Everything VMWare offered is and was glue and automation over the fundamentals underpinnings that now available to anyone freely in the Linux Kernel + qemu project; or some other places.

As with most enterprise software technologies the value was not actually fundamental bits but that all that glue and management was there so that you:

1) Do whatever you need to do in a supported way
1a) for CYA
1b) for actual technical assistance when needed
1c) to appease audit / risk management / insurance people

2) Do it in way that is aligned with however a lot of other organizations are doing it, so you can hire someone to replace your sysadmin if he decides to have a second career in forestry next Tuesday.

Pretending there is no value there is just weird, there is obviously value there, fact is a lot of places were using VMWare and doing new deployments because they saw that value. Now maybe roll your replacement for whatever it is in vshphere you need that proxmox does not do, does make sense after Broadcom's extractive price hikes. That does not mean the VMWare product suite is worthless or that is offers nothing of value over the alternatives, just that it isn't worth (to a lot of clients) Broadcom's new asking price.

It is also true the Virtualization space has been comoditized, there may not be a business in maintaining an enterprise class commercial software suite, and Broadcom's strategy of extracting the most revenue they can from a small group of customers who can't or won't transition off until they do eventually sunset the project is the right one. People like to moralize about this stuff but at the end of the day it is just business, and long revenue extraction has been part of the commercial software industry nearly as long as there has been a commercial software industry.

it isnt a trope it is a witticism.

Mark Twain was joking when he wrote it, but like all observational humor it is funny because there is a grain of truth to it. It isn't like a law of physics or something where a single counter example falsifies it, as long as it true often enough to broadly reflect the reality we experience it is good enough.

No it isn't real "evidence" that the author of BitCoin is a single persons but it is a valid counter point to, we can't find a single BitCoin author so maybe it was really a team. Which is a fact free hypothesis. It is simply the assertion that the author of BitCoin remains a secret, one thing we know about secret keeping is that the fewer people with knowledge of a secret is the more likely it is to stay a secret, therefore in absence of additional BitCoin author specific observations the mere fact we don't know who was behind it suggests it was either a very small well compartmentalized group or one person.

So Anthropic demos Mythos and OpenAI has to say put out a press release.

Altman's house of cards is collapsing...

Two can keep a secret if one of them is dead..

I don't think it is a team. That would be even more people with 130 some odd billion reasons to show their cards.

I don't even think one of there letters could sit on something like this effectively. Hell even the airman rescue mission leaked, and there was little or no financial incentive to leak that.

I am not the one here that doesn't know what I am talking about.

Availability is a leg of the CIA triangle bro.. If the authorized user CANT get access and its not fixable. That is a security failure, and likely as serious as a total confidentiality failure.

You getting root does not make you the evil made, you getting root means you SE'd the owner into running something, found a nice heap spray in the browser followed by a local privesc etc. Realistically these are all going to be drive-bys of some kind, where the victim stumbles onto your watering hole, runs whatever code you the attacker react when the listener calls home. Go in plunder and leave if you identify the box as being someones home PC. You're not going worry about persistence or dwell time..

I wonder. Certainly in suburbia yes. Cities though.

People have to be able to park, vehicles have to be able to get by in the opposite lane if you cone off an area being patched. I am not sure you can necessarily fix every hole in a give couple blocks at the same time without creating a significant traffic problem.

Bullshit.

About the only thing secure boot really protects from is the evil-maid. All other cases affecting most users by the time something is in a position to modify the kernel or boot loader it was already in a position to do all the damage that would matter to that person.

You had root on my box, you have already had the opportunity to crypto ransom me, just vandalize my system in general, find and extract any sensitive data in my home directories and on any mounted volumes.

Even advanced persistent threats for the most part are not going to be trying to spliot the pre-boot environment, if I want dwell time on a corporate network I want to compromise assets that are usually always online.

In fact I would suggest for most users of home PCs anyway (to include laptops that rarely if ever travel) are less secure for using secure boot and even FDE. Most of them are one bad update or certificate expiration away from rendering their data completely inaccessible and unrecoverable. We know most of these users have no backups, and the tiny percentage who do have never tested them. -That is the opposite of security folks.

FDE does make sense for corporate environments and secureboot probably does as well but it has not f***king business at home and should NEVER be acceptable as being part of any requirement. It serves only one real use there denying people freedom to do what they like with their own hardware. It does nothing but enable DRM, and it does so at the cost of massive potential harm to the end user.

Only if it is in the public interest to destroy bitcoin.

Imagine if one person were suddenly revealed to unilaterally posses sole authority/ownership over 1/10th of dollars in circulation with no checks, or limits on how or what they could do with them, when or how fast!

Do you think that would do much for dollar confidence? I think likely lead to a pretty immediate discounting of the dollar probably around 10% in real value. The impact on Bitcoin would be a great deal more pronounced because Bitcoin is so much less liquid.

They (Iran) obviously chose it because it is at least in the short term comparatively difficult to sanction but also not to difficult to convert. It would not do them much good to collect tolls in some other currency and subsequently have US diplomatic pressure cut them off from the banking networks that generally handle that currency.

I am not saying that Bitcoin isn't highly traceable and that the US and other governments wont try and won't ultimately succeed making it so punitive to accept payments (in bitcoin) from Iran that Iran has to trade their bitcoin at a significant discount to those wiling to launder it and / or accept having tainted funds they can't spend a lot of place as well. That will happen, but will take some time to become really effective.

It does leave you wonder if the people who whisper in Trump's and Bibb's ears and their friends who might whisper in the ears IRGC types might indeed have provoked this whole thing in order to create a situation Bitcoin or some other crypto-currency could be forcibly inserted into the "international system".

It is interesting to think about because I do still believe in light of hyper-sonic missile and drone tech, and expanding Chinese influence there were / are good strategic reasons to remove Iran as an international player right now, for the US. Attacking Iran was a smart move... Letting them survive as even a regional power isn't. The ability to fight them is determined by the domestic clock on war powers. Trump is an idiot for wasting two weeks on this cease fire, he should economically disabled them, finishing it. Whoever he listened to on accepting those terms is not advising him well. We should have at least destroyed their remaining oil infrastructure, before any pause.

Well shoot, even the politicians jobs are not safe then!

I am very disappointed in Trump, there is no reason to give Iran and Islam in general credibility by labeling it a civilization.

Maybe we should just cool it with the guilt by association stuff. Yes Bill was friends with Epstine, and sure Malinda left and it looks likely because he a philanderer; but we don't really have any direct evidence he is a child molester.

There are lot of people who were and are important in terms of contribution to our society, who may at some point associated with an unsavory character or two. This is the trouble, where are lines. Why wasn't Obama's relationship with Bill Ayers disqualifying? He knew or reasonably could have know his opinions and involvement with terrorism, isn't Obama a terrorist by extension? How about everyone involved in Harvey Weinstein movie? His transgressions were ostensibly an open secret in the Hollywood community, some the victims were likely underage so we are in the same space as Epstein there, yet almost none of these people are considered untouchables now? why?

Epstine made it his business to get into the business of literally anyone with money or influence he could. I think there is a big difference between asking:

how is it the guy avoided the trip to Federal-pound-you-in-the-ass-prison for as long as he did?
Who was complicit in protecting him?
Why?
When will we bring them to justice for perverting justice as was obviously the case?

and this desire of some to try to tar everyone they don't like who happened to have gone to the same dinner party once.. One is witch hunt the other is not. Gates might indeed be abuser, but if we are going to treat him like one, even in the court of public opinion someone should be able to cite some harder evidence, than has been turned up so far.

^^^ Someone with some points please mod this (#66081144) up!

Indeed the The Commerce Clause has been so stretched as to place essentially nothing outside the bounds of federal law.

SCOUTS really needs to look hard at the individual precedents that have expanded that interpretation in light of that practical reality. Some or all of those have to be incorrect because there is no world where the 10th Amendment gets included, but the intent of Article:1-8-3, is as broad as supposed.

Red state AGs really should be shopping every case they can for opportunities to get in front of the Court while they have a small majority of justices that are at least slightly sympathetic to limits on federal power.

For the individual that is certainly better than Chrome, but from a perspective of does it give Alphabet, any less influence not really much better.

I come back to if we allow Chromium to become essentially the only online HTML Document rendering engine in use, Google makes all the rules. It is really to large a project for any entity not a large corporate to fork.

Just look at the whole plugin architecture(Manifest V2) stuff, Google got their way because the plugin architecture touches so much and nobody maintaining Chromium based alternative browser could realistically keep up with the mainline if they forked or tried to keep a patch set running.

Google basically unilaterally decided what web-plugins are allowed to do; and nobody was able to stop them.