I wonder what form of beveraged stimulant the author was on?
Presumably redbull, given their avatar https://bobdahacker.com/static/images/bobdahackerReal.png
Readit News
Given the sloppiness of McDonald's security, my conclusion is that they don't really care about being secure. Being hacked is an annoying business expense to them, but that's it.
Given that his friend was fired, if I ever had an inkling of doing free pentesting for McDonald's, I sure as hell don't now. They don't deserve it.
> Given that his friend was fired, if I ever had an inkling of doing free pentesting for McDonald's, I sure as hell don't now.
What is a company supposed to do when they detect an employee repeatedly try to access different systems they shouldn't have access to (nor have reason to even try)?
My decision to move away from DDG was when they blocked a website due to Bing blocking it. The block was inadvertent. But it showed the flaw in relying on an external provider for all your results. You're just using Bing with a different UI. Kagi having their own index (plus being enhanced by several others), was a huge selling point for me initially. Truly separated from a reliance on big-tech and their whims.
Kagi results are entirely sourced from other indexes (mainly google and yandex), their own index (Teclis) is small and insufficient. I guess you fell for the marketing. DDG also claims to have its own index btw, but as you've noticed it's the same situation. It's basically useless and 99% of the results are straight from Bing.
The only smaller search engine with its own real index is Brave.
tredre3 commented on Cloudflare 1.1.1.1 Incident on July 14, 2025 blog.cloudflare.com/cloud... · Posted by u/nomaxx117
How busy in life are you that we're concerning ourselves with nearest DNS? Are you browsing the internet like a high frequency stock trader? Seriously, in everyone's day to day, other than when these incidents happen, does someone notice a delay from resolving a domain name?
I get that in theory blah blah, but we now have choices in who gets to see all of our requests and the ISP will always lose out to the other losers in the list
news.ycombinator.com has a TTL of 1, so every page load will do one DNS request (possibly multiple).
If you choose a resolver that is very far, 100ms longer page loads do end add up quickly...
Nothing unique about deps. NYC has bodegas, UK has Spars, US has 7/11. Wherever you can still go to buy cigarettes/vapes, beer, sweets, sugary drinks and porn mags, that's a dep.
It has long since lost its etymological purpose. Deps are entirely unhealthy waste of spaces now that grocery stores are omnipresent.
> Deps are entirely unhealthy waste of spaces now that grocery stores are omnipresent.
One dep takes the space of one apartment, and it helps the thousands of residents around it to not have to walk 15min to get milk.
Seems like a fair trade to me.
tredre3 commented on Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update 0x44.xyz/blog/web-request... · Posted by u/deryilz
It is true though. Like, literally.
Why do you think it is called Lite?
The statement was: "Adblockers basically need webRequestBlocking to function properly. "
This is demonstrably false, ublock lite proves that adblockers can work without it.
Whether or not ublock lite is missing functionalities because of MV3 is irrelevant to the original statement that adblockers need webRequestBlocking.
tredre3 commented on Is an Intel N100 or N150 a better value than a Raspberry Pi? jeffgeerling.com/blog/202... · Posted by u/transpute
Reddit is filled with posts where people try to make their values in to everyone else's.
Want an Arm SBC? Get an N100 instead! Want a Ryzen to transcode video? Get an N100 instead! Want a NAS? Get an N100 instead!
I get it, N100 people - you get a shiny new toy, and you want to hype it up as the Next Best Thing that's a great choice for everyone. The problem is that it's not the best choice for everyone, and it's getting old hearing about it.
Here are some reasons the N100 isn't best:
SBCs are smaller and almost always take less power.
Intel QuickSync isn't the same quality as software based transcoding, and not everyone wants to compromise on quality.
Like Jeff points out, N100 systems cost more, and the added performance over a Pi of some sort isn't always needed (although it's funny that the same people who point out the higher performance of N100 over a Raspberry Pi will at the same time dismiss a low power Ryzen :P).
They cost more.
N100 systems don't have enough PCIe lanes to replace certain I/O heavy uses.
Some people don't like the x86 ecosystem. N100 fans try to tell everyone that there's more software because it's x86, but that's a negative thing for some of us who prefer to install from source.
Intel gatekeeps products by removing features when there's no reason to do so. Even my 2014 AMD Athlon 5350 systems, which are very decently performing low power systems and which I'm still using as routers / firewalls / servers in many places, have ECC support in the CPU. (I wonder how the N100 would compare with a 2014 Athlon 5350, but that's a question for another time.)
The primary reason for me is a little different: Intel makes shitty decisions. All of the CPU vulnerabilities found that I know of have affected Intel CPUs more than AMD or Arm CPUs. Why? I think it's because Intel tries so hard to chase performance and marketing points that they prioritize this over security and reliability.
I bought an eight core Bulldozer in 2012 for compiling because I preferred eight integer cores over four cores plus hyperthreading in a Core i7-2600. Benchmarks then showed the Intel beat out AMD in many benchmarks then. However, more than a decade later, with toolchain improvements and with performance impacts of Spectre and Meltdown, my Bulldozer now beats an Intel i7-2600 at many modern benchmarks.
But it's not just security - Intel's 13th and 14 generation degradation debacle again shows that Intel is more concerned with marketing and benchmarks than having good, reliable products. That their CPUs can take hundreds of watts to compete with Ryzen illustrates this well. Would this be an issue with N100? Probably not, but I don't want any CPUs from a company that will compromise their products for profit and marketing purposes.
They tried to do AVX-512 and made a huge mess of which products have it - again, Intel were more concerned with benchmark results. After all, Intel's not going to release benchmark figures that show the effects of dropping the whole CPU's clock while running AVX-512. They tried to play us.
The bottom line is that I don't trust Intel, which is why I'll never get an N100, and all of these other reasons are why I'd never recommend them.
Your post has nothing to do with the topic at hand, you do not make a single point against the N100. You just whatabout other Intel products that you hate...
tredre3 commented on The hamburger-menu icon today: Is it recognizable? nngroup.com/articles/hamb... · Posted by u/thm
Huh, interesting research. I wonder how much more intuitive the firefox hamburger menu on the top right would be if they moved it to the left. I sadly just realized it's the one icon I cannot customize the location of, but now I'm super curious.
Their first attempt at a unique menu button was on the left (circa Firefox 4-5).
https://static.digit.in/fckeditor/uploads/ff4-newui.png
But they probably figured that the more like Chrome they are, the better...
That's just how this works. It's a performance vs. efficiency tradeoff.
And there's nothing special about your workload. It's small in comparison to many others that many other OSes on many other ISAs, including Windows & x86 w/ AWE, have been running for quite some time with no issue.
Applications do not allocate memory through the kernel, though. There's a layer between the application code and the kernel, usually the libc or equivalent, that takes the page and fills it with smaller allocations. And most allocators out there usually request pretty big chunks at a time too, measured in megabytes/hundreds of pages.
So what you are saying might be technically true if you were to dispatch all mallocs to the kernel, it is not actually true in the real world.