I've been saying glossy screens are pure cancer for 20 years and every time I was dismissed as a Luddite that should get with the times.
Now they can sell you "nano texture" at a premium after getting you hooked on functionally terrible displays (they look pretty in the store though).
My worst experience with glossy displays was when I had to perform some work outside on a sunny day and I comically could not see a single thing. It looked like a pure black square. I laughed, packed up and left, and told my boss it wasn't happening.
Unappealing PC matte screens are for old farts who can't appreciate sexy rounded corners and perfectly rendered fonts¹
¹ assuming your display yields over 300dpi
If you are a cool kid, you'll prefer glossy screen any day. Only with deep contrasty blacks will you be able to appreciate your low-contrast macos interface or your low-contrast VScode solarized theme. Occasional gorgeous reflection of stunning you squinting at the screen is just a nice bonus.
But I have to give it to Apple: PC glossy screens are mostly even worse.
Keep in mind that google is primarily a cloud business. That means that they take on a lot more of a risk, as when they are hacked its a them problem vs traditional software where its much more the customer's problem. Security is very much about incentives, and the incentives line up better for google to do the right thing.
It's more about when Google assumed full control of the cloud, the browser, the OS, and everything in between they self-appointed themselves as the unelected standards board of the Internet, and forced everyone else to follow their whims and timelines. Some of which are completely insane.
What are the policies you view as "completely insane"? I have some I disagree with like how they've handled things like Manifest v3 in the browsers, however there are still alternatives like Firefox anyway. However I think in terms of web standards some of the things they have pushed are also helpful. It's been much nicer having a much more consistent web browsing experience with less things like "You must use Internet Explorer on this site".
I feel like web browser and website standards are one of the main areas Google has a lot more control of policies. Is there somewhere else they have much control of for standards?
"To demonstrate how crappy most front door locks are, to boost our company's social media cred we will be leaving drills and a dish of bump keys at the entrance of the neighborhood."
NTLM is often used for more of the underlying technologies, some more secure than others… nthash, net-ntlmv1, net-ntlmv2. There’s a little more complexity here and this is different than the stuff that was out 15 years ago
> this is different than the stuff that was out 15 years ago
This stuff was out at least 10-15 years ago. It’s different from the ancient local ntlm hash cracking everyone used to get admin in high school, yes, but it’s not a novel technique.
You're not wrong, I just want to point out this is net-lmvm1, which is different and more complex. Not functionally meaningfully more complex to an adversary with a few hundred USD (almost typed LSD) in monies. But technically larger tables. That being said I'm in agreement that this has been known problem for 10+ years, and Google is just saying the horses are so long out of the barn their grandchildren are grazing.
The bad guys already know you live in a bad neighborhood and have been closing your front door with a plastic combination lock you got in a Happy Meal 40 years ago. They can already come and go at a whim. This is Google letting you know that your crappy lock is pre-broken to encourage you to upgrade to literally anything else.
It's certainly morally and legally dubious to facilitate attacks on things that others choose to use in within their own private domains, just because you disagree with that choice. But that's how these people roll.
It's been 15 years since this was known broken. If you had children when it was not known broken, they'd be almost old enough to drive in most western nations.
I mean this kindly, but if you're still using net-netlmv1 on anything that matters, you need to pay much more mind to your own business because even the original vendor of it has been telling you to get off that since 1999 because it is not safe.
If you're using it on something that doesn't matter, then it also doesn't matter that rainbow tables any attacker could have already had for a decade are slightly more available.
Probably because this looks more like a Deep Research agent "delving" into the infrastructure -- with a giant list of sources at the end. The Archive is not just a library; it is a service provider.
An article about "infrastructure" that opens up with a dramatic description of a datacenter stuffed into an old church, I would expect more than just generic clipart you'd see in the back half of Wired magazine.
There was a lot of renovation. One day they fired up the pipe organ (which still works) inside the building as well as the servers and the transformer for the street blew up. That was a legendary day.
No regular residential building is set up to host a datacenter off the bat. Even racking more than half a dozen boxes in a given room requires an upgrade.
Most rooms in North America won't be wired for anything over 2.5 kW by default (kitchens and laundry rooms being obvious exceptions).
An electric dryer might pull 5 kW. An electric range ballpark 10 kW. Versus 15 kW per full rack for a fairly tame setup.
And then you've got the problem of dissipating all that heat.
That's super cool!
Can the IA building be accessed by some random people like myself? Next time I'm in SF (who knows when that will be though) I'd very much like visiting it!
Because like most political threads, it will largely consist of people with a crayon-and-coloring-book understanding of geopolitics posting low-effort snipes and trading insults while contributing basically zero to productive discussion.
The most disgusting example of this in recent memory was the Scott Adams death thread, where complimentary comments were being aggressively flagged, and toxic vitriol was being upvoted. It made me finally realize how many joyless, seriously broken people lurk here.
Hey, I'm just joyless, not broken. Also that thread was full of people complimenting his political views, not just his work on Dilbert.
Don't try to sneak in political commentary under the guise of "complimentary comments" and you shouldn't have to deal with as much pushback from people with opposing viewpoints.
That or keep doing so and complaining about others free speech. I'm an anonymous poster on the internet, not a cop.
reply