No idea how I’m supposed to take this ranty blog needlessly interspersed with furry cartoons seriously. But it’s basically just restating (poorly) all the same criticisms and alternatives written about here: https://www.latacora.com/blog/2019/07/16/the-pgp-problem/

The ‘real’ criticisms of PGP are that it’s old, it’s clunky, and it doesn’t support forward secrecy by design. None of that is invalid, but I think the importance of those points depends on the use case and user.

The alternatives given are myriad and complexity and clunkiness are interspersed between dozens of solutions instead of well understood and documented in one tool.

That isn’t a superior approach. I’m not arguing that PGP is perfect, but it’s absolutely asinine to suggest (like this blog and others suggest) that the solution is to use dozens of other solutions with their own problems and with less auditing.

If we’re going to replace PGP, we need to do it properly in a centralized library/toolchain. Breaking up the solution and spreading it around just magnifies the problems.

The “real meaning” of Christmas was getting the pagans on board with Christianity, don’t let anyone lie to you otherwise lol.

Yes.

And that’s why you don’t let them contact the Internet.

Managing IoT risk is an easy no brainer if people bother to try.

Need to remember the bastards to remember to piss on their graves.

Much as I understand your sentiment, I think it’s important to remember the people who did horrible things like McCarthy, and use him as a warning to our younger generations who didn’t see the problems they created.

You know, and the grave pissing.

So that’s like, what, one 22nm fab?

They’ve been shipping them in every GPU for years.

These things are now managed by 10 to 40 custom RISC-V cores developed by Nvidia, depending on chip complexity. Nvidia started to replace its proprietary microcontrollers with RISC-V-based microcontroller cores in 2015, and by now, virtually all of its MCU cores are RISC-V-based, according to an Nvidia slide demonstrated at the RISC-V Summit.

Holy shit it’s Andross.

I can promise you it isn’t the engineers fucking up Boeing. It’s the old macdonald-douglas management / exec team.

Which might make an even better comedy honestly.

Different caller, same question.

The BSDs I’ve used are extremely well documented and cohesive. No basic tools or functions are missing and everything works very simply and together as a whole. The tooling they put forward in the 2000s like DTrace, ZFS, jails, bhyve, were simply unmatched for their capabilities at the time. Having all those tools on a simple and fast OS at the time felt like living in the future.

At the same time, BSD is severely lacking in gaming, graphics performance, compatibility with modern ecosystems, ease of use for less technical users, and generally seems to have stagnated in the last 10-15 or so years. Some chalk that up to leadership, some to the license / corporate interests largely moving to Linux, who knows. But these days I use Linux and while I miss the halcyon days of BSD, I wouldn’t switch back.

It won’t actually work. So yes, this is just a grift until funding dries up.

Haha, wow that was crazy, right everyone? Geeze, why did we even do that thing we did? What was that even? So weird!

Anyway, everything is back to the way it was before! Maybe even better! You can all come back now from the various forks and open alternatives you’ve spent the last 18 months migrating to!

Entangled particles cannot transmit information between the pairs. That would violate information theory and likely causality as well.

Quantum networking is instead focused on using extremely robust encryption that can detect interception using entangled pairs of light particles being transmitted together in the fiber optics.

Edit:

To elaborate on this, let’s talk about how entanglement works.

Let’s say I have two identical bags. Into each of the bags I put one of two balls, one colored red, the other blue. I then mix these bags up like a shell game and hand you one.

Now you can travel anywhere in the universe, and when you open your bag, you know exactly what color you have and what color I have too. No information transmitted, only information inferred.

Now the quantum part is tricky. Basically when you do this experiment with quantum particles, for example generating two particles, one that must be spun up, the other that must be spin down, there’s a lot of science that “proves” the particles spins are each entirely random, implying that somehow when you examine one you force BOTH particles to pick their opposite spins instantaneously across any distance.

Now there are two major explanations for how truly random gets ‘picked’ by the universe.

The first one is Bell’s theorem, or ‘spooky action at a distance’, basically claiming that until you ‘observe’ the particles they both exist in an undetermined state, neither spin up or down, and when you look, the universe forces things to get corrected through some mechanism we don’t understand. Scientists generally prefer this theory because the math is clean and beautiful, and randomness written into the most fundamental levels of the universe fits philosophical ideals nicely (more on that in a minute).

The primary alternative theory is much more mundane, but has huge implications. Basically this theory, called super determinism, claims there is no such thing as true random, and instead the universe has a set of hidden variables determined from the very beginning of the universe. This implies that time is an illusion and everything is fully deterministic across the entire universe. Scientists generally hate this theory because the math is much harder and uglier, and some interpret this to mean there is no free will.

The Disney retcon team will be at your location shortly, please remain where you are and do not resist.

Well realistically it’s up to Samsung and Micron to respond. We could get a price war, which would be grand. But unfortunately we’ll probably instead see price collusion once again and the main competition will effectively settle on a price they’re all making a ton of money at.

Oh wow so that means the consumer cost will be -50%, right? …Right?

Entirely fair.

There are many ML/AI models that are doing a lot more good than harm. The shitty mass market chat bots and art generators are mostly hype and greed.

But Mathematics, physics, healthcare, and many other industries have embraced models that accomplish amazing things humans with similar resources just could not.

It’s a problem of application.

Yup. A seriously intelligent AI we probably wouldn’t have to worry too much about. Morality, and prosocial behavior are logical and safer than the alternative.

But a dumb AI that manages to get too much access is extremely risky.

Well… now the paperclip thought experiment becomes slightly more prescient.