bytK7

Does it mean you’re actually right when you get it to proclaim “Holy shit, you’re absolutely right!”?

I did get it to say that once, after I prompted it to be mean and argumentative and make me defend my idea. I did defend my idea, but I’m still not sure if I was right or not.

As a fellow resident of Bend I felt the same way when I saw this.

Indeed, bash already has socket access via /dev/tcp/HOST/PORT and /dev/udp/HOST/PORT, which allow opening a socket and reading from/writing to it as if it were an ordinary file.

I think there’s a misunderstanding of the data _here_. The underlying data are indeed a DEM, distributed as a single band geotiff file. There’s no R, G, or B, just elevation. The linked tutorial is simply how to take those data and convert them to a format that can be visualized on screen _using_ R, G, and B values derived from the formula you posted in a child comment.

You’re right, I realize now that cog doesn’t process an input template but the actual output file, modifying it in place. Perhaps that why it took so long to gain popularity: that fact seems somewhat non-obvious from the documentation. Even the examples on a cursory glance are not obviously not templates. At least to me.

Re-reading the docs I realize that sure enough, they say very clearly what it does. But I think it just doesn’t click immediately.

Now that get it, I have a few problems coming to mind that I can solve with cog that I didn’t have a great solution to before. So I’m jumping on the bandwagon.

Looking at this reminds me strongly of texthon, but with a less attractive syntax. A quick skim through the source appears to show a similar use of eval.

Too bad texthon is essentially unknown and unmaintained, as far as I know. I worked on a project with it for several years and it always worked really well and was much more pleasant to use than something like jinja. Maybe I need to make a modern fork…

Anyway, anyone interested in cog should check it out as well.

I don't know enough about this so maybe dumb question, but couldn't you use DSP to correct phase between microphones if you knew their relative differences?

I was thinking the same thing as I read the on the description. I see no reason that a separate VPN namespace would be vulnerable to this attack. The compromised device would be able to spoof packets with whatever IPs it wanted, but they would never be received in a context where the tunnel interface would be directly accessible and therefore the device would never see a response from that address, even if correctly guessed and probed.