In a parallel universe, they switched to RFC6979 in 2013, but the implementation had a bug that wasn't detected for years, allowing compromise of lots of keys. In that parallel universe, HN is criticizing them for following fashion instead of just leaving an already-proven piece of crypto code in place.
It's an unfortunate bug, an unfortunate oversight, but I think they made a perfectly reasonable choice at the time.
You must know that breaking down and verifying someone else's analysis is more time consuming than writing your own. Just like dealing with a bug in another person's code.
Given them the benefit of doubt that Go team is cautious about binary size. People have dug in to this. Sure, they could do a better job giving some breakdown, but claiming that they are careless deserves that kind of response.
Given a choice of their time, I would rather have them work on some other Go language problem. Most low hanging fruit has already been had. See [1] [2] [3]
For normal people... pretty much nothing. You need power to keep the plasma hot, it's a safety hazard, and it's not cheap. For electrically-small antennas it looks like it might be slightly more efficient than a wire antenna of the same size (or slightly smaller than a wire antenna of the same efficiency) but most of the advantages listed pertain to military applications, and that seems to be who's driving the research.
Oh, did this just launch today? That's funny, I thought I only noticed it today. In any case, I'm using it already. I was going to build SAML into this app that we have deployed on GCE, so that employees can access it over the internet as long as they're authenticated, but instead I put it behind an IAP, and our Google auth already talks to our SAML server, so Google is effectively doing the same work for us.
Anything at all with strftime: Use %Y instead of %G. It's a C function, but many languages (Perl/Python/Ruby/etc.) expose it through their own datetime libraries.
Which is a disingenuous answer since he's not even using the SDK. The ChromeCast at least notionally supports an open protocol (DIAL). Only it doesn't, because if you try to use it with software other than Google's, it breaks.
> The ChromeCast at least notionally supports an open protocol (DIAL). Only it doesn't, because if you try to use it with software other than Google's, it breaks.
I believe that's just called "it doesn't support that protocol".
It's not "iMessage for Android users" in any way. The headline is nonsense. If your browser is closed or your PC is shut down, MightyText does nothing for you. The browser interface is the interface.
I've been using MightyText in beta for months. It doesn't resemble iMessage in any way, and it's not supposed to. I have no idea where the headline came from. It's not an IM service. It is, simply, an app for sending and receiving text messages through your phone from a PC. So if you're at a computer and you receive a text, or you want to text someone, instead of taking your phone out of your pocket and using the little screen and the little keyboard, you do it right on the computer. Simple, useful, end of story.
It's an unfortunate bug, an unfortunate oversight, but I think they made a perfectly reasonable choice at the time.