mobeigi

So TempleOS was ahead of its time!

I enjoyed the reference more than the story itself :)

I saw a recent post about only adopting packages a certain number of days post release (say +3 days, or +7 days) after. The idea is you never bring in fresh commits, only older ones. This would need dangerous or bad commits to be marked vulnerable too.

It means you skip supply chain attacks but may miss fresh vulnerability patches too.

I'd very much like to learn more about this too, deserves its own blog post.

I've made the same exact SVN mistake. My first week in my first Software Engineering job, accidentally deleted trunk and my team lead had to scramble to fix my mistake.

I will always remember how he told me "Don't worry, it happens fairly often".

Been using Claude as a harness to OpenRouter for a while now. It's a nice setup if you don't mind API based billing.

I wish people wouldn't abuse the author of that project over this. Giving them the benefit of the doubt in that this was a mistake and not intentionally malicious, it feels really bad for hundreds if not thousands of people to send hate, insults, abuse to a single individual. Shame on the people who are doing that.

Such a feel good post, thanks for sharing OP!

This was not on my bingo card. Not sure why eBay would take this personally. They've had a solid couple of years and there is room to grow. Gamestop on the other hand I'm not sure will exist in 10 years.

Valve's VACnet solution is definitely interesting. It uses AI, deep learning and is server side. It's hard to tell how effective that has been for them compared to traditional client side detection systems; I don't imagine they'll share any results.

The fact that it's completely hidden from cheat developers gives them a huge advantage though. In the past, any client side algorithm or detection method could be reversed engineered by cheat developers and patched before lunch time. Now they're working against Valve completely in the dark.

Couldn't agree more, I have personally benefited from the additional layer and it irks me when people outright claim it has no value.

I'm being very cynical here but who says that their tool or LLM discovered this. How do we know they didn't hire some expert security researchers to find it or bought it off the black market as a promotion stunt.

With that being said, I wouldn't mind if they made more sales on whatever they're advertising IF they followed the disclosure process well. A bad disclose immediately tells me I can't trust them because their moment in the light was more important that the safety of millions of boxes.

Last time I heard about Zed I was intrigued. Now i'm interested, going to give it a go.