Notices by David Schuetz (darthnull@infosec.exchange)

@ryanc That seems silly, but honestly, I'd probably do the same thing.

I'd worry about the quality of the gold-plated cable, just because they clearly don't understand, or are actively scamming customers.

@ryanc I once had a subnet where all the hosts used movie names. Remotely connecting to “2001” was a real pain.

@ryanc As is “a-pointed-to”

@skinnylatte “OF COURSE the government has alien bodies in storage. They just don’t remember where.”

@ryanc I have a similar frustration with reviews or surveys for in-person service. Especially when they push the “We don't want to see anything less than 5 stars!” angle. (even more so when they say “It’s super important for my JOB that I get a 5-star review”)

I'd do the "1-star on principle" thing if I knew it wouldn't directly hurt the workers. So I just politely smile, say sure, I’ll do the review later, then ignore it.

But they're such bullshit and don't measure a damned thing.

@hrbrmstr Yeah, I never thought "Just run your own instance" was a viable argument to make, just from a logistics standpoint -- look how much work it is for @jerry to keep infosec.exchange running, can you imagine what a NYT or CNN instance would be like?

I'd much rather see trusted companies outsourcing dedicated instances to companies (or groups of companies), giving them editorial and moderation control, but managing servers, balancing, security, etc., for them.

Seems much more viable in the long run, and if they come up with an easy way to move the instance to a compatible provider, then the entire thing becomes even more portable than it is today.

@xabean @ryanc Yet Another.

I’m just spitballing that maybe lighting circuits should move to low voltage DC, maybe directly dimmed but even better digitally controlled. Dunno if it would ever happen. Probably not in my lifetime.

@ryanc I’ve wondered if, in the long term, we start to move to a secondary power standard for built-in lights that’s different from outlets.

OTOH, we can’t even get X10/Insteon/Z-Wave/matter/whatever standardized.

@mybarkingdogs @localzuk The <foreign> I agree with totally. If other characters in the scene are expected to understand it, caption it “[in language] whatever”. If they’re not, then maybe caption it in the spoken language? If a bilingual hearing viewer can get a leg up on the characters, why couldn’t a deaf bilingual viewer?

The <untelligible> I think works when it’s truly background speech, not meant to be heard. Often you can’t even hear it on the soundtrack, so the note helps clarify that deaf viewers aren’t missing anything — you see people speaking but you’re not meant to know what they’re saying.