Joined 13 years ago
In the link from the comment to which you replied, buried deep below the comic strips and all that, there is this explanation which seems to confirm your guess:
> Right. We should explain from the start. My first step of finding if any long-lost siblings of Stefan's 2004 bug were still lingering in the codebase was to look for ways to exceed the memory_limit that allows us to throw a controllable fatal. I asked my LLM companion for help.
> The first useful finding was a way to bypass the smaller post_max_size barrier that normally prevents a request from delivering enough memory pressure to reach memory_limit. PHP compares post_max_size with the declared Content-Length before automatic POST parsing begins, but it does not enforce the same limit against the bytes it actually consumes. Apache can therefore pass a chunked HTTP/1.1 or lengthless HTTP/2 multipart request with no meaningful declared length. A configured input-decompression filter creates the same mismatch between the compressed length and the decoded stream.
> The second useful finding was a way to exhaust memory_limit with a multipart request that remains below post_max_size. An RFC1867 file-upload part with filename="" contains no file data, and PHP does not count it toward max_file_uploads. PHP still creates all six corresponding $_FILES entries: name, full_path, type, tmp_name, error, and size.
> The term Demulsification describes the physical separation of a stable emulsion into its distinct chemical constituents. In software labor economics, high enterprise salaries acted as an artificial emulsifier, suspending supernumerary application bloat alongside core systems craft within the same engineering organizations.
> As AI tools collapse the cost of generating high-level glue code, this corporate emulsion is rapidly breaking apart:
But then I do not see any indication in your website that you are expanding and given the current situation it sounds more likely that the link is meant as a portfolio to show what you have done lately.
Then again, the lack of a jobs/careers listing might be a way to prevent a flood of automated applications.
I would suggest to clarify it in any case.
I learnt about the XJ220 from the Amiga game and many years later got to see a real one at the Technikmuseum in Speyer, Germany. What a beautiful machine!
I am preparing a pull request adding the Apache license in case it is acceptable for you.
So far I do not see any licensing terms, the source file headers only state the copyright notice. Do you have any plans about that?
> I came up with the idea while waking up from a nap and then was so blinded by how great this feature would be to have.
This has happened to me many times. In my case I forget how my program works fron all the approaches I have tried while writing it, then get excited to try a great idea which then does not work because it relies on some feature from one of the alternatives that I rejected for some other reason.
I will indeed waste a few hours trying the PDF indexing idea, there has to be some way to make it work. I have done some feeble attempts in this direction by myself before using the C library pdfio ( https://github.com/michaelrsweet/pdfio) which would work also on Windows. I will probably crash again on that wall but if the code search works as described I will still use this program every day.
> This article however will focus on the technical reasons why I won't be installing Omarchy yet. It boils down to what I call the security sweet spot.
> ... Most of the improvements I read about seem to focus on the desktop and UX, but I wish this humble list gives some food for thought about deeper OS architecture in terms of security and privacy.
I assume you meant "now" instead of "not": "The person who used to edit things for me has now been replaced,"
It might work if you manually change the TLD part of the URL.
What I did was get the IP address when it worked and add it to "/etc/hosts" so it works when on another network.
I think the note was written by the sender because the handwriting looks the same as in the vague "woman in Cornwall shed" address.
My guess is that it was intended to motivate Royal Mail to figure it out by quoting what might have been their slogan at some point. Now the highlight could have been added by a post office worker as a way of saying "indeed we never fail". The sender's style of higlighting things seems rather to be adding asterisks.
