[ my public key: https://keybase.io/lukeshu; my proof: https://keybase.io/lukeshu/sigs/HnTgaX1Qhui0yhjc6P-GRCJqUfJlk_xU09_TFpQKk0U ]
- LukeShuWhile it doesn't add much more info: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cve-announce/2025121614-CVE-20...
- libgccjit is much higher level than what's documented in the "GCC Internals" manual.
- ...yes? Hence me saying that 'composition' and 'polymorphism' have often been unnecessarily coupled together in 'inheritance'?
Compare: Ruby mixins or Go embedded struct fields.
- Inheritance is just the unnecessary coupling of composition and polymorphism.
- Yes, subscribing to bullshit I don't want them to work on will surely send the signal that they're focusing on the wrong things!
- While exact definitions vary, it's a term of art for Research Unix ≤ V7, perhaps plus or minus a version, perhaps including contemporary derivatives.
- At the same time, it's easy to believe that MIT of 2013 is very different than MIT of 1988.
- > You can do the same thing with a vt220.
Can you? The last I looked at it (a year or two ago), the vt220 in MAME was just the beginning skeleton of an implementation, and it doesn't seem to have been touched much since then. A shame, because AFAIK no "terminal emulator" implements vt220-style sixels (which are different than than the widely-implemented vt4xx-style sixels).
- I know the trendy thing is to hide the menu-bar, but it's great for discoverability. Tools→Games→Zone Out
- Many flip phones had cameras by then. For instance, the Razr V3 was the best selling phone of 2005, and had a 640×480px camera.
- To expand on laulis' comment: Valetudo isn't a full custom-firmware, it's a mod for the existing firmware. You copy on the Valetudo daemon binary, fuss with the init scripts to start the daemon, and fuss with the DNS and such to point some domains at 127.0.0.1 to talk to that daemon instead of the normal servers (well, actually you probably download a firmware image from dustbin that already has those modifications applied).
This is a distinction that is worth making because the robot is still running and relying on all of the on-robot proprietary code; it's just the in-cloud code that has been replaced.
- Apple users (both macOS and iOS) get curly quotes by default when they hit quote key.
- Except for not including a timezone offset, that's one of the RFC 3339 formats.
- Mojo is specifically developed as part of Chromium.
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/refs/heads/...
- I was going to say that I assume that the reason for such old CPUs is the ability to use Canoeboot/GNU Boot. But you absolutely can put an SSE4.2 CPU in a KGPE-D16 motherboard. So IDK.
- Fascinating.
My setup: Firefox on X11 on a ThinkPad E15 Gen 2, with X11 misconfigured such that it is 96 DPI instead of the physically-correct 144 DPI.
On initial load, it has the green calibrated box saying "Detected: 24″ FHD Monitor (Auto-calibrated)", and my credit card measures as 131mm. This more-or-less the error that I'd expect given my misconfiguration: 131mm/85.6mm =~ 1.53 ; 144dpi/96dpi = 1.5. (Given those numbers, I figure it should be closer to 23" than 24", but whatever.)
But if I tell it "Standard Laptop", then my credit card measures as 97mm. (97mm/85.6mm =~ 1.13). I can't guess how that number is being arrived at. IME lots of X11 users will have their DPI misconfigured as either 96 DPI or (less likely) 192 DPI, but also lots of non-Apple laptops will have a pixel density of 40%-65% more than 96 DPI (on the rationale that lots misconfigured-as- or hardcoded-as- 96 DPI is common, that things designed to look good at 96 DPI assume a desktop monitor about 28" from your face (CSS3 defines device-independent pixels as such), but laptop use puts the screen 17"-20" from your face; and 28in/20in gives us a factor of 1.4 and 28in/17in gives us a factor of 1.65. But none of these numbers give me the factor of 1.13 that you show me. A good mystery!
- Specifically, what is colloquially an "RJ45" or "Ethernet" connector is an 8P8C "Bell System Miniature Plug/Jack" (AT&T's original name; it is a smaller version of the older Bell System connectors) / "miniature plug/jack" (FCC genericization of the name by removing "Bell System", even though the word "miniature" is no longer meaningful without context) / "modular jack" (ANSI/IEC genericization). That is what is meant when just "8P8C" is said.
Pedantically speaking, RJ45 (as first defined by AT&T internally[1], and later by the FCC's 47 CFR part 68) is not that. The RJ45 socket is a keyed 8P8C modular jack, not a regular 8P8C modular jack. Here is a photo: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:RJ45_female_connecto...
[1]: The "RJ45" designation was originally an AT&T "USOC" (Universal Service Order Code). In the '70s, the FCC told AT&T that they had to allow interoperability from other companies, so the FCC had to publish a bunch of specifications; the meaning of "RJ45" became publicly specified in Bell System Communications' Technical Reference PUB 47101 "Standard Plugs And Jacks" (1979, though I think there might be an older number/revision from the early '70s that I haven't been able to track down). That (in combination with a few other technical references, such as PUB 47102), later became part of the Code of Federal Regulations, as 47 CFR part 68.
- RJ45 is a keyed 8-position jack, not a normal 8-position jack. ("Keyed" means that there's a notch in the side making it a different shape; you would not be able to fit an "Ethernet" connector into it.)
Closer is RJ38X, which is a series 8-position jack, not a normal 8-position jack. ("Series" means that the jack shorts pint 1 to pin 4 and pin 5 to pin 8 when there's not a cable plugged in to it; you would be able to fit an "Ethernet" connector into it, but even so it's probably not what you want.)
AFAICT (skimming 47 CFR part 68, and the historical AT&T documents that became 47 CFR part 68), there is no RJ-number for a normal 8-position jack.
- I would agree with you that DTLS is a misnomer; that it does not provide the layer-4/transport-layer -like interface that regular TLS provides.
(It isn't quite a layer-3/internetwork-layer -like interface; from the UDP that it sits on, it has a multiplexing component that is "half" of a layer 4 interface.)
- No? The "transport" layer is layer 4 in the 7-layer OSI model (physical/datalink/network/transport/session/presentation/application) and 5-layer IP model (physical/network/internetwork/transport/application). That is: the "transport" provides reliable continuous data-stream abstraction over the lower-layers' discreet and unreliable packets; e.g. TCP.
And that data-stream the interface that TLS provides; to the higher layers it looks like a transport layer.
