My very experience at university. Projectile vomit all over the place.

Love your posts and your little insights and review you share with the screenshots. Thanks for sharing!

What’s the reference?

Especially RAID 0.

Reference for the admission?

And it’s made by a Bitwarden developer.

They highlighted it was a bug and said it would be fixed very soon after it was flagged. It was addressed in a matter of days. You can build the server with the /p:DefineConstants=“OSS” flag still and you can build the clients with the bitwarden_license folder deleted again (now they’ve fixed it).

I don’t understand why you’re throwing FUD about this. Building without the Bitwarden Licensed code has been possible for years and those components under that license have been enterprise focused (such as SSO). The client is still GPL and the server is still AGPL.

This has been the way for years.

Cool. They got that sorted nice and quickly.

Edit:

I don’t get why people think they’re suddenly doing stuff under a different license to subvert the open nature of the project. They’ve been totally transparent on what isn’t part of the GPL/AGPL licensed code for years.

SSO, the password health service, organisation auth requests, member access report blah blah have been enterprise features under the Bitwarden License for ages and they architected the projects in a clear and transparent way to build without those features since they added them.

A connoisseur right here.

Thank you for the smug response however I did indeed read the article and going from 13 months to 10 days is not a trend but a complete rearchitecture of how certificates are managed.

You have no idea how many orgs have to do this manually as their systems won’t enable it to be automated. Following a KBA once a year is fine for most (yet they still forget and websites break for a few days; this literally happened to NVD of all things a few weeks ago).

This change is a 36x increase in effort with no consideration for those who can’t renew and apply certs programmatically / through automation.

Smells like Apple knows something but can’t say anything. What reason would they want lifespans cut so short other than they know of an attack vector that means more than 10 days isn’t safe?

AFAIK they’re not a CA that sells certs so this can’t be some money making scheme. And they’ll be very aware how unpopular 10 day lifespans would be to services that suck and require manual download and upload every time you renew.

Taking it private just means taking it off the stock market (the news of it possibly going private has already cause the share price to spike).

Honestly, public trading of games companies sucks anyway and is what drives all the shit you see from the likes of EA, Take Two, Roblox etc.

Under private control, and less drive to bleed every drop of value out of every property might mean we can get classics like Beyond Good and Evil again.

You okay?

You’re not wrong. Research into models trained on racially balanced datasets has shown better recognition performance among with reduced biases. This was in limited and GAN generated faces so it still needs to be recreated with real-world data but it shows promise that balancing training data should reduce bias.

Let me guess, UltraAV whitelabels Kaspersky…

It’s like the PHB. You don’t need to read it cover to cover but there’s a couple of chapters you’ll want to read entirely up front and then it’s just a resource with suggestions on how to adjudicate various scenarios.

Which I always find kind of hilarious since it’s basically expressed on the first page of the DMG.

Not entirely. Yes there was blight affecting crops but there was more to it than that.

Huge volumes of unaffected produce were exported to England for profit - the decreased yields only impacting the market for locals. Previous famines has seen the British ban exports to ensure the local population had access to food (which also decreased the prices) but not this time around.

English landlords of Irish property were evicting their tenants who weren’t able to pay (since the blight impacted many people’s ability to work) with zero notice or rights for the tenants. Absentee landlords were extracting huge amounts of capital out of the Irish economy, owning vast swathes of the entire country.

The Irish were widely dependent on the potato as a primary form of sustenance but it was due to the potato being high in calories, cheap and easy to grow, and high density yields from relatively small plots of land (landlords dividing up the land into incredibly small divisions whilst simultaneously extracting the highest rent possible for the land).

The Irish were, in essence, forced to eat potatoes due to the extreme economic exploitation they were subject to.

Yet there was no aid from England; she simply sat by reaping profit and leaving things up to the divine - “the market will provide”. There had been efforts to change tariffs and laws but the contention in the governing party about providing aid caused the Prime Minister to resign and the subsequent government threw out all efforts (except those such as offering relief to those without land which forced many Irish to sell what land they had to gain relief and aid).

A Prime Minister at the time launched a commission to investigate and it was found that the absentee landlord system was abhorrent and principally responsible for the famine.

Sadly 1/4 of the population perished, and another 1/4 simply left the country. In some ways, Ireland never recovered.

Not to excuse the developer but I empathise with why they might have felt compelled to change the license.

One of the biggest pains for any open source project is distributions and packagers who package the software themselves yet make changes or configure in non-standard ways which leads to major overheads for upstream as everyone submits bug reports for bugs introduced down stream and have nothing to do with them.

I feel we, as a community, need to be more vocal about when a project has been modified from the original source for packaging or distribution (where those changes weren’t pushed upstream) to demand the project be renamed in that instance.

I feel for these small developers who do this in their spare time and find the community forcing more work on them and damaging their reputation without any fault of the developer but someone downstream who doesn’t care not want to support what they’ve packaged.

Perhaps there are other solutions? Before other projects decide to use awful licenses and infringe on rights just to try and tackle the problems created by downstream.

Nonsense. If they were perfect, wouldn’t they have used a question mark? Your judgement of character is laughable. What empirical evidence is there that they are perfect?

(How was that?)