ddddddddq

5 ms·

1.
by ddddddddq 9y ago
You will then refer to the standard to find U+1F351 PEACH and U+1F346 AUBERGINE (Eggplant), and be amazed at the bountiful harvest your friends have had this year.
2.
by ddddddddq 10y ago
From the FAQ[0] > Is it real-time? > The term "real-time" is often misused or misunderstood. We'll define it as "a provable guarantee of meeting an execution deadline when scheduling a task". In this sense, no
3.
by ddddddddq 10y ago
How would you respond if someone replied with: Yeah, but isn't it in the private roads' owners benefit to reduce congestion, so they create HOV lanes? And what if they want to promote certain kinds of cars like electric and hybri
4.
by ddddddddq 10y ago
In the Linux kernel context, DRM is "Direct Rendering Manager"
5.
by ddddddddq 10y ago
> Only sites whitelisted by the device can even request permission to connect because the device is integrated into the web security model. > Shady sites cannot even request permission to interact with the device. It seems like a gian
6.
by ddddddddq 10y ago
> That was the major point of dispute, since taxi drivers usually get loans to buy these plates knowing that they can re-sell then anytime. Uber changed that. So fundamentally their complaint is: "My investment carried a risk"
7.
by ddddddddq 10y ago
Which automobile?
8.
by ddddddddq 10y ago
Why the hell not? It's a proper noun, and we capitalize them. The proper noun "Internet" refers to a specific instance of an "internet", a common noun.
9.
by ddddddddq 11y ago
I would be in favor of any new technology for the web requiring TLS. It provides both a carrot (of new features) and a stick (of falling behind competitors) for people to get off their asses and secure the web from a whole host of attacks.
10.
by ddddddddq 11y ago
It only needs access to: Calendar, Internet, SMS, Profile, Start on Boot, Location, Microphone, Call Log, etc...
11.
by ddddddddq 11y ago
Here's the exploit posting that they refer to in the first paragraph: https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/38090/
12.
by ddddddddq 11y ago
By deploying the same certificate/key to every machine you really cut down on the 'private' part of the private key.
13.
by ddddddddq 11y ago
I just want some CA to offer cheap/affordable name constrained CA certs for domains I own. If I own `foo.com`, I should be able to get a cert that can sign certs for `foo.com,*.foo.com`. Yes, yes, DANE, but it's not ubiquitous or
14.
by ddddddddq 11y ago
I think I would have to go with this one: https://i.imgur.com/4t5xWq2.png