notabot

The comment was made in response to a question about whether Western help to Ukraine went too far. The Russian leader said: “They started ratcheting up the confrontation with Russia, which continues to this day. I think it is heading to an end, but it’s still a serious matter.”

I’m not reading that as him saying Russia are going to stop, but that he thinks that the West will stop providing aid to Ukraine soon. Considering that his Washington puppet is doing their best to destabilise NATO, and Europe in general, he could easily be hoping for aid to be cut.

Now this is the big brain thinking I come to the fediverse for!

You might want to try something like Anubis on both the signup and order pages. Real users will either not be stopped, or will only hit it once, and no user interaction is required to continue, but bot users will be slowed down enough to, hopefully, disuade them from returning.

You don’t need to stop them, you just need to make the effort not be worth it compared to using a different site. Things like making sure they have a valid session cookie before they hit the payment flow, and, ideally, require them to be logged in too. That way you can block attacking accounts, and they have to go through the effort of registering a new one, which is, hopefully, well gated against automated attacks.

Alternatively, they could have sent the security team an email with the ‘carrot’ and saying “There seems to be fundamental, systemic, security issues in Forgejo; here’s some proof. There’s too much for me to raise individual reports, what are we going to do about it?”

What???!? Say it ain’t so!

You know, the more I hear about this chap, the less I like him, and I’ve heard a lot about him.

It’s terrible what the aliens do to people after they scoop them up and before they teleport them back to Earth. There’s probes and prodding and general dubious medical practices. That’s probably what causes it. I’ve heard they use certain solvents to pacify people first though, so you might fail a breath test when you first return.

The TCP connection time out on linux defaults to a bit over two minutes, although individual client programs can use different values, and I’m assuming Windows is similar. Honestly, I was thinking about the time to boot a server, but if you’re just suspending you’d almost certainly be ok, albiet with a slight power draw even when the machine is not in use. Hibernating might also be ok as long as your hardware gets through its POST quickly.

WoL works, but your server will take some time to come back online, but the router probably wont be able to buffer the traffic for that long, and a tcp connection would likely timeout before then anyway. You usually want to send the WoL magic packet, wait for the server to come back online, and only then start sending traffic.

I assume he thinks that American companies will get the contracts to rebuild it all, and control the oil afterwards. Specifically, American companies which have shown the appropriate gratitude to him.

An airgapped machine is certainly going to be most robust from external attack, but even then you should probably encrypt your files to ensure privacy should you ever discard, or otherwise lose control of, the storage media.

An encrypted partition may be sufficient, but your journal entries will still be “plain text” when it is mounted, and so you will be able to read them without extra effort. If you want to make it so that once an entry is written it is encrypted and can only be read with deliberate effort, you could use GPG encryption.

First generate a key pair with a really strong passphrase, and store it on a USB drive. Then import just the public key onto your journaling machine and store the USB drive somewhere safe. With just the public key on your machine you can encrypt files, but you can’t decrypt them. Ideally you’ll set up your journalling tool to only write via GPG, but if not, you can just encrypt each entry after you write it.

As to what journalling tool to use, I like VIM, although I know not everyone gets on with it. You can have it start up with a template ready to go, not write temporary files, and save via GPG so the plaintext never hits persistent storage.

• You still have the extra bloat in memory.
• it shows a lack of focus on core issues rather than adding “cool” features.
• Can you actually trust that switching it off will disable it in every place they’ve incorporated it, not just now, but also in future?

There are undoubtedly other issues too.

The first time they rerun a storys it should be referenced as a “new olds” or “new old news”, the secon time as “old new olds”, and so on.

Ublock origin does a pretty solid job, I’m always mildly horrified when I have to use a browser without it. Is that really what other people see when they browse the web?

Thank you for this, it makes for a nicer reading experience than their own website! Is the code open source by any chance?

Ah, that frission of excitement when you come to restore! Will it work? Does it contain that very important file? Is it up to date? How much will future you hate past you if it isn’t there?

Have you tested your backups recently? Having them complete is one thing, having the data you need for recovery is another. Have you backed up your vm configurations and build scripts?

Go test your latest backup!

The thing is, the US administration desperately needs other countries to be seen to be acting like this, so they can point and say “see, this is perfectly normal”, rather than scrambling to avoid calling concentration camps concentration camps, or terrorists terrorists.

We know they want the Iranian people to rise up, overthrow their government, and welcome the US forces as glorious liberators, (IMHO the probabilities are maybe, possibly, no chance), so I wonder if they’re trying to cause as much harm as possible so people will go “if we just overthrow our government, the US will stop hurting us”. It would be psycopathic of the US to think so, but I have seen no evidence to suggest that makes it impossible.

Of course, now that they’re using “AI” they get to blame that for any targeting “mishaps” that become a liability.

Sure, that would be a little different, but unless you could make a convincing argument, backed up with a solid set of unit tests, at the least, as to why and how you were able to remove that much code whilst only adding a comparatively small amount, I’d still be inclined to reject it and ask for it to be broken down into smaller units.

Now, that explaination might be something along the lines of it being dead code that is not called from anywhere, or even that it was a patched version of an upstream library, and the patch is now included in that upstream, in which case, fair enough, good work, and thanks very much. As a rewrite or refactor though, it’s too big to sensibly review and needs breaking down into separate features.