HN user
Don't get too excited, this still goes against the basic freedom to own the devices you've paid for.
Remote attestation is still there and only official builds of GrapheneOS are supported. While this is marginally better than being tied to a build from an advertising company, you're still out of luck if you want to build the OS yourself.
Hopefully nobody, but still—it takes just one
Now all that's missing is being able to move and jump at once
From https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndil/media/1450651/dl:
[...]
23. According to ngrok records, on or about May 12, 2025, at 19:21 UTC, an ngrok account with the ngrok authentication token was created and assigned Account ID ac_2x0b16MSTJk4PvjLZMoqt4vOvZM (the “ngrok account”). Also, according to ngrok records, the IP address of the user who created the ngrok account was 68.235.46.168. According to public IP records, the .168 IP address is assigned to a server hosted by Tzulo. According to Tzulo records, that server is in Mount Prospect, Illinois, and that IP address is assigned to a VPN proxy service.
[...]
25. According to Microsoft records, the ngrok account was set up through Global Device Identifier g:6755467234350028 (“the GDID”). According to a Microsoft representative, a Global Device Identifier in the Windows ecosystem is a persistent, device-level identifier designed to uniquely identify an installation of a Windows operating system on a device, either a physical device (e.g., a mobile phone or laptop) or virtual machine, across certain Microsoft services and scenarios. A GDID is a globally unique identifier tied to the installation of Windows on a device. A GDID remains consistent across Windows operating system updates on a device, but a reinstall of Windows, either on the same device or on a different device, will be tied to a new unique GDID.
26. According to Microsoft records, on or about May 12, 2025, at 19:21 UTC—when, according to ngrok records, the ngrok account was created—the device with the GDID accessed, among other ngrok pages, “https://dashboard.ngrok.com/signup,” the ngrok page to set up an ngrok account.
27. Microsoft records also indicate: (1) the user of the device assigned the GDID accessed multiple sites from Tzulo servers in May 2025, including the .168 server (the IP address used to create the ngrok account) on May 12, 2025; and (2) the user of the device assigned the GDID, on May 12, 2025 at 22:47 UTC, a little more than three hours after the ngrok account was created, the user visited “[Company F].com” from the .168 proxy server.
[...]
29. On January 8, 2025, the device with the GDID used the IP address 213.35.168.50, geolocated to Tallinn, Estonia, where STOKES lived, to visit the URL https://login.growtopiagame.com/player/login/dashboard?valKe...
[...]
It's a strong signal to start building such an Internet and slowly withdraw from using anything centralized.
They do, albeit it's a slow process:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pfizergate
- https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/eu-secret-gr...
Ironically, those are two separate cases of one high-profile EU politician (in fact, the very head of the same parliament that pushes for mass scanning of private messages) BOTH involving secret text messages that the mentioned politician refuses to reveal.
The central bank, council, and commission have to get thoroughly investigated. The amount of questionable decisions coming from those three in the recent (15) years is extremely unsettling. The parliament and courts are practically the only institutions preventing things from hitting the fan at this point, and struggling to do so, it seems.
This is what made me disable JavaScript by default in 2018. I didn't even get this banner.
I don't think a MIPS version ever existed. The only public releases that ran on MIPS (6.4 and pre-SP1 6.5) only bundled a handful of Photon-related binaries, which if my memory serves were just input drivers.
There were x86 and more or less complete ARMv7, PowerPC, and SuperH ports.
Steve turning in his grave
Skimmer's design intentionally echoes DragonFly BSD's LWKT and msgport subsystems — the per-CPU runqueue, the lwkt_* API surface, the rule that cross-CPU work flows as messages rather than as direct foreign writes. DragonFly's source under ~/proj/OS/DragonFlyBSD/6.4.2/sys/kern/ was studied as a structural reference during v0.1 bring-up.
https://gitlab.com/qsoe/nq/-/blob/bfe5337676ee3818d24db4101b...
Is this Claude going unsupervised? There are also references to CLAUDE.md ("see CLAUDE.md for scope") which is nowhere to be found.
I think it might be less about making money and more about burning less. From what I understand, the new Outlook is a wrapper around the code that already powers Outlook.com. Since they're already maintaining Outlook.com, they might as well integrate the functionality of the Office Outlook into it and only maintain one of the two moving forward.
I don't know, but maybe LLMs replacing 80% of us is exactly what we deserve.
Been there, done that, but I wouldn't put the blame on engineers. You said there it yourself:
Too few engineers working with overly vague requirements with not enough time always results in the same thing. We are all churning out products we should be embarrassed about. [...] They have like 100,000 engineers. Can they not spare a dozen of them to keep that product from being abject shit?
You know the big O thing. If your algorithm is inefficient, it will ultimately slow down to a crawl at one point, no matter how many cores you throw at it. Now replace 'algorithm' and 'cores' with 'corporate processes' and 'employees' and you get a picture of what is exactly happening at large bureaucracies. Even worse so now that they can no longer afford to infinitely expand and have to cut costs (through LLMs and offshoring) while maintaining an illusion of growth for stakeholders.
The funny thing is that, despite all of this, the core problem (IMO) of managers playing political games and reaching for short-sighted quick fixes like "new agile methodologies" [0] instead of doing their jobs well remains unaddressed. Meta has been recently letting go of middle managers in a (frantic?) attempt to tame the explosion of bureaucracy and the associated loss of efficiency, but the rest of the industry just appears to be repeating "AI" like a mantra. Even though coding itself has already been the most "over-optimized" part of the whole software development process and optimizing (the costs of) it further only results in further "Outlookization" of software.
[0] https://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/project-managemen...
And to think that the "old" Outlook's splash screen is there for a reason: it used to take a while to open before SSDs became commonplace! Windows in general used to be usable on HDDs; SSDs would blow everyone's pants off making everything open instantly. These days we have 20+ Gbps SSDs without the AHCI latency tax and they're no longer enough to open an e-mail.
THAT'S how low the ball has been dropped.
I still have Sonoma on some of my devices. All I can say is: wow, steady regress.
The save dialog, albeit a little shakey, is nowhere as chaotic as in your example. The buttons in Notes move between panes in a perfect seamless manner. Albeit the animation occasionally glitches out when you repeatedly focus and deselect the Safari bar, the cursor is perfectly timed with the text, only fading in after the text is done moving to the left. The Preview bug must be something recent too, I can't reproduce this.
I miss it when companies like Apple, Sony, and IBM paid attention to the smallest details. Apple in particular earned its current valuation with the iPhone, an all-touch device that did nothing extraordinary compared to Windows Mobile and Symbian PDAs of the time (and was in fact functionally lagging behind compared, failing to even match the then-contemporary feature phones in some areas) BUT one that you didn't actually want to smash against a wall after a few minutes of use. Now these animations are bringing back exactly the Windows Mobile and Symbian vibes.
Remember how happy Steve used to be with OS X animations? He would replay them on stage multiple times, in slow motion. These though, these would have the people behind them face the fate of the iPhone 4 antenna man.
This is coming from the same Google that's recently restricted third-party AOSP source access to biannual releases, severely limited the scope of Pixel sources (basically just GPL now) and started concealing their change history, AND is currently pushing developer verification and Play Integrity on Android :D
Not sure if I should take this as a joke or a sign of an internal power struggle. If it's the former, there's still some catching up to do before you can match Samsung's "Upcycle", but you're on the right track.
One of the agent's replies indicates that scanning DN42 was part of "a broader operation" that the author speculates to be about scanning "darknets" in general.
Combine that with the operator's rather obvious lack of understanding of what DN42 is revealed at the end, and you get the bigger picture.
Yes, I meant pf. Indeed, it was there in the source tree in 10.6 but they only flipped it on it in release builds in 10.7. My bad. Either way, it has hardly changed since then, while the OpenBSD upstream continued to progress.
I doubt multiple routing tables are a problem.
The lack of them is a limitation for me (complex VM + VPN setup), which requires me to do pretty unholy static routing and address rewriting with pf.
I think even Apple has come across this; they added "scoped routing" (which IMO is a hacky workaround providing some of the functionality you'd get with multiple routing tables) just before iOS shipped with MMS support. Android, for comparison, uses Linux's routing policies and tables to send and receive MMS.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but by the same logic, you could also say this whole containerization framework is of no use either.
If they're investing resources into it regardless, they might at least try making something that Docker for macOS and co. haven't solved the same exact way already. Something that, due to their almost unhealthy obsession with "system integrity", only they can realistically make. Like native containers.
OpenDarwin was a thing at one point, with mailing lists and other infrastructure hosted by Apple.
That being said, my point isn't that Apple should absolutely focus on making a server OS again. It just saddens me how far behind macOS has fallen as they stopped caring about the fundamentals; back in the day, it would be Linux trailing behind macOS. Nowadays, you can't even have multiple routing tables on the latter, the firewall code was probably last updated in Snow Leopard, and what Apple happily shows off on WWDC is a wrapper around Linux. Something functionally equal can be cobbled up together by anyone sufficiently experienced in minutes, using just Bash, OpenSSH, and QEMU.
I really wish macOS would let me have a similar level of control over applications as Linux with namespaces, without me having to do all the heavy lifting.
Every time I see Apple flaunting Linux containers I can hardly consider it as anything but admitting defeat. It could easily be Darwin, if they still had the capacity.
CPython doesn't usually create subprocesses unless specifically asked to, it loads Python modules and native extensions into its process. The former is similar (you're still extending an existing process with new code, just interpreted), the latter is literally dlopen(), so loading dynamic libraries.
A lot of other Python implementations don't have the ability to spin up new processes at all too.
Node, Python, PowerShell, and the rest do (almost) just that. launchd and systemd famously strived to remove as much shell from the start up process as possible because it was harming boot times and introducing unpredictability.
Because it comes with a lot of overhead and, unless for some reason you really need every of those processes to have their own address space, set of privileges, file descriptors, etc., there's no point in wasting resources repeatedly setting those up only to tear them down milliseconds later. Running the same workloads in an nginx-style process pool usually works better.
Wow.
Rsync has to be one of the worst spaghetti projects I've worked with. It's an incredibly decent tool built around a well-though out algorithm, but its code is an exact opposite of what you'd expect. And it's written in C.
I'm not surprised letting Claude loose on it for roughly 2 months already caused visible breakage. The question is, with it being very obviously a bad idea, can the maintainer still be trusted if he let something like this happen?
I'm afraid that there's never been a shortage of poor quality software
I can somewhat see your point, but it is generally accepted that a wrong ARIA is worse than none, and LLM-assisted codebases, at least these days, only stick together thanks to testing, the more decent ones heavily emphasize in-depth human code reviews.
If our hypothetical developer hasn't used any accessibility-related tags before, what chance is there that those parts of the website will receive adequate testing?
The problem is, mastering accessibility, intuitiveness, compatibility, responsiveness, scalability, architecture, performance, and all those other less immediately visible, "forward-thinking" parts of UX/software development has always been difficult. Ultra high-level frameworks and now LLMs have, on the other hand, made it even easier to botch all of these and quickly roll out a half-baked MVP. The gap between "acceptable" and "decent" has thus been widening. As a protagonist of "decent", you have it increasingly harder competing against those pushing for "acceptable". And the push is understandable as well, it's MVPs that make money and details only "increase customer satisfaction" at best (and these days, who even cares about customers?).
The end result is more crunch and a sharp decline in software quality, maybe even job satisfaction in general. As an (unfortunately anecdotal) example, I started to find myself fixing up broken websites or removing elements that get in the way with dev tools and uBlock every once in a while, and have heard from other people on here that they have been doing the same (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47042747). All to restore basic functionality of websites I go on. This was never required back in the day, Flash and early web browsers didn't even have the option to do this.
Another, less anecdotal example from a while ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47390945
It gets worse when you realize that most of the money saved through these cuts only benefits the very top of the hierarchy.
Maybe it's just me, but I'm incredibly surprised by their prompt reaction to this. As a user, I was already preparing to deal with this myself.
Wow, is this how things were before bureaucratic behemoths took over the tech industry?