Yeah… Markets do tend to peak just before a crash. The only problem is knowing when the leak finally hits, since the market can be irrational longer than we can be solvent

TLDR they’re not doing basic cleanup and auditing of their DNS records.

The key phrase in their statement is ‘pseudonymous interactions’, which is what we have right here. We are not anonymous, because we each have a username and we can develop a rapport of sorts based on who we see around in various threads. What you’re thinking of is anonymous interactions, where there’s nothing to associate a post to an individual, which are toxic. The surprising thing seen, is that tying your real name to your post actually leads to less civil interactions than pseudonymous nicknames, with the possibility that people are less civil because they’re effectively playing it up for their social circle. [Source]:

We built a data set of 45 million comments on news articles on the Huffington Post website between January 2013 and February 2015. During this period, the site moved from a regime of easy anonymity to registered pseudonyms and finally to outsourcing their comments to Facebook. This created three distinct phases.

…

We looked initially at the use of swear words and offensive terms – a crude measure of civility. We found that after the first change the use of these words dropped significantly. This was not just because some of the worst offenders left the site. Among those who stayed, language was cleaner after the change than before.

…

Our results suggest that the quality of comments was highest in the middle phase. There was a great improvement after the shift from easy or disposable anonymity to what we call “durable pseudonyms”. But instead of improving further after the shift to the real-name phase, the quality of comments actually got worse – not as bad as in the first phase, but still worse by our measure.

…

What matters, it seems, is not so much whether you are commenting anonymously, but whether you are invested in your persona and accountable for its behaviour in that particular forum. There seems to be value in enabling people to speak on forums without their comments being connected, via their real names, to other contexts. The online comment management company Disqus, in a similar vein, found that comments made under conditions of durable pseudonymity were rated by other users as having the highest quality.

Accountability for thee, not for me.

I was running it on a couple hundred Mbps up for a while, and gig up is fine

in fact if you’re going to install insecure services you definitely want to containerize them,

While this is true, if you’re running a platform that is root by default (looking at you, docker), you’re not shielding yourself as much as you might think you are.

If you’re running an insecure app as root, you better hope they don’t also have an exploit to get out of the container after the app is popped, otherwise you’re fucked.

every service is running without any containerization and there is a single database for everything… and it all runs on a single host and I didn’t read one word about a backup strategy or disk encryption.

Man, a paragraph that can give someone some serious PTSD flashbacks…

The number of times I’ve had to clean up a customer’s environment after they let little Billy play corporate IT and things went boom…

Sarcasm is rather hard to detect over text, especially when I don’t add sarcastic quote marks…

Wow, must be bad if even the fascists are seeing the ‘descent’ into fascism as a bad thing.

No, that’s not even close to how bad it is now. Hell, I bought a car that’s a decade old and the fucker yells at me for being to close to the lines, yells if I’m approaching a stopped car “too fast” (which means it freaks out even when I’m slowing past 25 with 4-5 SUV lengths ahead of me), when I back up and there’s anything remotely close off to the side (remotely close is the 2.5 ft on either side of me as I back out my driveway), and it gives me an extra special freak out if there’s any possible cross traffic to 4 houses on either side of me. That last one is a nice warning the few times I’ve needed it, but more often than not, it’s spazzing out over the neighbors taking their dog out on the other side of the street.

“Hey, the massive spy machine isn’t supposed to be used on us!”

Backing up/transferring stuff is my only roadblock

It’s also opt in

For now.

I’ve been dragging my feet moving to grapheneOS, but shit like this is going to encourage me to make the jump sooner than later

I commented on this issue a couple of days ago here and linked a study arguing that the current methods of “factoring” via QC are not scalable

https://lemmy.world/comment/23267756

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-11687-7

The issue at hand is that there’s a fundamental limit of what we can effectively do at the moment, and a lot of the hype is being driven by “factorization methods” that ultimately only twiddle a few LSBs in the number to cheat to solve it using something that’s not even remotely close to a real world example.

To use the Manhattan project analogy, this would be like saying “theoretically, if you smash enough radioactive stuff together into a critical mass it will fission, so we’re going to compress these bananas until we hit that point”.

I think they’re hoping that reaches more of a steady state

With how quickly tech advances and hardware degrades under heavy use, they’re going to be pushing that rock up a hill for a good while lol

Sure, papers about an abacus and a dog are funny and can make you look smart and contrarian on forums. But that’s not the job, and those arguments betray a lack of expertise. As Scott Aaronson said:

Once you understand quantum fault-tolerance, asking “so when are you going to factor 35 with Shor’s algorithm?” becomes sort of like asking the Manhattan Project physicists in 1943, “so when are you going to produce at least a small nuclear explosion?”

L. O. L.

I love that this dude just casually dismissed that QC hasn’t been able to factor anything larger that 21 in the last 14 years without cheating and using primes that are nothing close to real world grade primes used in crypto.

Relevant paragraph:

PQC readiness “is mostly actuarial/risk management—even if the chance of building a CRQC by, say, 2030 is very low (say 5 percent), the downside risk is huge,” he explained. “Combine that with very long transition engineering times, and you should have started already.”

Also, relevant paragraph from the wiki page for integer factorization records:

The largest number reliably factored by Shor’s algorithm, rather than some other quantum method, is 21 which was factored in 2012.[26][27] The number 15 had previously been factored by several labs and subsequent attempts to factorise 35 failed.[27

And a relevant excerpt from this study looking at “factored” primes above 21

Large-scale fault-tolerant quantum computers capable of implementing Shor’s algorithm are not yet available, preventing relevant benchmarking experiments. Recently, several authors have attempted quantum factorizations via reductions to SAT or similar NP-hard problems. While this approach may shed light on algorithmic approaches for quantum solutions to NP-hard problems, in this paper we study and question its practicality. We find no evidence that this is a viable path toward factoring large numbers, even for scalable fault-tolerant quantum computers, as well as for various quantum annealing or other special purpose quantum hardware.

I’ll be concerned when we start seeing primes being factored when they’re not using compiled Shor algorithm primes. So far, most of the big “factorization records” cheat and use primes with only the LSBs differing, and aren’t remotely close to anything used in a real RSA prime. There was a good discussion of it on Security Now episode 1034 for those who are interested.

And Congress can impeach the president. Just because they can doesn’t mean they will or have any desire to, unfortunately.

Unfortunately America wouldn’t let an American appear at The Hague. Like I’m sure they’d send special forces to recover them before that.

Gdub signed the Hague Invasion Act back in 2002, so we’ve already got laws on the books to do it.

It’s cute you think we wouldn’t send the military to stop it. Gdub signed the Hague Invasion Act back in 2002