I've only been paying attention since 1990 but every single time a feature they don't offer "is stupid" until they offer it.

Even when I liked the company this Cluster B behavior always bothered me.

If there's an example of "that's a really nice feature our competitor has but we don't offer it yet" I haven't seen it.

The closest I can think of was offering WebObjects for Solaris. Not sure if that ever shipped or we just had a beta. I bailed from that Healthcare IT team when the CIO pulled funding for two-phase commit among disparate patient medication systems with the rationale "even if medication errors kill someone it'll be cheaper to settle the lawsuits than pay for the license." Enough people left that they outsourced and everybody still hates that replacement system.

I learned too late that MBA's don't care about quality.

> everything you do has fucked the consumers

Say more ... how has suing to end the Play App Store monopoly 'fucked consumers'?

Let them do their thing.

I remember in High School the Camaro guys couldn't stop talking about how their Camaros were better than Mustangs but the Mustang guys never felt the need to denigrate the Camaros.

It's a matter of nature.

unrelated: Tailscale is so fooked today:

https://www.bleepingcomputer.c...

Some people here may need to panic right about now.

The right way to do this is to hire a group of developers and have test volunteers report workflow problems - then FIX them - then iterate. That's the point of choosing an open source solution.

Eventually there would be no problems remaining.

But so many possible scenarios exist that it's impossible to guess what happened here.

PS _NSA_KEY

There are apparently other unpatched vulnerabilities that are known but 'too busy':

It sounds like this fix got done because it was 'accidentally' posted as a public PR.

https://github.com/tianocore/e...

Yeah, the threat actor would need a foothold on the PXE network, which is a private VLAN (or better) in the competent case.

That's why we worry about APT's and such.

Granted, you'll find people on certain cloud providers who do far too much on a public IP.

That comes from mismanagement, and putting people who don't understand entertainment in charge of too many areas of the company. When there are more movies and shows available across many different genres, you get a LOT of people interested. Not everything needs to be a blockbuster production, not everything needs to be a top tier production. It's good when you have all of them profitable, but the push where everything needs to be amazing for a specific demographic reduces the number of movies/shows, and that will cause your audience to shrink.

Unless you are a teenager, you may look at the movies that come out and decide there isn't ANYTHING worth watching. Go for too long where entire segments of the population see that there isn't anything they would enjoy, and that segment will just stop going to the movies. The same goes for shows on TV, if you get too many of a given type, or not enough of another type, you lose a lot of viewers. So, instead of needing everything to be a high cost production and getting fewer people overall, going for a mix of low budget, medium, and high will make people look forward to seeing what is new.

The same applies to games, where the variety in the types of games has dropped like a rock since around 2005, and now, there are far too many first person shooters, and not enough games that are DIFFERENT. The independent studios or small teams can come up with some of the original stuff, but most of those do feel like they would be better if they had a bigger budget for music/sound effects/voiceovers, etc. EA killing off those developers who were doing interesting things, plus the death of Interplay has really hurt the games industry, the same way these big movie studios are killing things with their focus being on "more of the same", without a lot of effort put in to be different.

What if someone has fifty windows open with fifty tabs each?

Asking for a friend.

Solid effort - good job.

It's a bummer if any of the employees got rug-pulled but many of the best employees will strike out on their own, form new companies with working conditions they value, and likely hasten Skydance's demise.

nah, a RS code can correct a tiny bit of loss but two metadata copies can correct a bad sector or even track if you're lucky.

Different requirement spaces.

The idea this guy has might make embedded devices slightly more long-lasting.

They usually have quantity one of a cheap storage part and a bad block in the wrong place could brick the whole thing.

It would only be useful in the case where maybe the build is 12MB and the chip is 16.

Most vendors won't ever pay extra for this.

I suspect the people who hate it don't have problems it solves.

Maybe a very basic home laptop is fine with SysV today and they don't want to learn anything new.

Personally I've been able to retire thousands of lines of scripts I'd written to handle complex things with many edge cases and ugly devops modules that are no longer needed with more recent releases.

There's just no userland interface to many of the events it can respond to and it's not easy to write a new C++ daemon to handle each need that comes up.

At this point it's largely a functional API to kernel events in the way I use it. That's the DOTADIW perspective for me. I still have services call my scripts where it doesn't handle what I need. It would be crazy to ever expect it to handle everything.

But just because I need to handle complex things at scale sometimes doesn't mean everybody else does. If I want to run debian with X11 and emacs and you want to run Devuan with Wayland and vi, you'll get no argument from me.

Who has time for drama these days?

When you see some CIOs who refuse to upgrade because they don't want to spend money, there is the flip side where these same CIOs keep the software for far too long. In 2026, seeing 2012 versions of programs is a BAD thing in a corporate setting because you run into compatibility issues with newer versions of the operating system(stuff from before Windows 10 having issues under Window 11).

Artificial limits, or subscription models are a bad thing, but when you know something is going end of life, do the jump to something new, before your old software loses support and the VERY important migration path to new software. I've seen it even in the consumer space, the old Eudora e-mail program was going to go end of life(Qualcomm was shutting the project down), and a migration tool to Thunderbird was provided as the path for users. The problem came from those who stuck with Eudora because people did like the program. BUT, then you have the problem where when you DO finally want to upgrade, and the tool to export to Thunderbird no longer works well, or it crashes because of 200+ mail folders. That's where it gets ugly to do the migration.

For Windows at least, Microsoft allowed the Windows 7 to Windows 10(and then 11) upgrade path to continue working, but it's possible that Microsoft may turn off the upgrade from Windows 7 at some point, and that is when it will get ugly for people who want to FINALLY upgrade the OS. Trying to migrate to new hardware for those currently on Windows 7 is already a BIG issue if there are no drivers for this and that.

Make the students go up and demonstrate their work. Assign homework, then have those students come in and test them in person, possibly showing their work up on a board to show how much or little they understand.

This discussion on their inclusion in Mozilla is quite revealing:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/s...

Elsewhere it's claimed that they used a FIPS HSM to generate their keys.

I did not see who their auditor was.

Did eMudhra lie?
Did the auditor lie?
Are FIPS HSM's backdoored?
Do we have another Dual_EC_DRBG situation on our hands here?

If nobody is lying we could have just seen a huge cyberwar or false flag averted. Essential crypto gear could be totally buggered still.

PS Remember when Mozilla gave CACert absolute hell for years when they were tremendously more competent?