove it from their motto tells you everything.

It exists and will exist for a pretty hefty premium. Not because the makers want to. But frankly the interest in owning and controlling your hardware is more rare than we'd like. So like any niche hobby the hardware will be expensive.

Didn't the old arm version of windows have this limitation though? It only ran signed exes with a chain of trust?

I feel like this is probably where things might be heading overall "for our safety". People saying it's only the pixel. It's only the pixel so far. And I think Samsung are locking up bootloaders too. I fully expect both to become the norm.

Oh you'll be able to get a phone that isn't locked this way. With 4 generations out of date hardware at twice the price of the current flagship because it's a niche product they just can not make at scale to be affordable.

Also I've said it elsewhere, local/personal compute is something I fully expect to become a rare and expensive hobby too.

Just testing the big red button is still working. Nothing to see here, no I mean literally nothing to see here!

Oh I am sure there's a backup. I guess I'm interested in whether they're actually using it or not.

Maybe they can check people like me that deleted on their reddit posts and comments.. See if the AI can see all that "removed" content :P

That option is only likely to be for paid accounts. The freebie users like me have to make our own anti bot WAF rules. Or, as I do, just toss every page I expect a user to be using via managed challenge. Adding exceptions uses up precious space in those rules which I've used to put in exceptions for genuine instance to instance traffic.

But I am glad they were able to convince cloudflare. Good for them.

This already happens right now. If you have 22 open, your firewall is getting hammered with bots trying to get in, regardless of what cipher you're using, trying to exploit known weaknesses.

I know, except they're only ever trying lame user/password pairs that only an idiot would have on their luggage. Same as on asterisk and the bots trying to exploit decades old exploits on wordpress etc. Regardless of whether the site you host is even remotely like wordpress.

I'm not sure how you'd achieve this. If you have a mechanism to change cipher modes then there would be part of the codebase and handshake that validates settings in some way, which adds potential attack vector.

Doesn't need to change the handshake. If the server is mine, and run by me and I decide I was to change say, just the key exchange part of the process. It could be changed without negotiation. I just need to make sure all clients are configured the same way. My point being there wouldn't be a negotiation. If you try to connect to wireguard on my server, you'd need to have the key exchange setup in the same way, with the same parameters too. Yes, it should be entirely optional and require specific configuration changes on both client and server to achieve. So long as server and client are configured with the same parameters there's no negotiation to make. The channel can be setup and if the configuration is wrong it just won't work.