What's worse about negative leap seconds? The "experienced" time by systems will just look like they froze for a second. Added leap seconds are worse, surely, as time goes backwards.
It's not a counter example to give examples of what does exist.
And it's not like the BGP daemon is on by default. That'd be dumb. You could equally say that any Ubuntu system has equally many steps to turn on a BGP daemon, starting with `apt install frr`.
I sure hope openbsd's BGPd doesn't have any suid binaries. And if it doesn't, well that might just as well be a vacation photo instead of a binary for all the "code" it is.
I agree that they're punching above their weight, but I would also say that they are falling more and more behind. 25 years ago they were more at par in what use cases they can address, and its performance. But now it's almost retro computing.
And it's fine! If you really only need a bog standard webserver, or router/firewall, then that's the use case and it solves your problem. And solves the problem without baggage.
I wouldn't use it for storage, though, since running a non-checksumming filesystem nowadays is a bit of a joke. (let's not get into btrfs. I acknowledge its history, but checksumming is not backups, and backups address the historical btrfs problems while not addressing at all the checksumming)
> But Bluetooth is basically a giant blast of security vulnerabilities
Yes, but this is exactly the point. And running OpenBSD is not a problem, until you run into a brick wall like this.
If you don't need it (and things like it), then that's all fine. As with everything, the last 10% takes 99% of the work, and code, and therefore contains about 99% of the security problems.
IIRC they were also very late to being able to run virtual machines, and even USB.
If you simply don't implement the things you don't need for a use case (e.g. a webserver) then that scales down to the fact that the compressor controller chip in your (dumb) fridge is not remotely exploitable too.
The bitcoin people bought a pardon for their hero, one of the biggest facilitators of drug smuggling in the world, and someone who personally paid money to have people killed. Including explicitly saying to indiscriminately kill whatever unrelated bystander happens to be there.
That was a stated goal for them, and they got what they paid for. So good ROI on that.
They've gotten PAAAAH-LENTY for their money.
Did they get their pet asset to go up in price? No. But they managed to buy "crime is legal now". The shitcoin rugpull industry is making BANK, and the DOJ has been paid off to look the other way.
Investigations have been shut down, and mobsters have been freed. They are not the losers. Society is.
When it's from an industry consisting 100% of organized crime and negative-sum grifting, it's a lot.
I'd read a donation with "from the oil industry" and "from The Organization Of Stealing All Copper from Public Spaces" as different types of "bad", even if I'd prefer that the oil industry also not buy politicians.
For the avoidance of doubt, blockchain people are the copper thieves.
> You’re still making introversion out to be something that you should work at to compensate or fix
Not fix. You just to hold your nose and do anyway, with no expectations if your experience of it ever changing.
Compensate? Not the way I think you mean it, no. Say you hate exercising or brushing your teeth. Ok. Nothing wrong with that. That's not good or bad. But you still have to do it.
Now, am I saying that only the social interaction with random strangers, that only inane smalltalk does it? Of course not.
> You say this as if introversion is something to be "cured."
Not at all what I'm saying. You don't get cured by exercise either. You're never "done" exercising. It's just a thing you do, in order to have a long term better life.
I don't like talking to strangers. It still tastes like medicine. I have no expectation that I'll ever like it. But I still have to take my medicine, or I'll be worse off long term.
And like being sore if you've not exercised in a while, the aversion to being social is stronger after taking a "solitude vacation". But you can't not do it.
> I find myself questioning for whom am I leaving a trace for? What kinds of humans or entities?
How's your reasoning there? You only want to be nice to people who have earned it? This sounds a bit too close to the "you have to EARN my respect", which is a hallmark of somebody nobody wants to be around.
You can only control your own actions. If your "good deeds" are conditional or transactional, then that very much diminishes their goodness.
Yeah. Should we just magically infer that he likes getting non-gig contacts on his explicitly gig contact form? The form is under "Get in Touch", and under an offer for a 15 minute call. I don't want that.
This reminds me of a friend of mine who in a B2B setting contacted a potential vendor by filling in a form, with his email and phone number as contact details. Instead of emailing or calling back, this vendor continued the conversation by tracking down my friend on LinkedIn and messaging him there! They already had the email and phone number from their form.
I'm also not super impressed by the consulting gig's "Johnny Holton" reference talking about Jake's "engineering excellence". A google search says Johnny Holton is an American hand egg player.
If I were a potential client going in cold then this would not fill me with confidence in his attention to detail.
You're not kidding. There's neither comment box nor email address. Is he expecting us to cyberstalk him to find if someone has doxxed him, just to give a thumbs up?
"Why is nobody calling to invite me to parties", says man who unplugged his phone.
Edit: Ok, I'm old. For younger people, pretend I said "turned off his phone".