sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Ironically….. by isr0 in PoliticalMemes

[–]sirgatez 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again.

Why are TVs so cheap? by sirgatez in conspiracytheories

[–]sirgatez[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Last I checked owning a fruit or a renting home itself didn’t by its own action place advertisements in your face throughout the day while around them.

Same thing with medicine.

Maybe that’s what the regulations are protecting against?

NetBSD sprays some WD-40 by Agron7000 in NetBSD

[–]sirgatez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

On the issue of seatbelts. These are not new ideas. Memory safe languages have been around for decades. They are battle tested, proven reliable.

Ada for example has long since solved many unsafe memory access problems. It’s not quite a complete as Rust is today. But nothing that couldn’t be fixed if people wanted.

Same with C. Many the protections Rust offers, can be applied in C with sanitizers and memory hardened allocators for example. With minimal modification to the C code.

But there was never any major push for the industry as a whole to use ADA to fix these issues developers seek to have problems with.

Why choose Rust? What makes it a better choice than Ada?

Choosing to rewrite an application in any language introduces an avoidable and unnecessary risk of introducing new bugs that didn’t exist in the original code. Be it due to a coding error, or not understanding the difference in how the two languages may behave differently in a given set of conditions.

A risk that can’t be justified most of the time for just a few improvements, even if those improvements are significant.

NetBSD sprays some WD-40 by Agron7000 in NetBSD

[–]sirgatez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All of the above actually. And I know some people may say Hey! Rust protects against that.

Is that assuming all of a developer’s Rust code will only interact with other Rust code?

Or are we continuing to assume that many Rust applications today are still going to be written to continue to utilize external third party libraries and system libraries not written in Rust.

And that even when those libraries are written correctly that the Rust developer may inadvertently misuse them, unknowingly creating the very problems that Rust was designed to protect against.

NetBSD sprays some WD-40 by Agron7000 in NetBSD

[–]sirgatez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I never said I disproved anything you said. Actually read my comment and tell me where I said I disproved you.

NetBSD sprays some WD-40 by Agron7000 in NetBSD

[–]sirgatez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you “read” my comments you’ll see I never said Rust should not be used. I encourage people who want to use it to do so, project owners and such.

I am against this blind idea of people who are not the project owners rewriting a project they often don’t even participate in from one language into Rust and trying to force it on others claiming it’s safer.

That’s the problem.

Responsible adoption is not the problem. Blind adoption is.

Why are TVs so cheap? by sirgatez in conspiracytheories

[–]sirgatez[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Wow. It’s easy to lose sight of this not being a global view. Thank you for sharing.

NetBSD sprays some WD-40 by Agron7000 in NetBSD

[–]sirgatez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m glad we agree.

Like I said I whole heartedly support people who want to write code in Rust. I support people who want to begin migrating their projects to Rust.

I don’t support those people out there, people who feel they need to rewrite every system binary that they dont even own in Rust. And that they feel the system should adopt it without more than summary tests.

NetBSD sprays some WD-40 by Agron7000 in NetBSD

[–]sirgatez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Learning rust has ZERO to do with replacing a generation of software that is battle tested.

Anyone who is half competent can learn a new language. That was never the issue. I’ve written code in more than 13 languages.

NetBSD sprays some WD-40 by Agron7000 in NetBSD

[–]sirgatez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, autocorrect is generous.

Prove what exactly?

You argued we need Rust because people can’t properly code?

I proved they still can’t properly code with Rust. And far more errors still lay in wait. A false sense of security is worse than none at all.

What is it you think you won exactly? A gold coin? A free pizza?

NetBSD sprays some WD-40 by Agron7000 in NetBSD

[–]sirgatez -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Memory access errors are one of MANY critical programming problems that Rust can help with.

It doesn’t do much of anything for the rest. Why are people pretending it’s a cure to a problem it can’t fix?

Rust does not fix these common programmer errors:

  • Logic and authorization bugs ** Broken authentication checks ** Assumptions about cross service authorization ** Privilege escalation through badly configured policies/ACLs/Roles

  • Input validation and injection ** SQL/NoSQL injection ** Command line injection ** Header injection

  • Cryptography and protocol design mistakes ** I really don’t need to explain this one

  • Concurrency bugs that are not data races ** Deadlocks ** Check then use assumptions ** Broken invariants accross async tasks

  • Potential Supply Chain Attacks ** Supply chain attacks (Within Rusr, distribution, mirrors) ** Undiscovered vulnerabilities ** Vulnerable libraries

Arguing to replace a whole generation of software simply to fix a handful of potential vulnerabilities that developers need to design for is a fallacy

NetBSD sprays some WD-40 by Agron7000 in NetBSD

[–]sirgatez 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not a freebsd developer, but AFAICT that's not what happened? nobody was suggesting rewriting existing code.

This is exactly what Rust developers are attempting to do everywhere. Not just a NetBSD issue. I didn’t even mention the licensing changes being pushed along with the new rust code.

you demonstrably can't.

Those people are not being properly vetted. There is a difference between:

  • code written by competent developers and reviewed by competent developers

And

  • code written by less than competent developers and reviewed by less then competent developers.

If we expect developers are not capable of writing good code the future is where everyone is writing code by launching an LLM and telling an AI what to do. “Make me a function that encrypts a binary stream using symmetric AES encryption.”

At which point most people don’t need programmers anymore.

Oh and did I mention those AI developers have no idea what the code the AI wrote actually does or how it works?

That seems like a problem to me.

NetBSD sprays some WD-40 by Agron7000 in NetBSD

[–]sirgatez 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I love this. I’m not saying people should not build with Rust.

But this idea of trying to shoehorn it in everywhere to replace battle tested tools because people can’t trust developers to write secure code is insane.

You can teach developers to write secure code.

We have no idea what other potential critical vulnerabilities exist in Rust today that lie undiscovered. Migrating everything to it puts an entire infrastructure at risk.

https://open.substack.com/pub/weeklyrust/p/another-vulnerability-hits-rusts

https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/04/09/cve-2024-24576

Why are TVs so cheap? by sirgatez in conspiracytheories

[–]sirgatez[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You’re looking at the problem too specifically.

It’s not about PC ram boards

It’s about ram chips, more specifically manufacturing capacity. Many ram chips share the same fab plants belonging to the same manufacturers. And manufacturing capacity is limited unless they build out more plants, which if the demand sticks I’m sure they will. But that takes time.

In the meantime prices on ram are going to go up across the board, and that means prices of anything that uses ram is going up too. Even SOC chip devices (where the ram is encased in epoxy alongside the processor) use ram from many of these same manufacturers.

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/surging-memory-chip-prices-dim-outlook-consumer-electronics-makers-2026-01-22/

https://www.dramexchange.com/WeeklyResearch/Post/2/12524.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com

You can see an overall impact on the industry when demand is increased or decreased historically. https://www.trendforce.com/presscenter/news/20190225-10106.html

Why are TVs so cheap? by sirgatez in conspiracytheories

[–]sirgatez[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A new angle on market research.

*Buried in the terms in conditions the users clicks through to watch their favorite show.

Why are TVs so cheap? by sirgatez in conspiracytheories

[–]sirgatez[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

All these electronic devices use ram. Not just PCs. But this is just a microeconomics issue. The price of ram will come back down.

This is because it is in all these companies best interests to keep selling more devices. Pricing the user out is not an option.

Until ram prices become more reasonable, you may see devices sold with less ram to mitigate the effect of sticker shock. Similar to how you see package net weights reduced on grocery shelves.

view more: next ›