hackernews (Network) issues
Other tags in Network
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.2,000 issues0 comments
hackernews (Network)
(1) Because it doesn't actually solve the problem.
NewEvery time fossil comes up, I hear this same issue - "why is there no rebase?" And honestly, I've never been able to get this argument.
My biggest problem with running local LLMs on my M4 Max/128GB RAM is the prefill latency.
Biggest problem with httpx I see is authors sanity https://github.com/encode/httpx/discussions/3784 .
There aren't many situations today that make one think: Why doesn't this business have a website?
> IAM can stay MS That's leaving the most critical component still with a US company.
I am very petty about this one bug and have a very old axe to grind that this reminded me of!
Not just the edge router.
(1) Because it doesn't actually solve the problem.
(1) Because it doesn't actually solve the problem. The registry operator for .COM is not historically trustworthy either. (2) Because DNSSEC is a nightmare to deploy. Leaving the IANIX-type operational stuff aside, it doesn't work on all network paths; plenty of middleboxes freak out when they see DNS packets with DNSSEC records in them. People see this and want a best-effort system that uses DNSSEC in the majority cases where it does work, but now you have a downgradable, strippable security protocol. (3) eMudhra is being murdered by the root programs as we speak, and when they're gone all we'll remember them for is as a WebPKI incident. The WebPKI itself will continue to function and nobody will care. That can't happen with .COM or .CO.UK or .IO; there's no accountability for those registry operators at all, let alone transparency logs to track what they're doing.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.