Posts by chrysn@chaos.social
(DIR) Post #AXNttxgwnZ7Z2TBZ8C by chrysn@chaos.social
2023-07-05T08:07:59Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@cwebber If this makes you an outlier, so am I. Oldest file I know I created is dated April 1997. (Sadly, much data was lost when carelessly copying over a disk in 2003, which destroyed change times).I've lost count of how many online services that I used have shut down since then.
(DIR) Post #AYTqd1IGyDlV4r6eMi by chrysn@chaos.social
2023-08-07T07:29:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Codeberg Nice: that means that 1.20 is coming :-)Right now I still prefer read-write deploy keys, for they can be limited to one repo.
(DIR) Post #AYYN9Wo9JM3BFUOuyO by chrysn@chaos.social
2023-08-09T11:51:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@webmink @EU_Commission I think my #IETF work could be eligible, but the scope is unclear to me -- on the one hand the type-of-contributions description reads like the "boring" everyday stuff (WG chairing, reviewing documents) is part of the plan, but the application form looks very project centric, as do the times (the "long term" parts are 6mo; that'd have worked for most of RFC9290, but that was the fastest doc I ever contributed to).Can you help me reconcile those?
(DIR) Post #AbnNcYRqfBoPb75Xlo by chrysn@chaos.social
2023-11-14T11:15:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@bfdi Als Österreicher musste ich das zweimal lesen, um sicher zu sein, dass das nicht ironisch gemeint ist. (Hier gilt die DSGVO zwar auch für Behörden, ist aber nicht strafbewehrt).
(DIR) Post #Ac6JSMN0Y4iIrVXvYO by chrysn@chaos.social
2023-11-23T14:28:39Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@tschaefer That's curious: I've seen a similar talk at IETF118 V6OPS from Jen Linkova <https://youtu.be/ABw_QqAM2Rg?feature=shared&t=6249>, and the takeaway there was not to even bother with DNS64 (because DNSSEC and because DoH), and that 108 using devices could do the DNS64 themselves from the PREF64 information (or, I'd assume, fall back to looping through CLAT instead of the application seeing the NAT64 address).
(DIR) Post #Acaa2lgIF13IOczL96 by chrysn@chaos.social
2023-12-07T11:29:55Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@thejpster I'm conflicted about this. Sure it's nice ergonomics, but `cstr!(...)` wasn't that bad, and it feels like it's giving a foreign language construct more weight in the language than it should have. Yeah it's used widely, but so is `hexlit!(...)`, and where do we stop.
(DIR) Post #AcbtharDTthozFEpDk by chrysn@chaos.social
2023-12-08T20:05:16Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
Students at the UGent Zeus WPI are successfully reverse engineering #ESP32 radio, to the point where they can now send and receive WiFi packets. This is a major step towards making that platform useful for fully #FLOSS #embedded projects. If you use that platform, please consider supporting them!Thanks Zeus team for doing this, and thanks @NGIZero for funding it!<https://zeus.ugent.be/blog/23-24/open-source-esp32-wifi-mac/>
(DIR) Post #Acw57Kolpvecuu5PaC by chrysn@chaos.social
2023-12-18T13:25:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
The Austrian telecom regulator's FAQ state that #ISP|s are required to provide public IP addresses on request due to #EU regulation, but that that regulation only covers IPv4 (without pointing to the precise regulation).Whom can I poke so that regulation gets updated to #IPv6?https://www.rtr.at/TKP/was_wir_tun/telekommunikation/konsumentenservice/faq/FAQ_oeffentliche_IP-adresse.de.html
(DIR) Post #AoGapOhSG3CtdGDrBA by chrysn@chaos.social
2024-11-21T11:55:14Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@aral Are Mementos (RFC7089) still a thing? Sounds a bit like the same thing but being more explicit about what happens.
(DIR) Post #AvqA80RfhzQ0TjeWVE by chrysn@chaos.social
2025-06-28T13:44:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@giacomo At least with Rust, there's the LLVM-free (?) Cranelift back-end.
(DIR) Post #AwBWXb8OzMVqkuVoOW by chrysn@chaos.social
2025-07-16T08:10:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@bortzmeyer Do those connections go up high enough to have an official French fediverse instance that could host, say, @academie@fr, and beat the pope to it? (cf. https://chaos.social/@chrysn/114477389021336262)
(DIR) Post #AwBbdta5oia7TWHp6e by chrysn@chaos.social
2025-05-09T10:25:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mcr314 At least he is in the rather unique position to set a fediverse TXT records to claim a full TLD as an instance.
(DIR) Post #AzPRaVsaUBbyodyEGO by chrysn@chaos.social
2025-10-20T18:57:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@musicmatze So what, it's just a branch rename, as has happened in many projects.As long as they take care of any GitHub fallout (autoclosed PRs for lack of target) ... for a user in git, that's well managable.
(DIR) Post #AzPUNVAq67ooj1zkDQ by chrysn@chaos.social
2025-10-20T19:29:03Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@musicmatze https://xkcd.com/1172/ ;-)More seriously: Given how widespread the new default is by now, at some point there's a break-even between breakage from the change and users whose muscle memory needs constant overwriting forcing `master` instead of `main`, esp. when other ma- branches defeat tab complete. That break-even may just as well be now-ish.
(DIR) Post #AzPWbozLQMKi8qZewi by chrysn@chaos.social
2025-10-20T19:54:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@musicmatze `ls --sort time | head -n100 | xargs -n1 sh -c 'cat $0/.git/HEAD' | sort | uniq -c` gives me 45 main and 23 master for projects I touch regularly, and that ratio only gets stronger the less I extend this to ages old projects.Looks pretty default to me, and the technical git default comes with a big yellow warning "hint: Using 'master' as the name for the initial branch. This default branch name is subject to change.".
(DIR) Post #B06LzSFDLai7ja4W5A by chrysn@chaos.social
2025-11-10T08:06:29Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@giacomo @daniel @lorenzo IETF protocol specs regularly include sections with privacy considerations just like security considerations. These point out such problems and guide implementers to get them right (eg. to only use 0RTT if user tracking is of no concern because cookies would be on anyway). If a browser implements that wrong, it's for other lacks but awareness.
(DIR) Post #B06LzTU8jaFBaA3wzA by chrysn@chaos.social
2025-11-10T08:07:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@giacomo @daniel @lorenzo I did not review that particular spec, but for those I do, I'd raise hell before publication as #IETF if such problems were unaddressed, and know many other reviewers who would do the same.
(DIR) Post #B06X8vSfBhfOS156X2 by chrysn@chaos.social
2025-11-10T12:52:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@giacomo If users use a browser that does not help them protect their privacy, it's a personal, or market, or regulation failure.The technical concern is not new to QUIC: even TLS 1.2 had resumption options with similar properties, and privacy aware browsers such as Tor browser have limited them for ages <https://gitlab.torproject.org/legacy/trac/-/issues/4099>.I've seen solo participants' concerns been addressed in documents backed by 100k employee companies. IETF is certainly not infallible, but generally, review works.
(DIR) Post #B10FmluQv1Vv5giF1c by chrysn@chaos.social
2025-12-07T07:05:19Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@m0xEE It is still true; so far, nobody has found it to be bad enough to add another auth source.As for browsing, you get quite far even without a browser: cargo info even works offline with what is cached.
(DIR) Post #B10Ms076EaQKGu4sW8 by chrysn@chaos.social
2025-12-07T12:10:53Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@m0xEE Ouch, it does indeed look terrible that way.I admit that I've built things that just wouldn't show anything else but that, but in my defense, those are not DB frontends, but statically served pages where the next alternative is to run as an application instead.