earenndil

You. You are the single point of failure; if you are compromised, then all your accounts can be accessed by the compromisor.

If you're looking for a point outside yourself, then memorising all your passwords would be an option.

But beyond that, I don't think your criticism is warranted. There's always a single point of failure - sure - but we can still consider gradations of how centralised that point is, and how likely it is to fail.

With a hosted password manager, you're at the mercy of their server code; specifically, at least for 1password, I think they have a 'dead man's switch' which lets you get at the encrypted content without the master password. This is more likely to fail than a password manager which stores all its content locally and really encrypts it (e.g. keepass). In this case, human error outside of yourself can't compromise you. But technical error can, which is why there are more steps that can meaningfully increase your level of security. Like running your password manager on a separate, air-gapped computer; or sandboxing everything you run a la qubes.

Are any of these especially likely to compromise you, as a user? No, but reducing centralisation and dependency still improve your chances, and are definitely worth considering if you are e.g. running a drug smuggling ring.

It's assumed that, if you're signed up for a service with an email address, you control that email address.

This is generally a reasonable thing to assume, and can be verified for whatever account providers you support.

Nope, because java is statically typed.

This is not that great of an article, IMO. A prominent developer of one of the roguelikes mentioned says:

> you can immediately see that this article was stitched together by throwing some wikipedia articles together if it references the Berlin interpretation

> it's also hilarious if the guild of disgruntled adventurers is referenced as fun addition :)

> I'm not sure if I should feel insulted [by the article's description of my roguelike]

I mostly agree with these. I also feel a bit slighted by one of the descriptions. I'm also not sure quite what to make of the fact that they don't mention the two most prominent recent roguelikes: caves of qud, and cogmind.

You need to use nested functions if you want to have nontrivial behaviour in a cleanup, and nested functions are awful in c.

Raku has something similar.

Author of the library here; AMA.

My version isn't as dependent on nonstandard extensions.

Did you have a strong (10+ character, alphanumeric) password on the device they were able to get into?

> not once have I seen an explanation of what makes it fast and why those techniques aren't looted for open-source languages

The language design is such that the programs you write can make optimal use of cache and SIMD. The interpreter can only take advantage of that if the language offers you that. It's like saying "not once have I seen an explanation of what makes c so fast and why those techniques aren't applied to python and javascript."

(Note also that the reference J interpreter is opensource and very competitive, performance-wise.)

BSD was already open-source and superior to linux as the time it came out; it was only hampered by licensing concerns.