Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | G4E's comments login

I'm sorry I know this HN and not reddit, but your formulation is so close to the meme "Thinking quickly, Dave constructs a homemade megaphone, using only some string, a squirrel, and a megaphone."

https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/045/029/Scr...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXAOamWIPcM

Here’s another arrow for your quiver.


Unless it has been recently standardized it's not valid C, it's a GNU extension.


You should check out the lpc8N04 from NXP then ;)


This is interesting but clearly not intended for security/cryptographic applications... no security hardening, no hardware cryptography, and it's also not available in a card form factor according to the datasheet.


I'm sorry, but that's a really narrow minded take. There are a lot of good reasons to have IDA or Ghidra installed on your computer, if only for fun and learning reverse-engineering. This should NOT prevent you to play others games.

( To everybody reading this : if you like computer and puzzles, you should absolutly try to reverse-engineer a simple binary at least once. It's fun !)


If you installed it to learn RE and the game refuses to run because of it, now you have a project to try your skills on.


I assume this is a joke, but still... I have had Ghidra open in the background for a while (weeks), as I worked on some IoT projects for my cats. While I'm biased and I hold some unpopular opinions... I think not just me, but most people definitely would get offended if suddenly some game would refuse to start and/or ban online account.

Honestly, banning players because they have RE tools feels like a generally counter-productive idea. Best-case scenario is that it'll require an engineer who was actually going to RE game files to get another account, stalling them very briefly. Worst-case scenario is getting someone with technical skills and free time pissed off enough to actually start messing with the game (potentially, in a less respectful way than your average cheat developer might - looking for game-breaking exploits than just automating things or providing extra information to the player), even if they didn't mean to.


I have tried quite a lot of alternative discord clients, my favorite is still Abaddon[0]. It works great, and its UI is fonctionnal enough for my needs.

[0] https://github.com/uowuo/abaddon


There is a pretty good[0] movie about that. They'll be fine :)

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_Run


stdint.h defining the fixed width integer is part of C99. I wouldn't call that recent !

https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/std...


You need to understand the timescales of C.

C89 (aka ANSI C) was "standard" C for years. C99 was released, and largely ignored until the mid-2000's, and then gradually began to grow. As of about 2015, C99 was probably the "standard" C dialect, but there is still a lot of C89 out there, especially where you have niche toolchains.

I wouldn't seriously consider C11 unless you're certain that the toolchain supports it, and there's some feature that you really need. And that's pretty unlikely.


Yeah because as everybody knows the steamdeck, which fits exactly your description, was a huge failure.

/s.


Lol. Steam deck is such a huge W - they even recently started the "Valve Certified Refurbished" program to satisfy the high demand. https://store.steampowered.com/sale/steamdeckrefurbished


Thank you for your response. You are right that my phrasing implied a bit too much conspiracy. That was not really my intention, but I was curious to have experts views on those hypothetis.



I honestly have no idea whether you are supporting what was said with that link, or objecting to it.

Anyway, I was talking about being inquiring. When you look at that list, surely, some questions do rise. “Why should I worry about all of that to read three paragraphs of text on some webpage?” “Which actions have made it so?” “What should be done to fix it?” Right?


I am objecting to what you are saying. It's terrible advice and an obtuse vision of the complexity of software nowadays, especially web browser.

Yes, a 3 months old release of chrome is not suited to use day to day. I link all the known and published CVE on chrome, but if you want to nickpick you could "just" check those which start with 2023-*.


OK. Shouldn't we ask questions about real or perceived “complexity of software nowadays”?

Why does displaying a piece of information that would fit onto a single 80×25 text mode screen absolutely require exposing to a third party a potentially (and, as mentioned, effectively) vulnerable WebHID functionality (which is non-standard, and seemingly only exists to make ChromeOS less mediocre operating system), various WebGL libraries and wrappers, ever-growing Javascript and CSS engines, and thousands of other entities? Someone who grants the whole internet access to local service ports by not using a firewall is considered a fool, but at the same time “non-foolish” “security conscious” people start their browsers, and see no problem in all the services embedded in them.

Isn't relying on a constant (and never ending) stream of updates from white knights in the holy castle in the manner you describe just a subscription model without a defined price?

Who controls the Web? Is controlling the web client enough for that? What benefits the endless rat race might give to them?

How come there's a hidden dependence on corporate products and their support cycles even in the process of using seemingly “open” technologies, say, for government sites and services? Is “I have no idea, my code absolutely requires latest libraries” a valid excuse?

Can mindless acceptance and circular finger-pointing between web developers, library authors, browser developers, and users solve these problems? What needs to be done?


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

Search: