/tech/ - Technology

>>18666
Although it's not the same thing, the part about protocols does somewhat remind me of Microsoft and the Halloween documents.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_documents
>Document I suggests that one reason that open source projects had been able to enter the server market is the market's use of standardized protocols. The document then suggests that this can be stopped by "extending these protocols and developing new protocols" and "de-commoditiz[ing] protocols & applications".

black-box-engineering.png
[Hide] (9.3KB, 608x479)

>>18667
Watching, especially, the horror of web browsers devolving over the years, I've come more and more to feel multiple independent proprietary software packages implementing well documented public APIs is a better approach than freely available source code nobody understands and everybody just keeps piling spaghetti on top of.

>>18663
The FBI does that.

>>18670
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_(fallacy)

>>18663
>CSAM
Anyone who uses politically correct corporate nuspeak deserves the death penalty.

1w9ghe748b6f1.jpeg
[Hide] (598.2KB, 1080x2340)

>>16876
I think it look neat, on iOS and Android, it's a nice look.

1749491887484149.jpg
[Hide] (618.5KB, 3840x2160)

>>16406 (OP) 
It can look fantastic when customized right.

>>16938
>it can make a great movie prop
ftfy

>>16406 (OP) 
How do you guys feel about Liquid Glass after the updates?

creed_of_assassins.webp
[Hide] (32.6KB, 505x639)

>>16406 (OP) 
Not really liquid glass-specific, but:
>haven't touched nu-crApple stuff for a while
>recently had to use one and it had multiple monitors
>not only is the menubar square
>not only is it translucent
>not only is it collapsible
>there are separate simultaneous menubars on each display, and they are different if there are different foreground apps
What's the point of having a menubar at all separate from windows if you're gonna pull this? These subhumans have no overall idea of what they're doing.

Any of you fags are using the pine phone? How is it?

>5 years ago
<still no linux phones

>>15936
is there any real actual advantages outside of being pinged? I would think that using something outside of android and IOS would put a red bullseye on your back.

>>10175
This picture feels so pointless yeah it's blatant the art is shit.  But what do you expect when you hire a hentai artist worse things come to worse being that if they drew her normally mentally ill women and homosexuals will cry they're sexualizing children despite it's just a drawing.
So no matter what you cannot win how you draw her unless you dress her like a Muslim woman with a hijab.

>>15936
They exist and you can even buy them, they are just not ready for daily use, which is a travesty. But then commercial UNIX pretty much died out because every vendor had its own line of expensive RISC work stations running their own flavour of UNIX, meanwhile anyone could take a random x86 computer and start tinkering with Linux. The problem is that there is no smartphone equivalent of x86 computers, instead you have to either fight tooth-and-nail to somehow put your own OS on a locked down phone, or try make your own. The former is not that much fun when you can permanently brick your phone if something goes wrong, and the latter seems to be too expensive for an end product that is objectively inferior to a low end Android phone.

fumo-smoking-fumafarhan.gif
[Hide] (178.8KB, 640x640)

>>15897
I see some people shilling Ubuntu Touch on YouTube, is it still supported? How's the support of modern apps and updates?

>>17054
>shitcrypted protocols
>they're too slow
are you imblyign it's slow because of encryption? that's long been accelerated to multiple Gbit even if it's triple AES encrypted. if i2p is slow it's because all you niggers with Gbit fiber at home don't run a node so there are only a few thousand fast nodes worldwide and you don't seed torrents
>niche to use
>why everyone sticks with Google Chrome
no it's because they're cattle that use whatever jews feed them by default

>>17066
>implying implications
Stopped reading there, KYS memetarded normalnigger.

85d22392c0afca2048af169614bc0c5df08f7528940c1fa7ab5d574d77f12bcc.jpg
[Hide] (82.5KB, 600x600)

Since the IPs of all I2P routers are publicly available, doesn't this mean that it could be easy to find a particular eepsite's real IP address by correlating its downtime with a particular IP's downtime?

c622a1bdaefb4b12c4a803714a24ad566f40167abd2baa9436410c833eed5857.jpg
[Hide] (83.8KB, 660x660)

>>18402
>Since the IPs of all I2P routers are publicly available, doesn't this mean that it could be easy to find a particular eepsite's real IP address by correlating its downtime with a particular IP's downtime?
Yes that's called Live Behavior Alignment or on/off attack. It's not as simple as it sounds because you need to go offline several times for any kind of pattern to make it through the noise of all other nodes joining and leaving. The main mitigation is called multihoming where you serve the same hidden service from multiple difference servers so it's not obvious to an attacker when one of the servers goes offline.
https://arxiv.org/html/2512.15510

You can read more about known i2p attacks and mitigations in the official docs
https://i2p.net/en/docs/overview/threat-model/

f24f24efb92a6526d39b341b98fe233f98af38666d8655f4f6f771813ed085c8.jpg
[Hide] (94.8KB, 500x333)

>>18518
>The main mitigation is called multihoming where you serve the same hidden service from multiple difference servers so it's not obvious to an attacker when one of the servers goes offline.
I was mainly concerned with the idea of that type of correlation because it's bad for a self-hosted setup since it reveals your personal IP. If I could get some VPS or other external server for "multihoming", at that point I could as well only host it on that server and not care about correlation attacks since getting its IP found out wouldn't be as bad for my personal privacy.
Anyway, only with a single server, could you confuse an attacker and mostly mitigate these attacks by waiting a little before putting up a service when your I2P router goes online after being offline, and also by randomly shutting down your service for short periods of time from time to time while keeping your I2P router online?

1746759676636665.jpg
[Hide] (51.3KB, 600x850)

>>17365
Based.

>>17368
Fair. As much as I like tablets, I'll admit the only demographics that use it a lot are children, elderly, homossexual men and college women.

>>17257
Well I find the idea delightful! My main driver is an iPhone Mini, and the consumption unit a full size iPhone (will probably get an iPad to replace it next). I've always found the idea of digital minimalism a worthy goal. Picrel is my last mini phone (Palm PVG100) before the market decided smartwatches were what gymrats wanted for a small comms unit.

IMG_0935.jpeg
[Hide] (1.5MB, 2912x2557)

^---

>>17466
>>17468
It's cool to see likeminded people, it seems this idea of mine is mostly unpopular on /tech/ overall, but I still like it, might try Syncthing as I've heard good things about it. Nice to see smaller smartphones, I personally prefer them bigger because my hands are big and fat, so it's more comfortable for me, but I still find smaller ones charming and wish they'd be common.

>>8229
So the less code you need to look through the less that needs to be maintained?

>>15982
I see, fair enough.

>>15984
Thanks for the reply! Don't be hard on yourself, I think you're doing a great job, this place is pretty great.

6.png
[Hide] (693.9KB, 784x806)

>>15983
Reddit is much worse, everything about it. And I don't think it was ever gud, unlike slashdot. Slashdot was decent in the late 90's, before they defaulted anonymous posts to -1 and changed the interface to a very painful browsing experience in Lynx.
Reddit mossad lady on the left.

installgentoo wiki link has changed:
https://igwiki.lyci.de/wiki/Main_Page

deploredit.jpg
[Hide] (78.8KB, 1136x640)

>>15987
Reddit was never good, but before all the purges under Pao/SRS it at least wasn't BAD. Much like SA or opinionstube, it was at least mediocre back when it was sincere(le retarded) Randroid fedoralords instead of Blue Qboomer Langley spambots.
>Slashdot
Main structural advantage of /. versus its later knockoffs like Reddit was the Anonymous Coward feature. It's worth remembering that, in its early years, most 4chan posts were NOT anonymous! The cultural norm of anonymity by default evolved later, from something originally more like USENET where anon posts were commonly known but most weren't even pseudonymous.

>>17966
The old URL redirects to the new site. Shame the new URL is less memorable, but it's still likely a good idea to update the link.

>>18167
>Last time I used it guix pull was unbearably slow, however.
That's specifically Savannah being slow as hell as it is(/was?) getting hammered by bots.
I believe they have switched to Codeberg as default since then. If not, just add this to ~/.config/guix/channels.scm:
(list
  (channel
    (inherit (car %default-channels))
    (url "https://codeberg.org/guix/guix")))

sonatype_survey_infographic.jpg
[Hide] (1.4MB, 1350x4800)

>>18167
>muh buttstrap
Asinine cargo cultism

If you actually cared about muh security you'd have somebody conduct a legit audit of every LTS release, but of course nobody does that except a handful of safety critical embedded platforms.

If you just want something unambiguous enough to trust gut feelings on, but easier to read than assembly, C is still a terrible choice because it's full of undefined crap and its bloated compiler's wizardry. Maybe something like Forth would be better.

>>18177
Guix uses a cryptographic (SHA256) hash of the source code and goes the extra mile to ensure 100% reproducibility.
It is not practical to verify a full-blown (and actually usable for common tasks) desktop OS without fully reproducible builds, so the work Guix and NixOS do is very important in this regard.

>>18181
>(SHA256) hash of the source
Cargo cultism. Hashed binary packages are exactly as trustworthy as uncompiled source nobody read.
>the work Guix and NixOS do is very important in this regard
The parts about ensuring bit-for-bit identical environments to those used by auditors can be deployed "the right way", instead of blindly dumping Docker images and Flatpak fake "sandboxes", yes. The arbitrary fetishism of C source as some sacred cow of transparency, not so much.

Security and bugginess aside, though, the ability to build everything the same way and roll everything backward and forward alongside multiple branches in the same install is extremely convenient for a ton of other reasons. Or at least it would be if the UI wasn't so autistically unpolished and the documentation wasn't so scattershot, for a project old enough to have kids in school.

>>18197
Assuming we are fine with starting "from scratch", how about something like this?

1. Specify a type of immutable object that isn't just bytes but also references other objects.
Specifically, make addresses not "just an integer/bytes" so it is possible to trace all objects to leaves from a single root node with just a single program/algorithm.
Instead of a single type of objects with both bytes and references, having two types of objects is fine too (one plain bytes, one only with references).
As the objects are immutable it is guaranteed they form a directed acyclic graph.
These references should be opaque to avoid exposing implementation details.

2. Use a cryptographic hash to refer to these objects.
This is possible due to the objects being immutable and not having any cyclic references.
The hash must differentiate (use a different domain) between plain bytes and references to avoid confusion attacks (e.g. tricking an implementation to interpret bytes as a reference).

3. Use "drivers" to transform objects.
These drivers take a single object as input and output a single object.

Dunno if OP is correct about his leak but it's pretty much a known fact you cannot trust modern AMD or Intel chipsets (would not be surprised if the same goes for those Mac M-series CPUs). On the upside of things you can use ARMs or ancient processors just fine and so long as you can run a modern graphics card you shouldn't really experience much bottlenecks. The issue with be running modern RAM alongside old CPUs. You'd practically have to make your own motherboard if you want that best-of-both-worlds situation. You can use ARMs of course, but then you're limited to shit that runs natively on ARM... unless you just make it into an x86-64 virtual machine with GPU passthrough. Your CPU speed will be shit in the virtual machine, but still fast enough for ordinary purposes and the GPU should work great while you use DDR5 RAM so all told it's a working option.

>>16043
>limited to shit that runs natively on ARM
Install gentoo, unironically.
>Your CPU speed will be shit in the virtual machine
About using old ARM socs.
The CPU is a massive bottleneck. But not as big as memory. Virtually all ARM boards you can buy are socs, that means there is no replaceable memory. The gpu on those machines don't have much acceleration capabilities. It drops frames playing 1080p vp8.
It struggles so much even when running natively, and you suggest running a vm?
Get any arm board and see for yourself. They are pretty cheap.

>>16049
The point is using new ARM for at least DDR4. If you want oldschool just use the AMD FX 9590 which has no PSP and use DDR3 RAM.

>>16043
making your own motherboard is not sufficient to use ddr5 if your cpu only supports ddr4, unless speed is of no concern to you.  even then, it might not be sufficient.  the memory controller is located on the cpu itself, and will not support ddr5 speeds.

>>8953
>It's not equivalent to ME/PSP
PSP is just rebranded TZ

>>17930
>portals
i2p

>>17930
Use the Wiby search engine, it indexes old websites and retro neocities sites so you can live on the old web forever. It also has a "surprise me" button for when you want to visit a random website.

>>17932
What's wrong with encrypted email?

>>17974
Current email protocols were designed in the 1960s, where the size of a "byte" was still undetermined and the only thing you could count on was every computer being able to output and parse English characters, so all the protocols are in plaintext. Security and encryption also wasn't a consideration at all in the original protocol.

Since then a bunch of extensions have been added on top of those mail protocols, all of which are horrible because mail servers can and will mangle plaintext, requiring more hacks to be resistant to mangling (take a look at DKIM "relaxed" canonicalization for example).

For encryption to be secure and private, you should:
- encrypt the message body, which is relatively trivial
- encrypt the subject, which probably isn't too hard
- encrypt the sender and recipient, which probably isn't feasible
- encrypt other metadata in the headers, which you can forget about
And that's just implementation. How do you ensure that encryption actually works? Even if your setup is perfect your contacts can still fumble it and end up leaking a whole conversation anyway.

If you want encryption to be effective, it needs to be always on at all times. Allowing non-encrypted modes carries too much risk. Email was never designed to be encrypted and it is very hard to make it airtight. A message protocol designed to use encryption always and everywhere from the get-g

>>16019
>Dick Sword
I think you mean Dick Sawed?

>>17875
Yes, please.

>>17873 (OP) 
>shape rotators and wordcels
>he's still stuck on people that can internally verbalize
You're retarded.
Internal verbalization is the inevitable internalization of rubber duck debugging.
The process of internal verbalization allows the practitioner to route concepts and ideas through alternate sections of the brain, which allows them to get outside of their normal train of thought.
The basis and benefits of internal verbalization are no different than internal visualization.

People who cannot program have feminized minds.
Feminized minds cannot chain logic; therefore, to the feminized mind anything that is not immediately obvious is a leap of logic.

1772246933931-tegaki.png
[Hide] (16.9KB, 500x500)

>>17882
I am retarded, of course, but I can recall that I was unable to make any sense of any of it until I had this insight:  a computer is a machine that executes instructions in exact sequence, exactly as you write them.  I taught myself BASIC on an old, old 8-bit micro and got into the mental habit of thinking of line numbers as being analogous to sequential memory locations and visualizing the instruction pointer going down line by line.

This allowed me to grasp and learn structured programming.  OOP confuses me badly.  I tried to take a course years back.  The instructor was a very enthusiastic young fellow who began by yelling "Everything is an object and objects are everything!  A dog is an object!  A potato is an object!"  As far as I can tell "objects" are little blobs of code containing both instructions and data, sort of like subroutines except for being ugly and inelegant and wasteful of RAM and clock cycles.  I still don't grasp how one object calls another object or communicates with it.  I have decided that my BRANE is too small and smooth for this and took up digital art instead.

>>17890
There's OOP and there's a whole bunch of other features that get associated with OOP but aren't really necessary, as well as implementation details that may confusing if you just want to grasp the concept.

IMO the simplest model is: an object is something that can perform actions in response to messages it receives.

Example: your computer is connected with the zzzchan server. It can send a message to request a page, to submit a post ... Your computer and the server are objects.
Your computer consists of a CPU, RAM, storage drives ... If your CPU wants to read memory, it sends a message to the memory controller. Likewise, if it wants to read from a hard disk it sends a message to the disk controller. Objects are composed of other objects.

Note that a lot of communication involves a request followed by a reply. Incidentally this maps very cleanly to call/return, so message passing can easily be implemented as method calls.

Other features like inheritance, interfaces ... may be useful but are not essential to model something as OO. OO is very general.

beginner_trivium.png
[Hide] (436.7KB, 1351x1054)

The_trivium,_the_liberal_arts_of_logic,_grammar,_and_rhetoric_-Sister_Miriam_Joseph.pdf
(4.2MB)

>>17873 (OP) 
>Van Someren looked at novices learning Prolog [29]. He came to the conclusion that those who were successful had a mechanical understanding of the way that the language implementation – the Prolog virtual machine – worked.
>Mayer expressed the opinion that the formal nature of programming (he called it syntactic knowledge) is the difficult bit [20]. He believed that experts were able to think semantically.
>Thomas Green put forward the notion of cognitive dimensions to characterise programming languages and programming problems [12]. Like Detienne in [11], he rejects the notion that programming languages can be ‘natural’: they are necessarily artificial, formal and meaningless.
Couldn't you solve this through an education program built around the classical trivium? It attempts to teach semantic thinking and improve overall knowledge transfer through the study of a specific grammar (that of a particular language such as English or Latin) and general grammar, Aristotelian logic (which transfers over to writing and speech more easily than symbolic logic), and rhetoric.