As a sysadmin in 2020 - 2024 time frame I used to do that all the time at my previous job, got a strong openlssl cli game going whenever needed to generate a new csr for existing key or new key and shovel an exact amount of SANs into the CSR too. Lot of time wasted. There were also a certain set of customers for which we managed systems and they insisted for it to be done this way as something free on the internet is not to be trusted. Oh well, strange times.
I think you could argue teenagers have a right to discuss political issues in the public forum. That's basically the definition of good citizenship, and (for better or worse) social media is the public forum of the day. Kids don't go from zero rights at 17 to full rights at 18; minors' rights are limited, but they do have rights.
I dunno if that'd fly in Australian courts though.
Tell a story. It might be "unrelated" to thd topic at hand (I based one on Shackleton's expedition, and another on a Robert Frost poem (two roads diverged.) Or it might be related, a "my journey" type, or it might be about the experience seen through the eyes of a customer. But a story helps the audience relate, and keeps a thread through it all.
If you can, be funny. Frankly this is hard if you're not a 'funny' person. Delivering a good joke, or line, well can be learned but if it's not your thing steer clear. Bad funny is worse than not funny.
If you're not funny naturally then get a funny person to help you script in "dry" humor lines. You can deliver them dry, in fact often the dryer the better.
"We founded our business in Jan 2020. Nothing could possibly go wrong".
But good funny is great. Learning while laughing really keeps the audience engaged.
Reacting to the audience engagement is also a skill worth developing. When they're bored, move on. When they hiss or boo or laugh or leave, these are all valuable feedback.
Enjoy yourself. If you're having fun, they will too.
Life extension research isn’t going to make anyone immortal - it can’t prevent deaths from accidents or foul play, and after a few thousand years the odds you will succumb to one or the other becomes quite high. Suicide is likely to be another major factor, including active suicide (possibly styled as euthanasia), the passive suicide of choosing to stop all this life extension wizardry, and intentional recklessness soon resulting in accidental death. Finally, for all we know there is a long tail of obscure disease processes that only kick in after lifespans no one has as yet ever reached-and even though that too might eventually be solved, if it takes you a thousand years to find the first case of such a disease, how many will die from it before you find a cure?
> There is another, I think different, form of "source available" that I've seen a bit lately, similarly from corporate/commercial sponsors: the source code is released under an OSI approved license (e.g. BSD, GPL licence) and the owner maintains and develops the code in an ongoing fashion, but there is no way to easily interface with the developers, contribute changes back to the project, nor is there any public facing bug tracker or developer/user community. To me this is just as much "not open source" as a specific no-compete with the primary project sponsor.
No, that's very much open source - in fact, it was the way most big name open source projects were developed back in the early days. See the famous "the cathedral and the bazaar" essay. Public bug trackers and widely soliciting contributions to mainline are relatively new phenomena, but you always had the right to fork and maintain and share your own fork, and that's the part that's essential.
> Is it something that can be fixed with editions? My guess is no, or at least not easily.
Assuming I'm reading these blog posts [0, 1] correctly, it seems that the size_of::<usize>() == size_of::<*mut u8>() assumption is changeable across editions.
Or at the very least, if that change (or a similarly workable one) isn't possible, both blog posts do a pretty good job of pointedly not saying so.
> Paramount has everything to do with things Paramount does
But not with things it does not. The numbers you quoted are not Paramount’s. (Though that is orthogonal to you being wrong on Warner owing Netflix a break-up fee if Paramount wins.)
Yes, I considered that. Someone using a horse-drawn wagon to deliver goods about town would likely not consider buying a truck until the cart horse needed replacing.
The working life of a horse may be shorter than the realistic lifespan. Searching for "horse depreciation" gives 7 years for a horse under age 12, the prime years for a horse being between 7 and 12 yrs old, depending on what it is used for.
I'm willing to accept the input of someone more knowledgeable about working horses, though!
>Russia seems poised to invade Europe in the near future
only if the near future includes the year 2150 because as of right now the Russian defense ministry is celebrating the liberation of individual bakery plants on their state media
I think it's easy to say this now, because calculator technology is ubiquitous, assessment methods have been adapted to account for calculator use, and we now have multiple generations of adults who used calculators in schools as students.
And yet the debate on calculator use in schools raged for a good 40 years or so before it quietened down - only to be replaced a short decade or two later by AI cheating.
> If we’re talking about grade school children who are learning multiplication, then yes, a calculator is unhelpful to their education.
> So, note for me: If I want NTP redundancy and I'm using NIST's servers, pick one NTP server from each of NTP's three sites.
System robustness hazard that won't tolerate just querying time.nist.gov at 4-sec or greater intervals?
From the cow's mouth[1]:
>> The global address time.nist.gov is resolved to all of the server addresses below in a round-robin sequence to equalize the load across all of the servers.
O'Sassy or whatever is certainly Source available, and not Open Source. DHH can pound sand.
I used to think the pedantry was foolish, but I've grown to understand the distinction. It's one thing to criticize the OSI's claim to the term, and I do think they could do a better job at getting out ahead of new licenses and whatnot, but even if you ignore OSI entirely then the distinction is of substantial value.
I do think we need more Source Available licenses in the world. Certainly I would greatly appreciate being able to browse the source of the many proprietary software systems I've administered over the years.
At the same time it is not worth it if the spirit of Open Source is watered down.
For someone who runs a small personal website and uses LE to secure this + some web exposed services, could you explain how this is different/better than acme-dns-certbot?
If you read into Web.Com, yes, they are quickly becoming a monopoly on host companies. They do not disclose many of the hosting companies they now own.
If you can find a company that allows clients to install Let's Encrypt Certs on shared hosting, please let me know.
> I am astonished that NIST does not have multiple clocks over multiple distributed sites with robust ability to detect and bypass individual failures.
Is this sarcasm? I can't tell.
Per the email:
> Servers at the Boulder and WWV/Ft. Collins campuses are independent and unaffected.
I work in UI in enterprise, where slight color shade differences between releases can cause uproar. I cannot imagine the thought process behind liquid glass in any sense.
OSX's Aqua was also an insanely bold UI with a lot of gimmicks, but was still usable for the most part. I'm so very curious about the internal discussions around this.
I am nearly in tears after reading this chain of posts. I have never read anything so funny here on HN.
Real question: How do LLMs "know" how to create good humor/satire? Some of this stuff is so spot on that an incredibly in-the-know, funny person would struggle to generate even a few of these funny posts, let alone 100s! Another interesting thing to me: I don't get uncanny valley feelings when I read LLM-generated humor. Hmm... However, I do get it when looking at generated images. (I guess different parts of the brain are activated.)
