create a new account every few weeks and don't forget to mix you you'er writin' style to fakeout stylometrics. its all against the rules but i disagree with HN terms. internet points don't mean crapola to me. but i like dropping in here every now and then to chit caht. i should have the right to be anonymous and non-deidentifiable here and speak freely. of IP address ---are--- tracked here and you can easily be shadowbanned. but i don't say anything awful, but i am naturally an asshat and i just can't seem to change my spots. 90% of the time i'm ok, but 10% i'm just a raving tool.
Are you confusing the open openSSL library with the CLI? Absolutely none of this is true when used as a signing tool on the CLI. Seems like you just needed to rant, rather than answer my question. Which is fine: I do it to, but I was legit asking a question that you ignored and you seem to know about openSSL?
And you can't delete your post when you realize how awful it was years later! That anti-information sticks around for ages. Even worse when there are bad answers attached to it, too.
I'm sorry you don't understand my answers. Like, at all. Maybe calm down and re-read my responses when you have a clear head? It's all spelled out multiple times.
What didn't you understand? The point isn't whether I do specific thing A or specific thing B, the point is that when I can I do the best in the situation to improve the average. The specifics don't matter. It is the overall impact. OP is playing the "debate" game which is about winning, and not about the issue itself. It is because OP doesn't care to understand, they just want to score points, hence their desire to focus on specific instances.
Had OP said something like "How can you make an informed decision congruent with your ethics when so many ubiquitous companies violate human rights?" that would have been a genuine question. Instead OP said "Tell me why you don't do X" and behind that is "because I win." That's arguing from bad faith (a polite way to describe OP).
"Quicken is a single-entry accounting system, which means that amounts can appear out of or disappear into thin air. In a double-entry accounting system you can't put amounts in an account without taking it out of another account."
Right there with you. I've tried to leave quicken multiple times. Especially when they moved to annual subscriptions. I haven't tried to leave since 2019-ish, and all the alternatives were just clunky as hell, as if the devs completely ignored UI/UX. Also, I'm on the latest quicken for mac and it has an export feature, but I have never used it. Maybe when they start charging per transaction I'll finally leave. I'm lucky enough to be able to afford it annually, but it still stinks that there's no open source alt, even to do just the basics conveniently.
What do you mean re-enter? I've been using every new version of Quicken since 1992 and never had to re-enter all my data, and I switched from PC to MAC around 2005.
I'll see your decade old text file and raise you one more: my current quicken file goes back to 1992! Lemme tell you about gas and grocery prices back then... (hint $1.09/gallon in Oneida, NY and $15/bag at Price Chopper)
About 5 years ago I purged as many apps as I could. I still have some I need for my job, especially on my work-issued iPhone, but excluding those apps I have exactly 5 apps on my phone. Everything has a website.
I've heard that native apps are more secure than webapps, but in my experience Firefox is a more reliable steward of security, and App permissions are too obscure to really understand: it is harder to make a malicious webapp than it is to make a malicious native app. Is that a fair statement?
FWIW: Me too. I want 100% transparency and I have no problem clicking a dialog every single time. My credit card company sends me a lot of alerts and I have no issue spending 5 seconds skimming an email if it means not getting scammed.
This discussion will proceed as follows: you will present a laundry list of examples, and if I answer NO to any of them, you win. It will play out as the illustration of the fallacy of all or nothing: if I am not 100% pure, then I am 100% wrong.
What you will fail to understand, is that in the real world "doing the best one can" still has an impact. So I might not answer 100% all of your questions, but it doesn't mean my decisions don't have any impact. The absurdity can be illustrated by rewording: "if we can't prevent all crime, we should stop enforcing it", or "if you can't feed all the hungry children, we shouldn't bother feeding any".
Unfortunately for you, I will not play your purity test game so that you can feel smug, but I will say that I do my best and I pay attention, and whenever feasible I vote with my wallet to buy from or invest in companies with stated goals that align with human rights, and I will feel disappointment over not making the "best possible choice" at every opportunity, but that will position me to do better next time. Because perfection is the enemy of progress.
We are discussing whether the LLM deciphering is accurate. That hasn't been demonstrated as measured by review, provenance, cross-referencing among historical record, etc.