Identification != Authentication

As obvious as this sounds, I’ve learned over the years that most people don’t understand what it means exactly.

If you use HTTPS, the attacker can still see what websites you connect to, they just can’t see what you are sending or receiving. So basically they can steal your browsing history, which defeats the purpose of a commercial VPN for many users.

This is blatantly false. They can see IP addresses and ports of you connect to from IP packets, and hostnames from TLS negotiation phase (and DNS requests if you don’t use custom DNS settings). HTTP data is fully encrypted when using HTTPS.

If exposing hostnames and IP addresses is dangerous, chances are that establishing a VPN connection is as dangerous.

Control of the DHCP server in the victim’s network is required for the attack to work.

This is not a VPN vulnerability, but a lower level networking setup manipulation that negates naive VPN setups by instructing your OS to send traffic outside of VPN tunnel.

In conclusion, if your VPN setup doesn’t include routing guards or an indirection layer, ISP controlled routers and public WiFis will make you drop out of the tunnel now that there’s a simple video instruction out there.

Please correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t this allow one to represent virtually any resource as a mail inbox/outbox with access through a generic mail app?

I’m working with a specialized healthcare company right now, and this looks like a way to represent patient treatments data as an intuitive timeline of messages. With a local offline cache in case of outages. Security of local workstations is a weak point of course, but when is it not…

In the dark, with the other side obscured (or just broken), you don’t want the blinker to actively prompt you to come to a wrong conclusion.

It’s better to see a blinking light and think “I don’t see enough, gotta slow down” than see a blinking arrow and potentially not even realize it’s a turn signal.

Don’t compare someone’s highlight reel to your behind the scenes.

I once convinced someone that they are actually doing a great job by sharing my struggles and showing that they are not an impostor. They now outshine me and will go to even greater heights.

And while that one episode of dealing with burnout and impostor syndrome is a drop in the ocean of their persistence, it’s a great illustration to how misleading comparison to others is.

PS: Also, if you have ADHD, you’re nearsighted in time. That doesn’t only mean “you can’t plan well”, it means “your life looks like a hazy blob, where others see a complex scenery”. And that can be devastating when doing a comparison. Be kind to yourself, be kind to others.

Welcome to the world of SPAs. Where every little thing needs its own application.

Damn it, we even have HTML tags that are impossible to employ in their entirety without use of JavaScript. <dialog> is infuriating and is literally two attributes away from not needing JavaScript.

Except on Chrome. Dialog is broken on Chrome and you will have to clean up with JavaScript after chrome’s own half assed implementation.

Sorry, but you don’t get to claim groupthink while ignoring state of Apache when Nginx got released.

Apache was a mess of modules with confusing documentation, an arsenal of foot guns, and generally a PITA to deal with. Nginx was simpler, more performant, and didn’t have the extra complexity that Apache was failing to manage.

My personal first encounter was about hosting PHP applications in a multiuser environment, and god damn was nginx a better tool.

Apache caught up in a few years, but by then people were already solving different problems. Would nginx arrive merely a year later, it would get lost to history, but it arrived exactly when everyone was fed up with Apache just the right amount.

Nowadays, when people choose a web server, they choose one they are comfortable with. With both httpds being mature, that’s the strongest objective factor to influence the choice. It’s not groupthink, it’s a consequence of concrete events.

On the other hand, if it works in Firefox, it’s likely to work everywhere else.

I use Firefox for development and then, barring some weird chrome bug, things just work everywhere.

Eh, there’s plenty of socialism in practice. But English speaking discourse is dominated by fans of dictators that actively hunted socialists in twentieth century.

Wealth itself is a stronger predictor for future wealth than individual performance.

That quote of mine doesn’t talk about success, nor wealth itself for that matter. You’re ignoring everything in the message to argue against a statement that was never made in the first place.

Please reflect on the fact that until you joined the discussion, we didn’t talk about equating success to luck.

Afterwards, you will likely notice that your jackpot argument reinforces mine.

Millionaires often worked for their money. Billionaires often worked for their first millions too. Problem is, difference between a billion and a million is about a billion.

On the other side of the argument, the amount of people that work harder and smarter than any given billionaire and have nothing is simply staggering. If it wasn’t down to luck, they’d all be billionaires.

So yeah, it is dumb luck. Randomness is not uniform, and someone ends up being close to the time and place of a local spike.

Turns out, I do need therapy.

They are left to the fascism, that they equate everyone who doesn’t agree with them, in a very special way - both are ultra right, but tankies are on the left of a spectrum orthogonal to the one the rest of us usually employ.

Oh, I’m not an academic, just an ADHD poster child. Historic weapons keep appearing on my radar for the past few years and I repeatedly find myself spending time on researching what I’ll never practice.

I try to find and share sources for that reason - they allow others to skip incorrect assumptions I made along the way.

By compete I mean to compete in utility and general use, not in a duel. Fencing sword is of no use when you get whacked at the back of your head. It’s also relatively useless on a battlefield, from which I presume it occupied mostly the same space the clubs did - streets and roads.

I won’t argue on weight distribution influence. Sharp object balanced near the handle doesn’t need much of a swing to render my arms unusable. A mace simply cannot do that, its utility lies elsewhere.

PS: I would love to see a skilled fight using a thrusting sword and a mace. Thrusting swords don’t have a cutting edge, which makes it possible to grab and grapple them aside. I imagine the moment your opponent grabs your sword and swings their club presents quite a pickle.

For example, https://www.clevelandart.org/art/1916.1589

It being from 16th century, it’s likely the heavier variant for cavalrymen (which the description kinda confirms). Even then it weighs only 1.6kg.

Some sword examples:

• https://www.clevelandart.org/art/1916.1600. - 1.76kg
• https://www.clevelandart.org/art/1916.686 - 1.6kg
• https://www.clevelandart.org/art/1974.58 - 1.62kg
• https://www.clevelandart.org/art/1974.59 - rapier, 1.48kg
• https://www.clevelandart.org/art/1919.69 - 1.06kg
• https://www.clevelandart.org/art/1916.698 - 1.28kg
• https://www.clevelandart.org/art/1916.1099 - a very interesting case of 600g of weight
• https://www.clevelandart.org/art/1974.57 - 360g

Note the years and descriptions on the lighter swords. They are more of an everyday tool for civilians at that point. A regular club competed with those, probably very successfully.

Maces tended to be lighter and shorter than equivalent swords.

Maces aren’t as good against unarmored opponents, because unarmored opponents bleed and get incapacitated from a few well placed cuts. Swords tend to balance their weight closer to the handle to offer precision to make those cuts.

Maces specialize in delivering nearly the entire energy behind a strike. They were balanced to the tip of the weapon for that reason. Which is great against cut resistant armor due to energy transfer. Note that this places maces utility well before invention of plate armor.

If it’s heavy and slow, it’s not a weapon. Slow weapons kill their weilders. Rare armor rendered the user so slow as to let you swing in a game-like “lumberjack dealing with a stubborn log” fashion. There are plenty demonstrations around that show how fast and deadly an armored swordsman is.

The statement about spears indoors is game logic. The variability in spears and swords designs is such that most swords and spears would be equally dogshit indoors, but those that wouldn’t would all work quite ok. In a narrow, defensibly built passageway, thrusting attacks are nearly the only attacks available to combatants. A short spear then can offer a good deal of utility that sword wouldn’t, and vise versa. Short maces are nowhere near being useless there either.

I’m not afraid of retirement, I’m afraid of needing to work on the day of my funeral.