I disagree that it’s a waste of time or that only gullible people use it. A WAF (enabled to block malicious requests) is a cheaper and quicker solution to throw and still get some benefits.
I’ve seen that even in some large (non-FAANG or whatever) companies, budgets for security are always very tight or not available. Practically, it’s easier to kick the can down the road with a WAF.
For enterprise applications deployed for specific clients, if at all there are issues because of the WAF, they’d quickly bubble up through standard support mechanisms.
How is it on older or budget hardware though? It’s been a long time since I tried KDE, and in between even worked with Xfce because Gnome was a bit more resource intensive. Is it still the case that in terms of hardware specs and demand of the hardware, KDE needs/uses more than Gnome? I guess Xfce will be in a different league capability wise and resource requirement wise.
AIUI, they actually really made an effort to improve on that front, to the point that KDE is actually really good about resource use these days, which is eg. why it was picked as the default for the pinetab 2.
I use LXDE on my new boxes, but on a 15 year old machine I wasn't sure what the Linux distro had defaulted to. I was surprised to see it was KDE. That machine takes 30 sec to decrypt the disk encryption key (stupid proof of work functions!), but the desktop environment is as snappy as LXDE on high-end 2026 machines.
I haven't compared those two with XFCE recently, but they all seem fine these days.
I run it on my RK3588 based MNT Pocket Reform. I have to force the GL ES 2 backend because of, presumably, Panfrost bugs, but otherwise it runs well despite the fairly weak CPU and GPU.
How old and what budget? I spent a good chunk of the late 2010s rocking Plasma 5 on a machine with a first-gen i5. It 8 GB of RAM and an SSD, which probably helped, but it ran great!
> On iOS there isn't always a choice to not build something native.
Tangentially, even native can be badly designed and developed, performance wise. Even Apple hasn’t been able to do a good job with the Reminders app (one of the several apps ported to Mac with the same level of negligence that Electron brings in). I use a lot of Reminders and lists in Reminders. It’s janky and poorly coded.
Oh absolutely. I hadn’t touched native development in perhaps a decade (and that was Xamarin before Microsoft acquired them). My initial iterations were rough, but I’m happy with where the app is. Choosing an audio app to try native again likely wasn’t the best choice on my part either.
I skimmed through the article. I didn’t understand what role AI supposedly plays in this case for tracking aid deliveries. For tracking you need sensors and connectivity from the mode of delivery, location information, some analytics and databases. What does this AI do for tracking? I can understand a sales pitch that says AI decides where to provide aid, how much, when, etc. But tracking deliveries? It’s a head scratcher for me.
I'm not the expert and the details that the company would put out are obviously obtuse, but: image detection/identification, predictive policing, and planning. The latter sounds to me like they'd have some system where people enter reports in natural language and an LLM assembles the information together and then proposes some plan of action. As opposed to having to have a more structured data entry and the friction that comes with it. It's all in the article if you read between the lines, really.
The article just describes how they're ingesting the data, some Palantir rep is watching the deliveries remotely and what sounds like manually entering delivery data.
From there I'm guessing the "AI" part is an LLM interface is offered to ask questions about the deliveries?
This wouldn't be the first product where it just provides what a database already does just fine / more efficiently...
Sorry, but if honest coverage of Israel is considered bashing it, then it deserves to be “bashed“
Israel is still bombing people in tents and withholding aid.
Israel is doing to the Palestinians exactly what the US did to the Native Americans. I sadly expect Palestinians will end up on reservations and once their numbers and little remaining power are reduced enough they’ll finally be given some form of second class citizenship.
I think Meta employees don’t protest either for the genocides its platforms aided and supported or the other harms caused to kids in general. Maybe the pay is so good that one can convince oneself they’re on the good side. Maybe these companies attract a certain type of personality that doesn’t necessarily care much about others.
Concur; while Meta does have a role in determining the content people see, interacting with their platform is mostly voluntary. Palantir's platform interacts with you, not the other way around.
The answer is that responsibility is diffused. Very few people are actively building the 'Genocide Palestine' or the 'Illegally detain and torture immigrants' system, but a lot of people have submitted CLs to microservices that the 'Genocide Palestine' system (as well as a thousand others) calls.
Modern America is the complete antithesis of 'The Buck Stops Here.' It's more of an 'I have absolute power, and none of the accountability' sort of place.
If the president, or one of his armed, masked thugs with a license to kill can't ever be held accountable for the evil, vile shit they do, why should some low-level SWE feel any remorse or responsibility for those CLs?
---
The solution? Don't tolerate it. Don't settle for no accountability. Don't think this is no big deal, or business as usual. The only way out of this, if power is ever taken back, is disproportionate punishment for the guilty. The country can move on and heal after justice is fairly apportioned.
Incidentally, both war crimes, and deprivation of rights under color of law are capital crimes in the United States.
> Apple's challenge is they want to maintain privacy, which means doing everything on-device.
Apple is not trying to do everything on-device, though it prefers this as much as possible. This is why it built Private Cloud Compute (PCC) and as I understand it, it’s within a PCC environment that Google’s Gemini (for Apple’s users) will be hosted as well.
So Telnet as a client is not dead though, right? A long time ago, I used to use the Telnet client to talk to SMTP servers (on port 25) and send spoofed emails to friends for fun.
With port blocking widening in scope, I’ve long believed that we would one day have every service and protocol listening on port 443. Since all other ports are being knocked off in the name of security, we’ll end up having one port that makes port based filtering useless.
I've never really understood why it's a thing to use a telnet client for transmitting text on a socket for purposes other than telnet. My understanding is that telnet is a proper protocol with escape sequences/etc, and even that HTTP/SMTP/etc require things like \r\n for line breaks. Are these protocols just... close enough that it's not a problem in practice for text data?
Because for a long time, on most computers, the telnet client was the closest thing to an "open a tcp socket to this ip/port and connect the i/o from it to stdin/stdout" application you can get without installing something or coding it up yourself.
These days we have netcat/socat and others, but they're not reliably installed, while telnet used to be generally available because telnetting to another machine was more common.
These days, the answer would be to use a netcat variant. In the past, telnet was the best we could be confident would be there.
In corporate environments, netcat was often banned as it was seen as a "hacking" tool. Having it installed would sometimes get the attention of the security folks, depending how tightly they controlled things.
The telnet protocol with escapes, etc. is only used by the telnet client if you’re connecting to the telnet port. If you’re connecting to HTTP, SMTP or something else, the telnet protocol is not enabled.
The point is not that this particular binary is huge, the point is that we tend to strip images of anything that is not useful for the actual application shipped. So we strip everything. Also: small things adds up. On AI prompt can be handled reasonably by a single machine, millions of concurrent ones involve huge datacenters and whole energy plants being restarted/built.
The point of reducing the amount of binaries shipped with the image is also to reduce the amount of CVEs/vulns in your reports that wouldn't be relevant for your app but woulld still be raised by their presence.
Thanks, sounds like a recent development. I don't use macOS, but on other peoples macOS computer it was always there, even when they are not developers. But it could very well be that these computers are ten years old.
I mean technically MS Windows 10 is ten years old, but the big upgrade wave to 10 only happened like 4 years ago, which is quite recently. Maybe that is similar to macOS users, I don't know that.
If it's alright to be pedantic, anyone with programming knowledge can do the same without these tools. What these offer is tried and tested secure code for client side needs, clear options and you don't need to hand roll code for.
I don’t remember how I did it but when I was about 12 years old I somehow managed to send SMS from Telnet to cell phones, and to the receiver they appeared to be sent by an official Telecom account - good that I was still an innocent child, had I discovered this a few years later I may have tried doing something nefarious with it.
None of this affects the use of telnet the client program nor the ability to run a telnetd on your own host (but do be sure it's patched!).
What's happened is that global routing on the internet (or big chunks of it, it's not really clear) has started blocking telnet's default port to protect presumably-unpatched/unpatchable dinosaur systems from automated attack. So you can no longer (probably) rely on getting to a SMTP server to deliver that spoofed email unless you can do it from its own local environment.
Presumably not on the SMTP servers they were connecting to. There are millions of IPs with port 25 open, without them email wouldn't work, so I'm not sure what you mean
They probably mean that port 25 is blocked on consumer ISPs/residential IP blocks to prevent malware from running an smtpd on an infected home computer or router (which used to happen a lot), but on a higher level of course no one blocks SMTP.
You would still be able to use the telnet client to connect to an SMTP server on TCP port 25, just not port 23, right? I don't think that part changed here.
It's... not super clear from the article whether this is a port block or a stateful protocol thing. But yes, you're probably right and SMTP spoofing is probably safe for now.
I have one observation that doesn’t seem to be reported on this thread. The home page is very heavy, loading several MBs of images. It took half a minute to load completely for me on mobile.
I’ve seen that even in some large (non-FAANG or whatever) companies, budgets for security are always very tight or not available. Practically, it’s easier to kick the can down the road with a WAF.
For enterprise applications deployed for specific clients, if at all there are issues because of the WAF, they’d quickly bubble up through standard support mechanisms.
reply