boomlinde

7 ms·

1.
by boomlinde 6d ago
Here, this is standardized, and if a local subscription service provider wants to pull money from my account I explicitly grant them permission to do that, which I can revoke at a later point.
2.
by boomlinde 9d ago
> What might not be clear about this is that a struct loses runtime information. If you want to iterate a map, that's easy: call for (key, val) in map { .... If you want to iterate a struct ... get fucked? write a proc-macro? I do
3.
by boomlinde 10d ago
People don't generally refer to these old Windows games as "DOS games", though.
4.
by boomlinde 12d ago
So, as I said, a matter of priorities.
5.
by boomlinde 13d ago
> So, if you're going to have to rewrite your UI layer to disentangle it from your back-end anyway why not also bring it up to speed? So, if you're going to have to rewrite your back-end to disentangle it from your UI layer a
6.
by boomlinde 13d ago
I think you may be underestimating how important playing back and recording audio is for an application built for that purpose. This was already a widely adopted piece of software. It was my go-to for light audio work like trimming a sample
7.
by boomlinde 13d ago
Maybe a three-line npm package sneezed.
8.
by boomlinde 13d ago
I saw the Tantacrul video back when it was released. I think that's when I went ahead and bought myself a personal Reaper license. My thought then was: wtf are their priorities like if they'll focus on a complete overhaul of the a
9.
by boomlinde 13d ago
I've given up on Audacity because it hasn't kept up technically with how a typical home studio Linux system does audio, and looking at the change log it seems like they haven't addressed any of the problems I have with it in
10.
by boomlinde 13d ago
The humorous LLM-generated blurb Google frequently places before the useful search results once referred me to Grokipedia, an LLM-generated repository of vibe-facts seemingly created more to illustrate some reactionary point than to actuall
11.
by boomlinde 14d ago
Sure, maybe someone may enjoy Dwarf Fortress despite that, but as I recalled from my own experience, it wasn't despite it that I enjoyed getting into Dwarf Fortress, but in large part because of it. So are you wrong in saying generally
12.
by boomlinde 15d ago
> The "67 cents" part though is misleading imho. You can't extrapolate from there and think that investing say $100 will get you a lot better results. Nothing about saying that it cost 67 cents implies that it will. Know
13.
by boomlinde 15d ago
I remember the "onboarding experience" essentially being losing over and over again and learning from my mistakes, getting a little further or trying a new approach altogether on each new attempt. Maybe it's an acquired taste
14.
by boomlinde 15d ago
> but the former doesn't make sense to me; unless you're saying that there wouldn't be enough phonemes representable by the letters to define spellings for all English words? Then you're inventing a phonetic alphabe
15.
by boomlinde 16d ago
Sidenote, but what's with the ref=mdubakov.me query parameter attached to every link? Are there benefits of this over the "Referer" HTTP header other than trying to skirt around my configuration choice not to share my browsin
16.
by boomlinde 16d ago
Deliberate distractions from the functional end goal benefit other arts just as well, promoting lateral thinking. Brian Eno made a card deck of "oblique strategies" to help you out of blocks. https:/&#x
17.
by boomlinde 16d ago
Conversations like this are a dead end. You can't devise a phonetic spelling convention without using a phonetic alphabet. The reason you think that "le" makes sense and the person you are responding to thinks otherwise is th
18.
by boomlinde 17d ago
Yes, but your claim is that applications can still have arbitrary execution vulnerabilities only on operating systems that allow dynamic executable code . I am refuting that statement by showing that not allowing dynamic executable code is
19.
by boomlinde 19d ago
Again, this is a crash bug, and again, whether it's a "self-dos" isn't a quality of the bug or ffmpeg. The implications of the crash depends entirely on the implementation of the process it crashes. If I use ffmpeg as a
20.
by boomlinde 19d ago
That's not a quality of ffmpeg or this bug, but of the application you use it for. If you only expose your ffmpeg-based application to your own input then yes, of course it's a self-DOS. But if you, say, expose it as a web service
21.
by boomlinde 19d ago
It crashes because of input that should have been rejected for being invalid. How could that be construed as being benign?
22.
by boomlinde 21d ago
> Writing hand crafted code for the sole use of an individual never happened. It seems bizarre in a way to see this sentiment on hacker news.
23.
by boomlinde 21d ago
Drawing , not buying hand-painted pictures. Writing , not buying hand-written books. You seem to have fundamentally misunderstood the argument.
24.
by boomlinde 21d ago
A parent can reasonably ensure that their child doesn't have a phone. Ensuring that they don't have access to a phone is much more difficult. I suppose that you can insist that your children only socialize with other children unde
25.
by boomlinde 21d ago
As an OpenBSD noob I prefer not to until I get a good feel for how much will end up in them across a few sysupgrades.
26.
by boomlinde 21d ago
In my experience the situation with GitHub is either that - you apply the commits as-is on the target branch and end up with a ton of pointless "fix this" and "fix that" commits that were created during the review proces
27.
by boomlinde 21d ago
In Gerrit, I would say that the equivalent of the epic is the topic, stacks are the stories and commits are the tasks. It certainly puts pressure on the scope and quality of commits, but I think that's only undue for a short-lived proj
28.
by boomlinde 22d ago
I've been considering https://openbsd.amsterdam/ as it seems like a nice way to donate to the project as well. For now I am using a lowest tier Hetzner instance. That gives more RAM but less disk space (which is pretty
29.
by boomlinde 22d ago
The point is that we aren't "giving away" manufacturing to China. We've already given the choice of where to manufacture to the free market, which then turns a profit by buying their manufacturing services from China. I
30.
by boomlinde 22d ago
We leave a large part of the question of where things should be manufactured to the market. If the market decides that the place is China it's probably because they think it's individually beneficial to them, not an act of charity

More ›