"Toxic" or "trash" doesn't have a meaning per se associated with it... just a diffuse feeling of doubleplusungood.

The specific details are for the reader (i.e. you) to fill out, or your opponent in a disagreement.

I spent 30 years in the field. I fully agree with your parent poster, that was spot on.

Except JSON doesn't have a schema.

(Yes, I know of JSON Schema, but it was built and designed after the fact, while XML schema is part of the standard.)

Besides, wrong syntax will fuck up every format - JSON too.

That's actually against the GDPR, too. Google got grilled for it recently.

Opting out isntallowed to be substantially more complicated than opting in. We're still left with anti-patterns, so it's not a level playing field by any definition. But at least we have a reasonable chance.

You got it backwards.

You regulate not because the companies would otherwise hurt themselves, you do because other wise they'd hurt others.

The correct simile would be "we aren't cattle, we mustn't be treated as such."

Well, you need to sync before you can effectively control, don't you?

Ah, fellow circadian nerd :-)

And with high-CRI LEDs, and then slowly dimming the maximum allowed intensity from 100% down to 20% between 6pm and 11 pm, and only allowing it up at 100% @ 6500K again at 6am the morning.

The true legacy of civilization :-D

I was asking for a constructive difference, not a destructive one.

The whole spiel with "monetary reason" as incentive for a good product works so well that the term "enshittification" has been coined to describe it.

Specifically: no, the company has no direct incentive to provide you with a useful product. What they want is to make money, and make you provide them.with money.

Sometimes this means giving you a useful product, but most of the time it means giving you a carefully crafted crappy one, barely usable to keep you on your toes, locking you in, and making you not use another product.

Here's the thing though: the more control they have over your endeavor, the more shittier a product they get away with providing. And the very issue with proprietary software is the fact that it enables people to gain control over your life that have no business having any. It's a self-reinforincg invitation for scammy behavior.

Oh, and:

...actually just translates to something like "next Tuesday" if that's what the commercial entity shipping the product feels like.

You have absolutely zero standing in requiring that someone, anyone, develops or even allows you to use the product 6 months from now, if they don't feel like continuing developmen.

"Lifetime" my ass.

...so... how is that different from being at the mercy of whatever commercial entity happened to sell the product, for a commercial software product?

Except with FOSS, when push comes to shovel, you still have the source and the right to work on it. With commercial software, if the vendor decides to "go in a different direction", you're royally fucked even if you're able to muster up enough knowledge and manpower to scratch thay itch of yours yourself. Because.you're simply not even allowed to, wo begin with.

Simple. You assemble different, mor luxurious, more expensive, products and sell to the upper class.

There will always be a market to send to. Just look at most of Indiaz for instance, where 99.9% of people are too poor to even afford a place in the shade. But they still have a functioning economy. It's just that everyone except for a very, very few selected ones aren't part of it.

So if you're hinting at, and waiting for, a poverty induced economic collapse... bad news: it's being postponed. Indefinitely.

"But we need a way to distribute money" is the most stupid reason for putting humans to work when/if machines wout do just as well.

(That's a big "if", but let's just play pretend.)

I mean... the rhethoric until now, increasingly misleading, was "there's no free lunch, that's why you need to work." So now?

Nope.

I don't know what is wrong woth the doll (you made it after your own image? is it woke?) but it has no brains.

Cannot show on doll how brains got raped.

Banning books and information was wrong then, and it's wrong now.

I think we're talking about different things here.

This isn't automatic mitigation, it's only about the necessity of revocation after the comprising and fixing have been detected.

  You're not leaving the system "compromised for 6 days", you're doing whatever you need to do to fix the compromise, and then can restart. Your new system will be safe & sound right away (provided you've actually fixed your hole). The only thing that will happen, is that there will also be another, older key for your domain in circulation, under somebody else's control. If that's a problem, i.e. your continued (new) system security, is sensitive to that, you need to stay put & keep the system disconnected until the old key expires.

But then again, having had the ability to revoke wouldn't have helped you much anyway. Typically, once you fix your hole, it's not your system that's at risk by the existence of the old key, it's your customers'. And it all would've depended on them updating their revocation lists timely - which they probably weren't to begin with.

And if you weren't going to fix your hole, then you would've been an idiot to begin with, and revocation of the old key does shit, because once you do that an set up a new one, that one will have been compromised, too.

And if you wouldn't have found out that your key (and system) were compromised in the first place... well, the nee 6-day regulation helps just about as much as the old 90-day one, namely not at all.