tedu

We’re all trying to figure out where these headlines came from. The stable channel with all the fixes does not (at this time) bundle the warning. How is that users have become confused and believe the dev channel is the only way to get security fixes?

I don’t know why you’d jump to the dev channel, though. Just apply the stable channel update.

I’m going to go way out on a limb here and guess nothing will happen if I do neither.

I’m sure it still works in photoshop or whatever, just not the windows stuff.

Because it comes from a laptop with rounded corners on the top of the lid and a flat hinge on the bottom.

What critical information are people putting in the six missing pixels?

Now people want recall?

What?

Are these millions of potential customers in the room with us?

A simpler explanation is that users are tired of everybody with a customer support issue running to daddy HN and making a big fuss trying to get their way.

So weird, that’s not what I see.

Pretty much, yeah.

UTM may be somewhat shinier, but you can run anything you like in qemu on a mac.

Jesus, what clickbait. It’s a bug in fluent bit.

Languages don’t have goto because they mindlessly copied it.

I will never use a Windows laptop because it wakes up in the middle of the night to apply some stupid update, then glitches out, and can’t go back to sleep. So every morning I find a laptop with a dead battery. Sometimes if I wake up early, it’ll still be hot from whatever it was doing.

Fixing that stupid bug should have been easier than porting the whole OS and app stack and emulator to a new CPU arch. And I have no faith they fixed the bug anyway, so it’ll probably still happen to ARM models. So no thank you.

Who goes out of their way to install requests-darwin-lite?

What is this “world of content” the author is talking about? 17 years ago, the streaming options on Netflix were the previous season of Friday Night Lights, and… that was it. A few years later they got The Office, but never the current season. So you were always behind. These articles never seem to include a graph of available content over time.

Some necessary caveats: This kind of attack can only be pulled off in relatively narrow circumstances by a dedicated attacker. Segal said the user would need to have installed a malicious browser extension or be in transit and use public Wi-Fi where their traffic could be intercepted and decrypted through a MITM attack.

Well, okay. Maybe there’s something new here, but despite the many paragraphs of exposition, this sounds like exactly the sort of cookie stealing attack that’s been possible for decades.

Is the big breakthrough here that somebody realized FIDO doesn’t change that? Like, uh, no kidding? What’s new?

You um… did know that um… mastodon did produce a um… product before the board change, right?