I decided to split the difference, by leaving in the gates, but fusing off the functionality. That way, if I was right about Itanium and what AMD would do, Intel could very quickly get back in the game with x86. As far as I’m concerned, that’s exactly what did happen.

I’m sure he got a massive bonus for this decision, when all the suits realized he was right and he’d saved their asses. /s

As I understand it (and assuming you know what asymmetric keys are)…

It’s about using public/private key pairs and swapping them in wherever you would use a password. Except, passwords are things users can actually remember in their head, and are short enough to be typed in to a UI. Asymmetric keys are neither of these things, so trying to actually implement passkeys means solving this newly-created problem of “how the hell do users manage them” and the tech world seems to be collectively failing to realize that the benefit isn’t worth the cost. That last bit is subjective opinion, of course, but I’ve yet to see any end-users actually be enthusiastic about passkeys.

If that’s still flying over your head, there’s a direct real-world corollary that you’re probably already familiar with, but I haven’t seen mentioned yet: Chip-enabled Credit Cards. Chip cards still use symmetric cryptography, instead of asymmetric, but the “proper” implementation of passkeys, in my mind, would be basically chip cards. The card keeps your public/private key pair on it, with embedded circuitry that allows it to do encryption with the private key, without ever having to expose it. Of course, the problem would be the same as the problem with chip cards in the US, the one that quite nearly killed the existence of them: everyone that wants to support or use passkeys would then need to have a passkey reader, that you plug into when you want to login somewhere. We could probably make a lot of headway on this by just using USB, but that would make passkey cards more complicated, more expensive, and more prone to being damaged over time. Plus, that doesn’t really help people wanting to login to shit with their phones.

Automated certificate lifecycle management is going to be the norm for businesses moving forward.

This seems counter-intuitive to the goal of “improving internet security”. Automation is a double-edged sword. Convenient, sure, but also an attack vector, one where malicious activity is less likely to be noticed, because actual people aren’t involved in tbe process, anymore.

We’ve got ample evidence of this kinda thing with passwords: increasing complexity requirements and lifetime requirements improves security, only up to a point. Push it too far, and it actually ends up DECREASING security, because it encourages bad practices to get around the increased burden of implementation.

The hell is that summary, AI-generated? Why yes, people DO work inside the TikToc building.

Talk about burying the lede, by not elaborating on that title, like the article does. “Stripping” does not mean that teenagers are being “stripped” from the platform, or from feeds, like I figured. It literally means that THEY are stripping. OnlyFans style. For gifts. Jesus fuck.

I think the big reasons for most people boil down to one or both of two things:

A) People having 0 trust in Google. I.E. people do not believe that paying for their services will exempt them from being exploited, so what’s the point?

B) YouTube’s treatment of its content creators. Which are what people actually come to YouTube for. Advertisers and copyright holders (and copyright trolls) get first-class treatment, while the majority of content creators get little to no support for anything.

The hell does “single-capacity” mean here? The article doesn’t specify.

TFG?

An additionap note on what a certificate is, to supplement everyone here who’ve desceibe howbthat’s the missing piece:

A certificate’s first main purpose is being the vehicle vy which the public key is distributed, but additionally it contains information ABOUT the owner. Then the whole thing is digitally signed with the private key (and also a trusted CA’s private key), so that a receiver can validate the authenticity of the cert with the public key.

The “info” in the cert can theoretically be anything, but the most important one is the domain. Your browser knows that visiting google.com is secure because it checks the cert it gets from google.com to see if it states that it owns the google.com domain, and then we trust the root CAs around the world to make clients prove they own that domain, before issung a cert for it.

Unironically, yes. Everything we had 20 years ago, but worse.

I feel like this is the first time I’ve EVER heard of a fine being “all the profits you made from the fraud.” Is this for real? Why the hell is it Razer, of all companies, that’s getting a proper punishment?

So, wait, Mocrosoft is finally giving us a way to fully-disable automatic Windows Updates?

/s

A couple of video streaming services, Hulu, which includes Disney+, Discovery+ and Netflix. That totals up to like $50/mo or so.

Other than that, it’s aaaallllll independent creators, through Twitch or Patreon.

So, what you’re saying is, their current setup is working for you, and their new proposal for lower-orbit satellites isn’t really necessary?

YT Kids avsolutely has ads.

I hate Huffman as much as the next guy, but the $193 million factoid is misleading clickbait nonsense. His actual salary is apparently $400k, the rest is “stock value” or whatever. Reddit is not giving 25% of its yearly revenue to the CEO.

There was another article I read that had a snippet from F5. As I read it, their concern was that they have two release tracks: the paid/subscription track, and the free track. They are actually the same code, but the free track is just 2 releases behind, so the idea is that if you want the “latest and greatest” stuff, you gotta pay. It’s a fairly common strategy in the industry.

So, the concern is that for security vulnerabilities that are not CVEs, info about the vulnerability (and how to exploit it) is out in the wild for two whole releases, before the patch reaches the free-tier users.

Seems like an actively good position on F5’s part, from this angle.

Me, I’m noticing the distinct lack of any information on cost or cost-effectiveness.

Stating outright that you don’t expect the obvious thing that always happens to happen… bro you’re already giving shareholders a reason to say you’re an incompetent manager and replace you with someone that will gut the company for stock growth.