Readit News logoReadit News
taftster commented on Good Riddance, 4o   mahadk.com/posts/4o... · Posted by u/JustSkyfall
torginus · 2 days ago
It just occured to me how different the emotional landscapes of people are. While I do not want to turn this into a sexist rant, I did observe this trait particularly in women (not all of them, mind you) - is that how much they crave strong positive feedback.

This was something that I figured out with my first gf, and had never seen written down or talked about before - that when I praised her she became happy, and the more superlative and excessive the praise got, the happier she became, calling her gorgeous, the most wonderful person in the world, made her overjoyed.

To be clear I did love her and found her very attractive, but overstating my feelings for her kind of felt like I came close to lying and emotional manipulation, that I'm still not comfortable with today. But she loved it and kept doing it because it made her happy.

Needless to say we didn't stick together (for teen reasons, not these reasons), but later in life, I tried doing this, but I did notice a lot of women respond very positively to this kind of attention and affection, and I still get some flack from the miss from apparently not being romantic enough.

Maybe I am overthinking this, or maybe I am emotionally flatter than I should be, but finding such a powerful emotional lever in another human being feels like finding a loaded gun on the table.

taftster · 2 days ago
I don't want to be called "gorgeous", but I admit that some of my "love language" is positive affirmations. As a man, I want to know that I am making a positive impact on my family, my wife, my community, my work. I crave that strong positive feedback, just as much or more as anyone.

So yes, I think it is a bit sexist or at minimum gender typing. And I don't think it's necessarily a "lie" for you to overstate your feelings. You might have matured in your approach, but I believe that everyone appreciates (to some variable measurement) positive affirmation from their partners. And that your lie was recognizing your partners needs for inputs, to help them in their self-image, and to assure them in their self-doubts. These are not lies.

Deleted Comment

taftster commented on How did Windows 95 get permission to put Weezer video 'Buddy Holly' on the CD?   devblogs.microsoft.com/ol... · Posted by u/ingve
jader201 · 5 days ago
taftster · 5 days ago
I'm so grateful for flat LCD screens. Man, all those CRT boxes. Yikes.

The rest of this video, it doesn't look like the world has changed all that much since 1995. Computing just kind of looks the same. I guess minus the lack of phones in everyone's hands.

taftster commented on The Day the Telnet Died   labs.greynoise.io/grimoir... · Posted by u/pjf
roywiggins · 5 days ago
The rest of it seems to be substantially edited by an LLM too, or at least it's composed much like LLM outputs often are these days: “not a gradual decline, not scanner attrition, not a data pipeline problem, but a step function.”

"Not X, not Y, not Z" is a common LLM tic, and there's a few more like it in there.

taftster · 5 days ago
I mean, that's fair. I guess I just wanted to put my old man hat on. The song is a tribute to an era of lost innocence. Which I think is quite apropos to the current situation surrounding telnet. Vestiges of the days of the early internet continue to disappear, almost like an endangered species. Old/obsolete protocols, like telnet, are pined for by old guys like me.
taftster commented on The Day the Telnet Died   labs.greynoise.io/grimoir... · Posted by u/pjf
jwpapi · 5 days ago
it was just ai written thats why.. unexpectedly so from greynoise.
taftster · 5 days ago
Well, I mean, the first part is a song by Don McLean called American Pie. You might know that, unsure that everyone will pick it out though.

One of the most famous play choices at karaoke bars these days too. I think because the song is a long story, of sorts? But it's a terribly long song and I will leave to take a smoke break anytime it gets chosen. You're going to be there for a good 10 minutes before it concludes.

So maybe the AI prompt was something like, "take CVE-2026-24061 and compose a song lyric in the style of American Pie by Don Mclean". I wonder if you would get similar results with that prompt.

taftster commented on The Day the Telnet Died   labs.greynoise.io/grimoir... · Posted by u/pjf
0xbadcafebee · 5 days ago
Telnet is used in legacy, IoT, embedded, and low-level industrial hardware. It's also intentionally enabled on devices where automation was written for telnet and it wasn't easy to switch to ssh.

If you investigate most commercial uses of ssh, the security is disabled or ignored. Nobody verifies host keys, and with automation where hosts cycle, you basically have to disable verification as there's no easy way around the host keys constantly changing. Without host key verification, there's kinda no point to the rest.

Even assuming the host keys were verified, the popular ssh conventions are to use either long-lived static keys (and almost nobody puts a password on theirs), or a password. Very few people use SSH with 2FA, and almost no-one uses ephemeral keys (OIDC) or certificates (which many people screw up).

So in terms of how people actually use it, SSH is one of the least secure transport methods. You'd be much more secure by using telnet over an HTTPS websocket with OAuth for login.

taftster · 5 days ago
How do you automate, for example, "HTTPS over websocket with OAuth", without providing some kind of hard-coded, static or otherwise persistent authentication credentials to the calling system in some form (either certificate based auth, OAuth credentials, etc.)?

The problem with IoT and embedded secrets isn't really a solved problem, from what I can tell. I'm not sure that OAuth exactly solves the problem here. Though all your comments about SSH (especially host verification) holds true.

Just honestly trying to understand the possible solution space to the IoT problem and automated (non-human) authorization.

taftster commented on Pg-dev-container is a ready-to-run VS Code development container for PostgreSQL   github.com/jnidzwetzki/pg... · Posted by u/mariuz
rapfaria · 6 days ago
You can set it up with docker compose and put the container on the same network of your dev env, and you are good to go.

What I'd really like is an image that mirrors extensions available on AWS Aurora. Supabase's is the only that has some parity as far as I know

taftster · 5 days ago
Makes good sense, thanks for the tip.
taftster commented on Pg-dev-container is a ready-to-run VS Code development container for PostgreSQL   github.com/jnidzwetzki/pg... · Posted by u/mariuz
stackskipton · 6 days ago
I tend to use dev containers with docker compose.

So if I'm building Python application with Prometheus/RabbitMQ/PostGres that's used as part of my application, My docker compose has network, those 3 services + Python Dev Container and I just reference the hostname of the service in my Python application config (ENV VARS).

taftster · 5 days ago
OK yeah, that totally makes sense. Thank you.
taftster commented on Pg-dev-container is a ready-to-run VS Code development container for PostgreSQL   github.com/jnidzwetzki/pg... · Posted by u/mariuz
stackskipton · 6 days ago
To help out everyone else, this is designed for those working on PostgreSQL development. For anyone who is just using PostGres as part of their application, use normal PostGreSQL container.
taftster · 6 days ago
Honest question. Do you recommend a "devcontainer" for this? Like a Docker image that maybe has both postgres and your development environment preinstalled inside? Or do you generally like to use and reference an external docker container instance (with postgres installed) and connect to it from your devcontainer instance?
taftster commented on What's up with all those equals signs anyway?   lars.ingebrigtsen.no/2026... · Posted by u/todsacerdoti
somat · 12 days ago
The thing is, even when parsing html "correctly" (whatever that is) regexes will still be used. Sure, There will be a bunch of additional structures and mechanisms involved, but you will be identifying tokens via a bunch of regexes.

So yes, while it is an inspired comidic genius of a rant, and sort of informative in that it opens your eyes to the limitations of regexes, it sort of brushes under the rug all the places that those poor maligned regular expressions will be used when parsing html.

taftster · 11 days ago
This is a pragmatic answer. While yes, regex is not proven to be the Most Correct Solution for a generalized parse, when you are sitting down with some data in front of you and you can grab the needed bits with a regex group, why not exactly use this. It might be part of a bigger parsing strategy, sure. But if it gets the job on, that means you can move on to the next thing.

u/taftster

KarmaCake day2024September 3, 2011
About
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/taftster; my proof: https://keybase.io/taftster/sigs/0lXrdc605CMOxR_VfREz1yLpR9NyGQsmm4P_7mn1tig ]
View Original