This is a ton of fun! Small suggestions:

    - A way to copy (or better yet, email) a session link so I can switch between devices while maintaining my progress
    - Allow 1 and 2 to function as hotkeys for Allow and Block, so I don't have to move between "a" and "b" for Allow and Block, and then the number keys for the block reason

Oh, also, change “Uptime” to “Availability”

If I recall they did the exact same thing with the first iPhone that had the camera bump.

The main problem with OP's experience is that the AI response has absolutely nothing to do with the search results and is functioning purely as a chatbot.

It seems to be a mix of LLM + RAG, with the RAG search results preferring what's fresh vs what has at least been endorsed by pagerank.

Are you sure? That would be a bizarre limitation. It seems much more likely there's something else going on where it's not working

Well I'll be. It does seem that the ability to get the subnet mask is present in the beta version of Dart, so hopefully this will be resolved.

From the linked page:

> When a cycle is started, a wax motor is actuated pushing a pin outward and locking the door. This design has cost, reliability and safety advantages. In moist conditions a wax motor costs less for equivalent reliability than an electromagnetic solenoid or motor latch. It has a predictable passive release delay. If power is lost the door remains briefly locked, designed to be longer than the high speed spin cycle coast-down time, then reliably unlocks as the wax cools.

> I really appreciate this attitude towards this because it recognizes that there are a lot of security teams out there that don't take a nuance view of CVEs

This is true, but also: needless CVEs place a burden even on security teams who do take a nuanced view of CVEs - it requires some amount of effort to evaluate every CVE and determine whether it's applicable or not.

In many (most?) companies it also takes nontrivial amount of time to patch potentially affected systems. In my company half IT department got recently an email that we need to urgently patch all Windows servers because of some critical CVE. I checked it. The description was maybe 3 lines and it said this affected domain controllers only. I raised this with security team and they said that in this case we don't need to patch everything. Now if we had to do this, it would force us to spend nontrivial time on unplanned patching. That this in itself disorganizes our operations can not be ignored. So comparatively me doing some legwork and checking the CVE was trivial effort and saved a lot of busywork for the department as a whole. That time we got lucky.

If something is hard do it more often so you get good at it.

While this time you avoided something, it sounds like you need to figure out your patching process ASAP. There is every reason to believe a major issue will affect everything in the near future.

Absolutely. I was focused on the burden CVEs place on everyone downstream of teams that don't take a nuance view, but even when teams do look at all the CVEs reported in scans, the proliferation of CVEs just adds workload to determine if they are affected. Unless teams say they will not look at lows (or lower-than-lows if the category existed) then what amounts to busy-work just piles up.

There's an upcoming talk at the OpenSSL conference next month on the cost of bogus CVEs to open-source projects that covers similar ground. It also lists some particularly ridiculous CVEs that, despite being jawdroppingly stupid, still need to be responded to by project maintainers who really have better things to do with their lives.

Same. I don't get motion sick, and this made me feel uneasy. It would make my wife motion sick instantly. It's an interesting concept though, and I can see the utility of it.

It's an in-depth post about something neat that someone made. Exactly what I want to read on here.

The author’s take on this in the Mitigations section makes sense to me:

> Remove the timeout, and a legitimately stuck core hangs the platform on the first SMI. Increase the timeout, and you kill performance on many-core platforms that are forced to quiesce all cores every SMM entry. It's not clear what the best path forward is, or if there is even a path forward at all.

Reads like AI.

Not to me, but who knows

I don't think was unkind, and I think that if you make something public, opinions are always warranted.

I think “soulless” crosses a line into unkind. Just say you don’t like AI generated text.