> Who would connect to unknown person's hotspot?
SSID "Sydney Airport Wifi" or the like.
You're more [security minded](https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/03/the_security_...) than me
Readit Newsdbtablesorrows commented on GitHub Actions is slowly killing engineering teams iankduncan.com/engineerin... · Posted by u/codesuki
You can though. GHA and Gitlab CI and all the others have a large feature set for orchestration (build matrices, triggers,etc.) that are hard to test on a local setup. Sometimes they interfere with the build because of flags, or the build fails because it got orchestrated on a different machine, or a package is missing, or the cache key was misconfigured, etc.
There are a bunch of failures of a build that have nothing to do with how your build itself works. Asking teams to rebuild all that orchestration logic into their builds is madness. We shouldn’t ask teams to have to replicate tests for features that are in the CI they use.
Indeed there are. But you iterate on local and care about CI once everything is working in local. It's not every tuesday I get CI errors because a package was missing. It's rare unless you're in those 1000-little-microservice shops.
This is oh sweet summer child stuff.
Have you ever gone to a crowded public place and setup an open hotspot?
Ah I think I never had to do connect to a public open hotspot because by the time I grew up 4G and then 5G internet were commonplace.
Many people don't worry about connecting to random wifi anymore, but users of AMD still have to
I do usually worry - because DNS spoofing is still possible and we are one step (eg: a compromised certificate) away from being pwned. But yeah one shouldn't have to worry.
This is super bad right? Like anybody who has this running will be vulnerable to a super basic HTTP redirect -> installer running on their machine attack, right? And on top of that it's for something that is likely installed on _so many_ machines, right?
I don't think I've ever seen something this exploitable that is so prevalent. Like couldn't you just sit in an airport and open up a wifi hotspot and almost immediately own anyone with ATI graphics?
Who would connect to unknown person's hotspot?
But it seems pretty trivial for some bad actor at local ISP.
dbtablesorrows commented on GitHub Actions is slowly killing engineering teams iankduncan.com/engineerin... · Posted by u/codesuki
I clicked the article thinking it was about GitLab. Much of the criticism held true for GitLab anyway, particularly the insanely slow feedback loops these CI/CD systems create.
Can't blame gitlab for team not having a local dev setup.
dbtablesorrows commented on Code is cheap. Show me the talk nadh.in/blog/code-is-chea... · Posted by u/ghostfoxgod
When you mention Redis bro, I think you are talking about Antirez correct?
yeah, forgot his name.
dbtablesorrows commented on Code is cheap. Show me the talk nadh.in/blog/code-is-chea... · Posted by u/ghostfoxgod
OK, fuck it, show me the demo (without staging it). show me the result.
dbtablesorrows commented on Code is cheap. Show me the talk nadh.in/blog/code-is-chea... · Posted by u/ghostfoxgod
I keep on wondering how much of the AI embrace is marketing driven. Yes, it can produce value and cut corners. But it seems like self driving by 2016 Musk prediction. Which never happened. With IPO/Stock valuations closely tied to hype, I wonder if we are all witnessing a giant bubble in the making
How much of this is mass financial engineering than real value. Reading a lot of nudges how everyone should have Google or other AI stock in their portfolio/retirement accounts
I realize many are disappointed (especially by technical churn, star-based-development JS projects on github without technical rigour). I don't trust any claim on the open web if I don't know the technical background of the person making it.
However I think - Nadh, ronacher, the redis bro - these are people who can be trusted. I find Nadh's article (OP) quite balanced.
In my experience this isn't true. People just assume their code is wrong and mess with it until they inadvertently do something that works around the bug. I've personally reported 17 bugs in GCC over the last 2 years and there are currently 1241 open wrong-code bugs.
Here's an example of a simple to understand bug (not mine) in the C frontend that has existed since GCC 4.7: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105180