This always makes me wince. I don’t think high uptimes should be celebrated. Has your kernel ever been patched or the services running restarted? Just installing the updates is not enough to secure your system you need to be running that new code as well.
Also, I get very nervous about touching those systems. You have no clue what state it is in. I have seen far too many large uptime server have their power go some day and are never able to boot again or don’t boot all the services back up as someone forgot to enable the service.
Nop, rather see them rebooted regularly at a non critical time so we know they will come back up. Or even better have a HA setup.
You can’t allow to lose sight of context. In general I agree with you, but this is not a production server or even a system exposed to the Internet. This is an internal server hosting my stuff to me and only accessible via a VPN server that is on a different machine that is updated regularly who in turn is behind secure physical network devices with their own rules. This machine only job was to be available when called upon and it always has been. It does not need a kernel update although it could use one. All software on it is up to date and all security patches are updated regularly. If by any chance the system was fully compromised, all the culprit would get are tertiary copies of my movies and music collections, which they can enjoy, and a bunch of tertiary copies of my VeraCrypt virtual drives in which I replicate my backups. Again, context.
How vulnerable your system is with an old kernel/old code depends on what you’re running. If you’re running a bunch of sophisticated services that allow access on the open internet, you may have more vulnerabilities than if you’re just running a file share. The kernel doesn’t really matter at all unless either you allow other people to run commands or someone is able to exploit a RCE exploit.
Sure, but those vulnerabilities aren’t just open to the network. Almost every one requires you to be able to run at least unprivileged arbitrary code on the machine.
It’s very big news when there’s a vulnerability in the Linux kernel itself that can be remotely exploited. Like, everyone on any security show/podcast/blog is talking about it.
Lesson time. In security strategy we have the risk equation. The calculated risk of something is the magnitude of the harm it could potentially do, times the probability of it actually happening, all divided by any prevention measures you have or can take. Nothing is perfectly or inherently safe or unsafe, you always have to calculate the risks taking into account all the factors, and balance risk against operative costs. There’s a lot of economic value in a low risk system that doesn’t require much intervention or maintenance.
Reach out to the SFLC, this is something a lawyer should advise you on, not any internet strangers at all whatsoever, no matter how thorough their reply is.
Design-wise: You need a Ulysses Pact. This can also be applied to contracts, preventing you from being pressured into closing your source under any means by licensing it or by signing a contract with yourself
Ask the barman the direction to the closest landmark? Grab a cab? Get a map from the hotel itself?
I understand that walking around with a laptop isn’t for most but trying to think like OP here, I want to suggest that for their goal, habits can change. They are plenty of good solution beside a mobile phone to be able to get around.
Why didn’t you take the laptop out while you were still inside the pub? And typically wouldn’t you use directions to get to the pub, and getting back is just going the way you came?
Welp, I haven’t seen anyone learn Swift other than for Apple stuff these days. So I wonder how many can actually contribute to the code. It’s also made by Apple, so yeah. It would have been more performant and secure (both of which are pretty important in a browser) if it was written in a more low level language. For example Rust.
“More performant” citation needed. Very well written Rust might be extremely fast, yes, but Rust is also a hard language to get right. Swift is far from a slow language and I would not be surprised if the average rust programmer barely if at all manages to beat out the average swift programmer in terms of speed. As for the amount of programmers interested, hard to tell, but given the sheer amount of Swift devs I’d not be surprised if there were quite a few interested ones and I am unconvinced Rust programmers are statistically more likely to be interested in Browser development.
Benchmarks mean nothing. These aren’t the results of code written by an average programmer. Edit: and as a general note I would also like to point out the relative inconsistency of the results in terms of factor, only further reinforcing my point. I like Rust and all but we do need to admit it doesn’t magically solve all our problems.
You’re free to suggest another method of comparing the two languages’ performance. This is the best we’re have, and Rust wins in every single benchmark shown there.
These aren’t the results of code written by an average programmer.
Citation needed.
I like Rust and all but we do need to admit it doesn’t magically solve all our problems.
I never said it did. I simply pointed out that it’s demonstrably faster than Swift.
While Rust would probably have been a good choice for implementing a new browser, I don’t think Swift deserves the criticism it’s getting in this thread:
Swift was created by the same person who created Rust, and has many of the same nice traits
Swift is a modern language that is easy for plenty of developers to pick up; I’d place it in the same family as Rust and Kotlin
Swift grants access to a large pool of native iOS/Mac developers
It’s also open-source? Like, Microsoft created C# and Typescript. Google created Go. Those get used without people bringing up their origins. Hell, Rust was created by a homophobe. What, do you think the license lets Apple close-source everyone’s code if they choose or something?
Sorry, I’m just really tired of these low-effort comments. The only thing that should matter is the language and if it hits the goals the project needs.
Shopify (i.e. Shittify) being their top donor already has me looking sideways at this project. They’ll invest in anything they think they can get an edge with and if something starts to happen they’ll fuck it up and wallstreet-ify it as fast as possible if they can.
Their (Shopify’s) guru founder Tobi made a huge NFT play that went absolutely nowhere while I still worked there. They spent a lot of time and money on it, right before they laid several thousand people off.
I mean I hope Ladybird devs do a great build and go their own way without being corrupted by their donors and all that, don’t get me wrong. But whenever I see that dumb shopping bag logo I get the no feelings.
You can also read up on how the vast majority of Mozilla’s funding has been coming from Google for a very long time, and draw your own conclusions from that fact.
You may have misunderstood. It was Shopify who did the big NFT play on their platform. I don’t know much about the Ladybird team, I’m not trying to throw shade on them.
Also I’m very much cautious about them on anything browsing related. Discovered (after others also) they let their search-pages-in-a-shop get indexed.
Meaning I could go to Caterpillar, search for “Wabtec is better” and then this search url (with 0 products) would turn up in Google searches and that URL persisted. Text and all.
Basically one could spray-paint and tag sites with this graffiti. Shop admins didn’t even have means to remove it.
Back in the late 90’s I worked for an internet search company, long before Google was a thing. We would regularly physically drive a dozen SCSI drives from a RAID array between two datacenters about 20 miles apart.
I downloaded that 200gb leak from national public data the other day, maybe not the biggest total but certainly the largest single text file ive ever messed with
Publish early and frequently (e.g. on github with a license statement) and encourage others to clone it. Now the code is out there. You can’t take it back. Even better if the funding agency explicitly approves this.
You can still dual-license, later, i.e. use a more permissive (or different) license if the agency or a research partner requires this. Just make sure the repo with your preferred licence stays available and uptodate.
The license is less important than you think. OSS projects live as long as there is at least one maintainer.
From my interactions with the people that’ll fund this. It does look like they want me to just develop this. But my advisor has not done this kind of software development grants. And the people I talked to might also not know what their organization’s legal requirements are put in contract. That’s why I want to know what kind of language I should use in proposal so that it can be used as a point of discussion if someone from their organization says we can’t do that. Instead of them just assuming I’ll hand over everything.
linux
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.