quakershake

I've also noticed that there are gems listed on rubygems.org that have dates in the past relative to the gem contents.

Nevermind - its the date in the gem spec

Anyone know why the date listed for a gem listed on rubygems.org wouldn't match the contents of the gem? I am guessing possible timezone differences. But some clarification would be nice.

For example:

  Listed for bundler -v 1.11.2 - December 16, 2015 (257 KB)

  $ tar tvf bundler-1.11.2.gem 
  -r--r--r--  0 wheel  wheel    2161 Dec 15 19:12 metadata.gz
  -r--r--r--  0 wheel  wheel  257198 Dec 15 19:12 data.tar.gz
  -r--r--r--  0 wheel  wheel     267 Dec 15 19:12 checksums.yaml.gz

Hmm..competing browsers, phone platforms, javascript engines..I'm sure google didn't take this into consideration. But yeah Mozilla is large enough to have their own MSoC.

Why should we care about what the POTUS has to say about internet freedom? It's not like the POTUS or politicians in general have a good track record of trustworthiness.

IMO, anytime officials are talking about it, they are guaranteed to screw it up.

I am actually surprised that they aren't talking more about having it be $Free and under government control. Maybe that is step 2.

Either way, the less authority the ISPs and the Government have over your network traffic the better.

I'm voting blue.

lol

Given that you're a Linux user, you should be familiar with Einstein's definition of insanity. :P

+1 - I just don't see any real solution to the problem. I do think that because Linux is more widely used it is running into the same issues Microsoft has/had where the vulnerabilities are more widely exploitable.

Diversity definitely has it's benefits.

"There are loads of tools that should have never been implemented in C/C++ in the first place (SSH, Make, APT, etc.). I'd say the best idea is to port a lot of these code bases to languages like Go or Rust maybe, but if that's not feasible for some reason, at least write some unit tests and do static code analysis."

This is the exact problem with everything today. Languages do not make bugs, people do. If that weren't the case, there wouldn't be bugs is python/ruby/shell/etc.

Rewriting something is only guaranteeing that more bugs be created initially. And all the time and effort gets you..what? The same thing that was just patching in a different language. Awesome...

You should be familiar with "bikeshed" being a freebsd user..

No. As far I as I know it is not a fork. Forking b/c of an overreaction due to a "bug" that was patched as soon as it was reported is asinine.

Agreed. Misuse is a problem. However sometimes being too flexible opens itself up to unintended misuse.

It seems as if though foss is so reliable that people start to act entitled when shit hits the fan. Software has never been problem free and never will.

I'm just glad I haven't seen a libreBash or some other lame fork instead of just adding more eyes to the existing functioning project.

Anyone who bashes open source code for bugs is an idiot. Maybe the "community" should start auditing code instead of blogging and tweeting about how awful things are. This functionality has been around for so long it is generational.

+1 to the person(s) responsible for finding this.

Everyone complaining should stfu

I think tech "work place suck" can also come from experience. Things are no longer shiny, unexplored, or hacky. Just old hat stuff that needs to get done and not that interesting. And sometimes you just get tired of the FOTM languages that come out. It's a rat race that causes burnout.