fc417fc802's comments

On: A proof checker meant for education

[fc417fc802]

Wow. It looks like they forgot to add one. I'm a bit surprised that GitHub permits creating new public repos without explicitly tagging a license file.

[falcor84 → fc417fc802]

You're surprised that GitHub allows people to host arbitrary repos?! Do you really prefer that GitHub would go "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't let you do that"?

On: Shift-to-Middle Array: A Faster Alternative to Std:Deque?

[fc417fc802]

Is fork really the problem in this scenario?

On: Supply Chain Attacks on Linux Distributions – Fedora Pagure

[fc417fc802]

> The device (eg. Phone or Tablet) gets owned and gives up its value as a provider of confirmation

Any device could get exploited. The requirement that it happen to both that device and my computer, simultaneously, significantly raises the difficulty bar.

> Users end up nominating a password service like 1Password as the device

I don't see the issue. Isn't that the user's choice to make? If you want better security then don't make that particular choice.

> Someone manages to convince the authentication systems that their faux device emitting the signal, is the device in question

By that logic why have passwords or keys or anything at all? Someone might exploit the server and get in regardless so why bother?

I've got at least a few objections to modern auth schemes but these aren't them.

On: Supply Chain Attacks on Linux Distributions – Fedora Pagure

[fc417fc802]

> my concern is to limit the ability of someone with access to my computer from using a connected hardware authenticator.

You don't need anything special to do that. Just select a hardware token that refuses to sign anything until it receives physical input from you.

On: Supply Chain Attacks on Linux Distributions – Fedora Pagure

[fc417fc802]

> It could be argued ssh is a weaker Trust on first use model

That is but an optional aspect of the configuration (albeit by far the most common).

On: Aiter: AI Tensor Engine for ROCm

[fc417fc802]

> I think most people just want ROCm to work at all

I think most people don't want to have to think about vendor lock-in related bullshit. Most people just want their model to run on whatever hardware they happen to have available, don't want to have to worry about whether or not future hardware purchases will be compatible, and don't want to have to rewrite everything in a different framework.

Most people fundamentally don't care about ROCm or CUDA or OneAPI or whatever else beyond a means to an end.

On: Is it safe to travel to the United States with your phone?

[fc417fc802]

You can "easily" do that if you don't mind the hassle of flashing.

To do it without flashing you need to be comfortable modifying system software. Which for Android means authoring your own ROM. It's a hassle.

On: How one of the world’s major money laundering networks operates

[fc417fc802]

The obvious potential issue is that the data on the AirBnB side looks sketchy as hell if anyone ever actually looks at it. Nearly all guests via gift card, nearly all those gift cards purchased locally (presumably) at only a few locations (presumably).

But I guess they don't have any incentive to be proactive.

On: 23andMe files for bankruptcy to sell itself

[fc417fc802]

Why do you say they were preying on them? The donor either matched the stated criteria or didn't.

On: 23andMe files for bankruptcy to sell itself

[fc417fc802]

Advanced notice to review the changes ... but can you reject them? I've yet to be presented with the option to reject a change to a privacy policy or ToS.

[rendall → fc417fc802]

You can reject the change by deleting your data. But your district's data protection laws might be different than mine.