I still don’t understand why it needs to be implemented as part of systemd, and not - say - as a service. Or, if we want to “go with” the law - make it a kernel module, which sounds more impressive (“we are complying at the kernel level!”) but in practice so much easier to opt out of.

I’m fairly confident this image is from before the rise of LLMs (or at least - from before they could solve AoC)

There are two kinds of Linkedin posters - those who are open about being trolls and those who aren’t.

<= makes sense if you start from 1.

That’s a very quaternionphobic list.

XML is good for markup. The problem is that people too often confuse “markup” and “serialization”.

You are assuming here that I know what I want. What if there is no obviously correct answer, and even in the Everett branch that generates the optimal content for the file I’ll still think it can be improved and tell it to destroy the universe?

What if there is no correct answer?

I just use this:

#!/bin/bash

keep_generating=1
while [[ $keep_generating == 1 ]]; do
    dd if=/dev/random of=$1 bs=1 count=$2 status=none
    echo Contents of $1 are:
    cat $1
    echo
    read -p "Try generating again? " -s -n1 answer
    while true; do
        case $answer in
            [Yy] )
                echo
                break
                ;;
            [Nn] )
                keep_generating=0
                break
                ;;
            *)
        esac
        read -s -n1 answer
    done
done

What do you mean by “improving”? This alarming warning appears because Firefox requires permissions. Let us look at the permissions listed there:

1. “User device access”. From the docs, I’d say the browser needs it for rendering?
2. “Download folder read/write access”. This one is obvious - the files you download with your browser go there.
3. “Can access some specific files”. This one, I’ll admit, is a bit cryptic - what files does it need to access? But this one is on Flatpak for making the permission so general.

App permissions should not be about “this app cannot be trusted because it asks for scary scary permissions”. They should be about “take a look at the list of permissions the app requests and determine whether or not it make sense for such an app to need such permissions”.

Nearly every app should have a warning

No. If you put a warning on every app (except for the most trivial ones that don’t actually do anything useful) then the warnings mean nothing. The become something more than ass-covering legal(ish) BS.

I initially read that as medieval management and now I cannot read it any other way.

Not sure I’d chose to use the word “sweet” here…

Of course I know AI? Who do you think wrote this resume?

Wouldn’t that just be a JavaScript compiler?