Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | fofoni's commentslogin

What's the difference between this and https://www.passwordstore.org/ ?


I like pass, and I use it. But, I don't actually use GPG/PGP otherwise, and trying to manage your passwords then gets you into managing a PGP key as well, a hassle I don't really want out of a password manager.


It doesn't seem much hassle to me, and does seem worth the assurance. I'd have expected people to be using PGP to check distribution signatures.


There are a lot of answers to that.

Pass was built by Jason Donenfield (zx2c4) who is competent enough to have also built WireGuard and survived the resulting years of uh, review by the Linux kernel team.

The parts of pass I've actually read (which is admittedly not all of it) are designed in a way that feels like the author understands both the large problem (password management) and lots of little implementation details to get there correctly.

One thing I particularly like is how pass gets random passwords. Unlike this tool 'pass' will generate you a strong random password, optionally constrained however you please. The insight is that the CSPRNG is cheap, so you shouldn't put any work into conserving random numbers by doing fancy algorithmic stuff. Instead pass consumes bytes from the CSPRNG (/dev/urandom) and just discards all the ones that aren't allowed in your password. So e.g. if you ask for a numeric password and 'pass' reads the byte 0x8F from the CSPRNG, it doesn't try to massage that into a numeral, it just discards it and fetches another byte until it gets one in the range 0x30 to 0x39. This inefficiency is actually totally fine and makes it easy to verify that the code is correct, which is much more important than slightly reducing the workload of the CSPRNG.

tl;dr I would (and do) trust pass but not this program.


Thanks for the insights, I used to use gopass but never realized that pass itself was made by the same guy who made WireGuard. I also trust Bitwarden however and I've found it a better overall manager due to it being much more convenient.


I've touched my face while testing the app way more than I would have if I weren't aware of the app at all.


I'd say a big part of that is just you're more aware that your doing it. I bet the total count is similar.


Hi, I'm a maths student in Brazil myself :) I'll answer in english, though, since I'm not sure about the HN policy on comments in foreign languages.

Can I ask you which university you're from? I'm not aware of many universities besides UFRJ which offer an "Applied Maths" degree.

About real analysis, I took the summer course in IMPA, an I used only Elon's books. I really like them (for the books themselves, not just because they're in portuguese). There are two: the thick one: "Curso de Análise", and the thin, silver one: "Análise Real" (I like to call them Elão and Elinho :)). Elão is very detailed and has lots of examples, but mentions topics which may be too specific and not covered in your course. Elinho is much more terse, and great if you need a quick summary.

I would also consider reading David Bressod's "A Radical Approach to Real Analysis". It's an awesome book, which mentions historical motivations for everything, and has a really different approach to teaching analysis (it will certainly help you learn analysis, but might not help too much in your course, since it's quite non-traditional).

If you're not used to proof techniques, I highly recommend Keith Devlin's "Introduction to Mathematical Thinking".

About strategies to studying analysis: examples. I think it's really important to work out lots of examples by hand all the time. Every time you read a definition in your textbook, whatever it is, close the book and try to think of some examples of mathematical objects which satisfy the definition. When you're done, try to think of other examples which differ significantly from the ones you came up with before. When you open your book again, if the author presents examples, read them with attention. TLDR: as the other comments have made it very clear, you shouldn't be reading an analysis book without a pencil on your hand; you should feel active, not passive, while studying analysis.

Finally, I don't know about any youtube channels that could help you with an analysis course, but you should be aware of Mathematics.StackExchange. It's a great Q&A website/community; I've asked a lot of questions there while studying for my undergrad courses.

Wish you the best in your course and you maths career :)


Thanks, fofoni! I am actually doing a double degree in Law and Applied Mathematics at FGV, Rio de Janeiro. (I know, Law & Applied Math is weird rsrs). Maybe we should hang out someday. My email is p.delfino01 at gmail dot com, drop me an email!


Law+Math degree is definitely on the weirder side of things I've heard (and I endorsed Oxford's joint CS and Philosophy). But in that case I may allow myself to make an equally far stretch connecting something lawyerly with real analysis (that isn't about RA utility in data science for law enforcement). About how model theory shapes logic. It is advanced (practically algebraic geometry now) and not really related any more, but the basic issue came from set theory and analysis: models of infinitesimals, like in Keisler books. Since then it came to encompass and classify all logic-based mathematics (not every creative reasoning in mathematics is logical! though papers always are) and more exotic logics such as the „default logic” sometimes employed by lawyers.

It's Bressoud BTW, I endorse that too. Along with TW Körner „Companion to Analysis: A First Second and Second First Course” with Lang or Zorich as base. I wouldn't be as insistent on pencil at all times if it were to prevent broader reading or just expanded skimming.


To piggy back on this, Devlin has an excellent free course on Coursera roughly following the textbook.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: