uep

> You already need compromised systems to install malware, signed or not. Not a real problem.

Is this true? Ads pointing to a malicious Notepad++ is already an existing thing. Now their malicious version will pass signing checks. Users will happily install these without the system itself being compromised.

I felt the movie was entertaining, but also somewhat unsatisfying. You don't really get answers or catharsis from Holmes being further confronted and exposed. To me, the movie was about media narratives and how deceptive lies of omission can be.

A small number of companies control the meat supply in the United States. If you decide that you don't want to buy that $50 hot dog, you likely won't have many comparable options.

I've noticed a lot of astroturfing lately. It really bothers me, because it was kind of my last bastion of sanity for online tech discourse. Every forum I've used is now full of marketing and dishonesty by bots, paid shills, and bad actors.

They said IE was the best browser, not the most popular. I wouldn't dispute that IE was more commonly used at the time.

Just checked your link and this fits with what I thought in terms of marketshare. You can see that Firefox was ~25% of marketshare in 2009. Which is an enormous share of the pie when you consider that they couldn't stick a download link on the front page of the most dominant search engine, and it didn't come preinstalled.

Never used Maxthon.

Damn, this also reminded me that RSS feeds were everywhere back then, and the browser supported it directly.

I agree with you on everything except the browser. I'm pretty sure I was using Firefox (or maybe Opera?) on Windows before the release of Vista. I know I was still using IE for some ActiveX web apps for a while. This was the era that I switched over to Linux full-time, but both Windows 2000 and XP were great OSes at this time. Linux was painful to adopt, but I really loved the promise of "full-control" over my computer.

My peeve today is how bad modern chat programs feel compared to the old instant messengers. The modern programs all feel slow and clunky in comparison. I felt that all of the messengers I used (MSN, AIM, ICQ) were more responsive than their modern day equivalents.

I hate to wade into this cesspool. How about some of the real obvious ones:

  * Crypto currency rug pulls (World Liberty Financial)
  * Donations linked with pardons (Binance)
  * Pardoning failed rebels of a coup that favored him (Capitol rioters)
  * Bringing baseless charges against political enemies and journalists (Comey, Letitia James, Don Lemon)
  * Musk (DOGE) killing government regulatory agencies that had investigations and cases against his companies

This is with two minutes of thought while waiting for a compile. I'm open to hearing how I am wrong.

> What is interesting that while 'Dilbert empire' fell in the process for not accepting white inferiority, full blown resistance marketing market is taking ( or maybe has taken already ) shape fueled largely by highly polarized populace.

I must be daft. There must be some cultural context I'm missing so that I don't even understand what you're saying. Accepting white inferiority? Full blown resistance marketing market? Huh?

This isn't my area, but wouldn't this still be quite effective if it automatically grouped and batched those jobs for you? At low throughput levels, it doesn't need giant batches, and could just timeout after a very short time, and submit smaller batches. At high throughput, they would be full batches. Either way, it seems like this would still serve the purpose, wouldn't it?

My knowledge is outdated, as I last seriously looked at it about nine years ago, but I doubt Binder is even better than dbus; it was not good. I'm quite surprised with people suggesting it. There was that recent kernel Binder bug even with the rust implementation. It was rewritten in rust because it has had a never-ending string of serious security bugs. On top of that, it had very poor throughput. I'm guessing this improved with the rust implementation.

It was a toy created by former OS devs who really didn't want to use Linux, but wanted their pet IPC from their former OS. It even used to be the case that Binder would dynamically create threads in the receiving process without userspace knowing. As in, your process would magically have function calls coming in from threads that you never created. Imagine the issues this can create with locking, forking, etc. This ended up being changed to get it upstreamed, but I consider this absolutely insane behavior.

I used to work for a general contractor who did residential remodels and construction, and a little bit of commercial work. He exclusively used cargo vans. He would carpet the interior to protect the cargo and your knees. It made me question why anyone would use a truck. As you alluded to, it doesn't just protect from the elements, but also from thieves stealing tools out of the back of your truck.

Do we even think that was real? I think social media has been astroturfed for a long time now. If enough people make those claims, it starts to feel true even without evidence to support it.

Did they ever open source anything that really make you think "wow"? The best I could see was them "embracing" Linux, but embrace, extend, extinguish was always a core part of their strategy.

I think you missed an important point in the parent comment. You can override the allocation for C++ coroutines. You do have control over details like allocation.

C++ coroutines are so lightweight and customizable (for good and ill), that in 2018 Gor Nishanov did a presentation where he scheduled binary searches around cache prefetching using coroutines. And yes, he modified the allocation behavior, though he said it only resulted in a modest improvement on performance.