a command printed the answer you need — a token
So, you typed this, and didn't stop here to consider the ramifications of storing tokens unencrypted in a central DB? Did you learn anything from the Windows Recall backlash?
a command printed the answer you need — a token
So, you typed this, and didn't stop here to consider the ramifications of storing tokens unencrypted in a central DB? Did you learn anything from the Windows Recall backlash?
Thanks for the 2am nerd snipe :D
You can do this via git hooks and a script.
Specifically the prepare-commit-msg hook (.git/hooks/prepare-commit-msg). In your script, check for the GIT_REFLOG_ACTION env variable, and check if its value is "revert". If so, you are in a revert, and you can echo/printf out whatever you would like in your template.
Might be a bit more work to get to where you want, but hopefully that points you in the right direction?
A different angle of this was the w11 picture recently I think? Looks really cool.
While human developers bring intuitive understanding
Well.... some do.
Jokes aside, I don't think this is an undiscussed topic, and ultimately, the solution is the same as it as always been: project culture. Project leaders need to insist that code is responsibly written and reviewed, and to make it part of the team culture. AI doesn't change that.
You can AI as hard as you like, you'll probably not manage to replace the really complex tools.
I have just started writing a laser cutter tool, and I tried some suggestions from AI for doing basic matrix transform calculations, and it was completely wrong. So I wouldn't trust it for anything moderately complex. That said, it was fantastic for the UI.
Yes. Separate out each part out. You are currently publishing the equivalent of of a compiled binary. Split it up, and use a script to "compile" it back into the mega shell script.
It means that changes to each file can tracked (and audited) individually, you can conditionally compile bits in or out, and most usefully, you can write tests for the individual components.
Probably gives them a real headache.
A HTTP get request is a few hundred bytes. The response is 28KB. Thats 280x. If a large botnet wanted to denial of service an Anubis protected site, requesting that image could be enough.
Ideally, Anubis should serve as little data as possible until the POW is completed. Caching the POW algorithm (and the image) to a CDN would also mitigate the issue.
Our AI meeting generator has sent you a meeting suggestion with an OP who matches your interests. Don't miss an opportunity - accept requests!
I personally dont think MS did it out of maliciousness, more indifference. They wanted the security benefits, and didn't care what it cost others. But we'll likely never know what their true intent was.
~~I dont know how the bazzite script does it, but any tool that can be executed from userspace that could add keys could just as easily be abused by malware to add their own signing keys, which completely defeats the purpose.~~ Edit: see princessnorah's comments below for more details, but it is a lot more hands on, which prevents malware abusing it.
In an ideal world, Redhat, Canonical, Suse etc could have gotten their verification keys built into every motherboard, but that still cuts out the Arch/Gentoo/flavour-of-the-month crowd. And also increases the risk that a signing key gets leaked and abused by malware.
Its just not an easy problem to solve.
Thats really sad. That kid is learning to get good at the one thing ChatGPT excels at - rewriting words into a different form. Who is going to want to employ someone for that?!
I always felt that schools do a bad job of explaining why plagerism is bad. Its not just that its theft, the really damaging part is that it cheats the student out of their own education. A late or poorly written assignment is far better than a passing chatgpt written assignment, because its still involves learning.
Better is a wild claim.
You're right, gists do seem to update with the static url, however that isnt necessarily better, it now means your gist is effectively under your control, and you can replace the installers with malware packed ones. Operating a software repository/installer requires that people trust you, and that is basically impossible for a no-name dev with no history.
You ideally should be doing checksum checks as well.