I record them in a different system that is more likely to survive shifts in technology, business relationships, and arbitrary expiration date changes to save money.
Readit Newsmgerdts commented on How do you capture decisions made in Slack so they don't get lost?" · Posted by u/frankiefrazer
mgerdts commented on What not to write on your security clearance form (1988) milk.com/wall-o-shame/sec... · Posted by u/wizardforhire
When I joined the Air Force, they helped us fill out the clearance forms. One question was related to marijuana use in the past. The NCO helping us told us “if you have used it before, be honest. They will know.” But then followed it up with “remember: you used it less than 5 times and you didn’t like it”.
I remember similar advice.
In Navy boot camp the person reviewing my security clearance application (which was filled out weeks before) was very helpful in the way he asked the critical question. “It says here you tried marijuana once. Is that true?”
Back in 1997 or so I bought an ATI video card that also had a Weezer video on the CD. I remember being amazed that it could play the video at 1024x768 with just a little bit of tearing.
mgerdts commented on Why E cores make Apple silicon fast eclecticlight.co/2026/02/... · Posted by u/ingve
One thing that distinguishes macOS here is that the mach kernel has the concept of “vouchers” which helps the scheduler understand logical calls across IPC boundaries. So if you have a high-priority (UserInitiated) process, and it makes an IPC call out to a daemon that is usually a low-priority background daemon, the high-priority process passes a voucher to the low-priority one, which allows the daemon’s ipc handling thread to run high-priority (and thus access P-cores) so long as it’s holding the voucher.
This lets Apple architect things as small, single-responsibility processes, but make their priority dynamic, such that they’re usually low-priority unless a foreground user process is blocked on their work. I’m not sure the Linux kernel has this.
This sounds like Solaris doors. The remainder of the time slice of the door client is given to the door server.
Deleted Comment
> delete your existing keys from OneDrive
This seems to go against principles of key management. If your key escrow peer has defected, the correct response is to rotate your keys.
Exactly. I question why the parent says you have to re-encrypt the drive.
Microsoft has the KEK or passphrase that can be used to derive the KEK. The KEK protects the DEK which is used to encrypt the data. Rotating the KEK (or KEKs if multiple slots are used) will overwrite the encrypted DEK, rendering the old KEK useless.
Or does BitLocker work differently than typical data at rest encryption?
You sure about that? Look up Visible, Mint Mobile, Total Wireless, US Mobile, Tello... Same carrier networks, same quality of service. You can even pay a bit extra for prioritized data and other fancy features. You can get basic unlimited plans for $15-30 and premium plans in the $30-50 range vs $100+ at the big carriers. The only difference is that you aren't paying for your "free" phone.
And if you don’t use a lot of data, at least US Mobile has a by the gig plan. My family has three phones on it for a total $30 per month. Those months that we go over, it automatically charges $2 for each extra GB, with data pooled between the lines.
It is easy to switch between Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile as well. This was helpful for me as all three of the networks normally have one bar or less at my house. T-mobile WiFi calling works more reliably than Verizon.
mgerdts commented on Native ZFS VDEV for Object Storage (OpenZFS Summit) zettalane.com/blog/openzf... · Posted by u/suprasam
In context of real AWS S3, I can see raid 0 being useful in this scenario, but in mirror that seems like too much duplication and cross-region replication like this going to introduce significant latency[citation needed]. AWS provides that for S3 already.
I can see it on not real S3 though.
Mirroring between s3 providers would seemingly give protection against your account being locked at one of them.
I expect this becomes most interesting with l2arc and cache (zil) devices to hold the working set and hide write latency. Maybe would require tuning or changes to allow 1m writes to use the cache device.
mgerdts commented on Fixing a Buffer Overflow in Unix v4 Like It's 1973 sigma-star.at/blog/2025/1... · Posted by u/vzaliva
What is up with fin? Is it really just writing an int 0 in the memory right after some variable present in libc or similar?
extern fin;
if(getpw(0, pwbuf))
goto badpw;
(&fin)[1] = 0;mgerdts commented on SSDs, power loss protection and fsync latency smalldatum.blogspot.com/2... · Posted by u/ingve
What SSDs are reasonably performant without a volatile write cache? The standards you quote specify why it is necessary to issue flush!
Per the definition of volatile write cache in the standard I quoted, pretty much any drive TLC drive in the hyperscalar, datacenter, or enterprise product lineup will have great write performance. They have a DRAM cache that is battery-backed, and as such is not a volatile write cache.
A specific somewhat dated example: Samsung 980 Pro (consumer client), PM9A1 (OEM client), and PM9A3 (datacenter) are very similar drives that have the same PCI ID and are all available as M.2. PM9A3 drives have power loss protection and the others don’t. It has very consistent write latency (on the order of 20 - 50 μs when not exceptionally busy) and very consistent throughput (up to 1.5 GB/s) regardless of how full it is. The same cannot be said of the client drives without PLP but with tricks like TurboWrite (aka pseudo-SLC). When more than 30% of the NAND is erased, the client drives can take writes at 5 GB/s but that rate falls off a cliff and gets wobbly when the pseudo-SLC cache fills.