but like… there’s literally no market for apple parts because you can’t really use them for repairs or anything at all - it’s ewaste unless it’s in the original device, and the whole phone is ewaste unless it’s logged into the registered apple account - you can’t just wipe it or anything because of all the serial numbers etc
swings and round abouts… tbh i love this feature of apple hardware because it pretty much means there’s no point to stealing an iphone: you can’t even part it out and sell it in bits… i’ve left my phone in random places all the time and i’ve never been worried it’s going to get stolen
totally understand that people have the opposite POV though: that it’s your device and you should be able to do whatever you want with it, and that locking down parts is a method to ensure apple status in the loop with repairs and overpriced parts
i think both points of view are valid
which endpoint are you referring to?
there are passwords exchanged when using the vault management API, but AFAIK that’s for local access (eg CLI talking to the app)
i’m no expert on the specifics of the API; just in the description they give: https://bitwarden.com/help/what-encryption-is-used/
Bitwarden always encrypts and/or hashes your data on your local device before anything is sent to cloud servers for storage. Bitwarden servers are only used for storing encrypted data.
…
PBKDF2 SHA-256 is used to derive the encryption key from your master password
this is exactly the way this should be done. any deviation from this formula by a password manager with a server component should be viewed with extreme scepticism
When you login to the Vaultwarden web application it’s going to exchange your passphrase for a private key.
bitwarden is end to end encrypted: your decryption keys never leave your device, and the server certainly never sees them
you must always be able to trust your network
this would be a horrible password manager. this is also not how bitwarden works
you do still need to trust your server if you use the web interface, because any web interface can serve malicious components to exfiltrate whatever they like but native apps, assuming they’re verified appropriately, could communicate over HTTP and still not allow anyone actively monitoring your network to see any data that would be particularly useful
wow yes how was my spelling that wrong and can i blame auto correct?
Resource not found Data not found (client error). Data not found (server error)
they are all the same thing; there is no useful, practical distinction between them
if we request a list of objects and nothing was found, because we asked for a date when there was no data, its not an error. But i suppose many still just throw around exceptions still instead of handle them properly
it’s an empty array: not found when requesting something specific is an error… that’s different to here is the complete set of 0 objects… like like if you have an array and request an index that doesn’t exist you get an exception, but that doesn’t mean an empty array is exceptional: it is in fact very valid
using an error code for a non-error
well, it is an error though. you have requested a URI for an object that doesn’t exist: it doesn’t matter whether it’s a resource or an individual thing
remember that HTTP youre asking the server for some object matching a URI: please give me the object matching /users/bananoidandroid and /userssssss/bananoidandroid may both not be found for the exact same reason: the object referenced by that string does not exist
here’s the spec definition for 404
The server has not found anything matching the Request-URI. No indication is given of whether the condition is temporary or permanent. The 410 (Gone) status code SHOULD be used if the server knows, through some internally configurable mechanism, that an old resource is permanently unavailable and has no forwarding address. This status code is commonly used when the server does not wish to reveal exactly why the request has been refused, or when no other response is applicable.
when you’re dealing with specs, deciding not to follow them because you feel like they’re wrong is not appropriate… this leads to bugs and issues in compliant tools because they make assumptions about what things mean
200 means the thing that you asked completed successfully
here’s the definition of 200:
The request has succeeded. The information returned with the response is dependent on the method used in the request, for example:
GET an entity corresponding to the requested resource is sent in the response;
HEAD the entity-header fields corresponding to the requested resource are sent in the response without any message-body;
POST an entity describing or containing the result of the action;
TRACE an entity containing the request message as received by the end server.
*edit: when talking about compliant, standard tools the classic example is transparent cache: a GET should not transform the resource and thus a GET with response of 200 can be cached… an API that uses a GET to modify a resource may cause transparent proxies (or CDNs) to significantly mishandle the user request… same goes for 200 vs 4xx and 5xx: proxies know that 200 means what it means and may cache based on that, where 5xx should never be cached and 4xx is probably dependant on which specific 4xx
error codes aren’t about who’s at fault… you don’t send a 404 because it’s the users or the servers fault. it’s information… a 404 says something doesn’t exist… it’s nobody’s fault; it just is
a 4xx says the request, if tried again without changes or external intervention, is unlikely to succeed
a 5xx says the request might have been fine but some other problem that you can’t control occurred so may be retried without changes at a later time
these are all standard things that are treated in standard ways by generic HTTP libraries… look at, eg axios: a javascript HTTP library that’s often thinly wrapped to build API clients… a 200 is just passed through as success, where 4xx and 5xx will throw an error: exactly what you’d want if you try to retrieve a non-existent object or submit a malformed payload…
this is standard behaviour for a lot of HTTP libraries, and helps people accidentally write better code - an explosion is better than silence for unhandled exceptions
it does not have that on apple tv, thus it does not have that on all platforms that i care about - in fact, that’s the main, if not only platform that i really care about
heck, it doesn’t have skip buttons on any platform: it places chapter markers, which is a great implementation!… if they also added metadata that showed a button overlay for “special” chapters like this as well updated and checked again - they do add buttons now, but still not on tvos
all of this is fine, and i’m sure they’ll get there but it’s disingenuous to say that everything is at feature parity with plex
alternatively gay men have our own culture and “normal” is conformance… i don’t want to fit into someone else’s box. gay men are by and large more sexual, and that’s not bad. in fact that’s great! people should strive to be more like us: sex is fun, just do it
that’s fine… but it’s not necessarily what it says. it’s ambiguous at best, but if they’d meant they need you to pay them for resources then theyd probably say it more outright
bad take, people are allows to have opinions that aren’t yours
that is the most basic list of features… if something implemented only that list id consider it an alpha
the thing im waiting on to switch is skip buttons on intro/outro/etc across all platforms i care about
you can do a thing called UDP hole punching for NAT traversal, buuuuuut afaik these days a lot of consumer routers consider it a security risk and attempt to block it
they never said they needed resources for the remote playback… they said that they needed more resources - ie money to develop the software in general, and this are feature gating a useful feature to try and convince people to pay
I’m sure Fedora is full of binary blobs and not-so-free software
fedora is staunchly opposed to non-free software in their default distro … that spat a few weeks ago with OBS was related to that AFAIK
unsure about like signed blobs for “security” services but i imagine they’d be very limited, and optional
rather than sticking a white label on Fedora and call it something else
but for what benefit? no matter what’s trying to be achieved, starting with a very full-featured, robust OS that’s widely used is going to serve you very well… not just technically (less work for the same outcome), but for human reasons
there are loads of guides out there for how to fix fedora issues, few for guix… loads of RPMs that are compatible with fedora, and i can only imagine fewer packages for guix
and then if you’re talking about server OSes - and actually workstations too - managing them with tools like ansible etc… fedora is going to have off the shelf solutions
just Fedora with different theme
well, the actual software and configuration i’d argue aren’t the important part - owning the infrastructure is the important part… package mirrors, distribution methods (eg a website), being able to veto or replace certain packages, and the branding (or regulation) that draws people to it… being able to roll out a security patch to every installation without a 3rd party okaying it, for example
i’d say if it happens it should start with focusing on:
though there is the argument that workstation and user desktop are close enough to each other that user desktop should be above server, but i’d imagine it’d be more of a “home user” than gamer situation. i could imagine some regulations around refurbishing old tech with this kind of OS too, and this would be more about low spec machines (that’d help workstations too)
alternative POV: it’s entirely FOSS so there’s little control that can be exerted from its use. it’s also entirely free, so use is extracting value without providing anything in return. by its use, you’re taking resources to maintain, host, etc and providing nothing in return
similar reason to why i don’t use ecosia with an ad blocker: by blocking ads you’re using their resources without giving back and thus you’re taking resources away from the charity
i’d suggest switching out openvpn for wireguard if you can… at this point, openvpn is basically considered legacy
make sure to use a wire guard VPN instead of openvpn
i’ve never understood why there’s not a good option for using one of the plethora of server management tools with prebuilt helpers for workstations to mimic group policy
like the tools we have on linux to handle this are far, far more powerful