I can’t decide whether this sentence is a joke or not. It has the same tone that triggers my PTSD from my CS degree classes and I also do recognize some of the terms, but it also sounds like it’s just throwing random science terms around as if you asked a LLM to talk about math.

I love it.

Also, it’s apparently also real and correct.

I really hope that CS will come up with recipes and emails where the board specificly “strongly recommended” that they reduce operation costs or denied internal investments. It probably won’t happen, because such pressure from investors is usually pretty vague, i.e they don’t literally tell you to cut corners, but they strongly suggest that if you won’t somehow increase revenue, you (the management) will have problems. Of course, it’s up to you how you do it, but to meet their often unrealistic demands, just doing a better job while also investing into internal failsafes is often simply not possible. It’s a loss-loss situation for CS, but I really hope they won’t loose this legal battle.

I’m sure there’s a lot of CS employees that would disagree with that, unfortunately there’s probably not much they can do about it.

I was just a few days ago giving my two weeks notice exactly for that reason. I’m getting so fed up with capitalism and companies working for the vultures who give zero fucks about what you do or whether you do it well or not, prioritizing profits over actually doing your job well. I don’t care about money, I worked in cybersec out of principle, to help people with their security. I don’t really care about money, as long as there’s job to be done for someone, I don’t really care if the project I’m working on is super profitable for me, as long as it at least breaks even. But no, we had to cut corners, basically scam our customers by selling products we had no qualified people for who barely scraped by enough results for the customer to not notice it. Non-existent R&D or training, because several milions of anuall profit are not enough. Fuck all of them, if I’m ever going to work again in cybersec, it will be a non-profit.

This OP’s article infuriates me, the nerves they have to demand more money for what’s entirely their failure, which they also directly cause in every company they touch. I’m sure that the fact that the failure was so devastating for most companies is also by large margin fault of their investors, some of which are probably also part of this lawsuit, that blocked investment into disaster recovery plans or backups, because their millions of profit per year felt low.

I feel like I’m getting pretty radicalized recently, ugh.

While I’m all for holding CS accountable for what happened, thisis not the way how to do it and to whom they should be accountable. If there’s any lawsuit, it should come from the customers who have been affected by the outage, not some fucking investors and shareholders that probably kept pressuring CS for the last several years to reduce costs and increase revenue, that are now scrambling to avoid consequences of their endless greed ruining companies they don’t care about by forcing endless growth at all costs and doing as much as they can to prevent internal investments, because that’s not what makes the line go up.

Fuck them. I hope they loose and have to eat their losses + expensive lawsuit. If CS would be able to actually invest their revenue internally, instead of it feeding pockets of greedy investors who give literaly zero fucks about the product or the service, this may not have happened.

I saw that happen at the cybersecurity company I was working at, when we got acquired by investors. Several milion of profit after costs suddenly wasn’t enough, and we had to reduce already non-existent internal projects or investments, that we have already been lacking to be able to do our job properly.

I mean, if it’s **just ** a normal screen-sized website, that already makes it a lot easier. Not having to deal with responsiveness bullshit would make webdev a lot better experience. That is assuming “normal screen” means 1920*1080, or whatever is the median screen size.

• OrangePi with HomeAssistant and PiHole.
• Old gaming PC turned 24/7 server with Jellyfin, V-Rising server
• Hetzner cloud with Matrix server for Messenger and Discord bridging.
• Synology NAS for SMB and sharing stuff with others through Synology Drive, which also serves as a seedbox for Redacted.ch, with Headphones and Transmission.

I might be wrong, but from how I understand it it probably wouldn’t help. Kernel drivers have a rigorous QA and cert by Microsoft if you want to get them signed, which is a process that may take a long time - longer than you can afford when pushing updates to AV/EDR to catch emerging threats. What Crowdstrike does to bypass this requirement is that the CS Falcon is just an engine, that loads, interprets and executes code from definition files. The kernel driver code then doesn’t need to change, so no need for new MS cert, and they can just push new definition files. So, they kind of have to deal with unsafe in this case, since you are executing a new code.

I wouldn’t call Crowdstrike a corporate spyware garbage. I work as a Red Teamer in cybersecurity, and EDRs are bane of my existence - they are useful, and pretty good at what they do. In the last few years, I’m struggling more and more to with engagements we do, because EDRs just get in the way and catch a lot of what would pass undetected a month ago. Staying on top of them with our tooling is getting more and more difficult, and I would call that a good thing.

I’ve recently tested a company without EDR, and boy was it a treat. Not defending Crowdstrike, to call that a major fuckup is great understatement, but calling it “corporate spyware garbage” feels a little bit unfair - EDRs do make a difference, and this wasn’t an issue with their product in itself, but with irresponsibility of their patch management.

It has been a while since I have to deal with problem complexities in college, is there even class of problems that would require something like this, or is there a proven upper limit/can this be simplified? I don’t think I’ve ever seen O(n!^k) class of problems.

Hmm, iirc non-deterministic turing machines should be able to solve most problems, but I’m not sure we ever talked about problems that are not NP. Are there such problems? And how is the problem class even called?

Oh, right, you also have EXP and NEXP. But that’s the highest class on wiki, and I can’t find if it’s proven that it’s enough for all problems. Is there a FACT and NFACT class?

Here is a picture, that may help a little bit. The n is input size, and f(n) is how long does the algorithm runs (i.e how many instructions) it takes to calculate it for input for size n, i.e for finding smallest element in an array, n would be the number of elements in the array. g(n) is then the function you have in O, so if you have O(n^2) algorithm, the g(n) = n^2

Basically, you are looking for how quickly it grows for extreme values of N, while also disregarding constants. The graph representation probably isn’t too useful for figuring the O value, but it can help a little bit with understanding it - you want to find a O function where from one point onward (n0), the f(n) is under the O function all the way into infinity.

For me, my common result would be something like O(shit).

Exactly this. I only have pretty vague experience with machine learning, since it was one of the other specializations for my Masters than the one I choose, which however means we still shared some basic courses on the topic, and I definitely share his point of view. I’ve been saying basically the same things when talking about AI, albeit not as expressively, but even with basic insight into ML, the whole craze that is happening around it is such bullshit. But, I’m by no means an expert in the field, so I may be wrong, but it’s nice to finally read an article from an “expert” in the field I can agree with. Because so far, the whole “experts talking AI” felt exactly like the COVID situation, with “doctors” talking against vaccines. Their doomsaying opinion simply contradicts even the little knowledge I have in the ML field.

I never managed to get gamescope working on my Nobara. Any docs I should look into?

I’m also pretty sure the camera does use some ML algorithms in processing of the pictures, so it is an AI by today standarts.

My favorite windows update was when I was attending an onsite coding competition hosted my Microsoft. We were all in this large meeting hall that looked like a theater, and we spent first 10 minutes or so at the start of the competition just looking at Windows update, with the Microsoft rep apologizing to us, because his pc decided to do the “Forced update restart you cant postpone any more” literally two minutes into the presentation

Serious EVE players are something else. The mention about IT security isn’t a hyperbole, some EVE players take the espionage meta-game very seriously, and even though it’s not only against the rules but also illegal, that’s not gonna stop them. I mean, once they literally got someone to turn off electricity for a whole town just so they can win a fight (I tried to find a link to the article, because I’m 90% sure I did read about it somewhere, but I can’t manage to find it anywhere, if anyone has a link. Maybe it was just a rummor, or an unexecuted plan?)

I used TS for the first time in like 15 years litterally two days ago, funny timing.

Yeah, I lost EVE. Again.

This is a great point, and I definitely agree, and I haven’t thought about it in this way. I don’t think that I’ve ever ran into a group where our expectations would be so much different that it would cause an issue, but it’s a great thing to keep in mind. Now that I read it again, I think I should add that I don’t think that it’s wrong to play RPGs as a board game, and I don’t really mind if someone does even in our group and I’m having fun either way, but I mostly felt like it’s a little bit shame that it may not even occur to some people that you don’t have to focus mostly on rules - since thats what most of the game book is about, and can do it differently, especially when you’re starting out. Which is also a good thing to keep in mind, to discuss and make the options and expectations clear before starting.

I agree, and I think that what may have also helped was that I was still basically a child when I was introduced to the dice-only RPGs. Also, it’s definitely way more difficult for the GM, which I was fortunate enough to have a really experienced and amazing one.

It’s true that if the whole group including the GM is starting out, going with something like Fate is better choice, which I also prefer nowadays. Or more experimental ones like Dread or the candles one.

I’m really glad that my first introduction to RPGs, when I was on a summer camp and like 13yo, was with a GM who didn’t use any rules (aside from a D10) and instead focused on RP, and resolved actions based on what exactly we described, intuition and a D10 roll without a set goal or number.

It has taught me an entirely different approach to pen&papers that has carried really well over to when I started playing more rules heavy systems, which is especially apparent when I play with groups who never really played without rules, where most of the combat or actions are reduced to playing a board game and a lot of talk revolves around stats and numbers, instead of on the RP, which is a shame. Which is understandable, since if your first experoence with RP is a rule heavy system, it’s not exactly intuitive to just ignore the stats and rolls, because they seem important.

I’m used to paying almost no attention to stats aside from vaguely knowing what my character is better at, and threat them and the rolls in same way as I did when starting - don’t care what are the odds, don’t care about the roll, I just start with describing an action I want to do and figure out the stats as an afterthought. And it makes for such a better experience, and I higjly recommend for anyone starting a new group or having inexperienced players - just go with a single d10 for the first session, and guess the results based on a vague gut feeling based on the situation and the number rolled. Its suprisingly intuitive once you start from the GM side, and it teaches the new players way better habbits in how to approach the game and what is important, that will stay with them even after they add rules to the mix.