MS could be far more evil than they are, given their power and market-share. At least Satya is the devil we know.

Lying to the Board and lying to the public are different things.

I made the same comment about Googleâ(TM)s SDK. If AI is so awesome, why not just write a single SDK in a single language, and AI build the others on each push? Then devs can use their preferred language and it already has full first party support. Seems so simple⦠and the fact that it isnâ(TM)t being done screams pretty loudly.

rivals like AMD and Intel offer competitive specs on paper, but their software stacks have struggled with bugs, compatibility issues, and weak adoption. As a result, Nvidia has built an Apple-like moat around AI computing, leaving the industry dependent on its expensive hardware.

Nvidia's competitors need to work together to improve open-source software tooling and to standardize hardware interfaces, or else go the way of Commodore and Tandy.

Cheapskate co. doesn't want to pay for retraining from one IT specialty to another.

Boeing MCAS, run!

PeopleSkillsGPT failed them

and that takes effort.

TFA only mentioned EVs not hybrids. Ford can't seem to build hybrid Mavericks fast enough, based on the shopping I just did for one.

> Throttling is ineffective if you base it on IP address...

I didn't dictate any specific throttling algorithm. You are stabbing a strawman.

> an attacker obtaining the encrypted vault is probably not going to be able to decrypt many passwords,

That may not be how they breach them. It's an extra layer or device that may have an inadvertent security flaw. The more turtles in the stack, there more turtles there are to hack.

It will be interesting to see who gets rich after the bubble pops. Biggest Game of Financial Chicken Ever, Believe Me!

"Covfefe"

The random ones are too hard to remember, most will copy and paste. Either that, the help-desk is swamped with resets.

I'm not understanding why the traditional approach doesn't need throttling. Keep in mind a DOS attack is usually considered a smaller "sin" than a breach(es). If you allow too many retries, then the second sin is more likely. I see no third option*, it's either a DOS freeze or lots of retries.

If hackers find a design weakness in your company's preferred/required password-keeper, they can potentially hack them all. A company can allow multiple keeper brands, but then they either have to vet them all, or accept that some users will select a dodgy brand.

> I read your setup as a global throttle. If that's not what you meant...

* The best throttling and/or DOS defense strategy/algorithm is a more involve topic, but so far not a difference maker in what we are comparing.

> so now attackers can easily DoS your login system.

What keeps them for doing that with a traditional system? Even a traditional login screen should be throttled.

> Which is why you store it in a password-keeper

Another vector for hacking.