"Unix was named (phonetically) by bwk. I don't think he ever spelled it, but, since it was a play on multics, he thought it was unics. (you can ask him)

at the time, unix was compiled on the central computer at bell labs (GE-635) that produced a PDP--7 paper tape. usuallly i just ran the tape and threw it away. when i needed to save a tape, i wrote "unix" on the tape. it stuck after that.

Ça fait plusieurs fois que je vois passer la notion de "instant software", pour du logiciel qui serait tellement facile et peu cher à produire par des agents de codage que ça ne vaudrait plus la peine de le conserver au-delà de ses usages immédiats.

L'auteur propose "touillette logicielle" pour les nommer en français.

Problème : le kit choisi par l’Europe se connecte en Lightning, le port contre lequel la Commission européenne a lutté pendant plus d’une décennie. Une erreur évidente de communication, alors que l’USB-C a remplacé le port d’Apple grâce aux efforts de l’Europe. Encore plus amusant : il existe bien une version USB-C du micro cravate sur le catalogue de Devia… mais elle est plus chère.

C'est le problème lorsque les responsabilités sont diluées, plus personne n'est responsable de rien et il n'y a plus de structure commune. C'est ici un exemple mineur qui n'a pas vraiment d'impact.

A new model emerges after the cathedral and the bazaar: the kitchen. The author describes it.

Every kitchen evolves around the habits of its cook. Tools sit where they are convenient. Ingredients are substituted freely. Recipes are modified on instinct. Two people may start from the same dish and end up with completely different results.

Kitchen rarely converge into a universal standard.

The project is available at https://github.com/kadir/cloakrs

Je suis bien déçu de Deepl et GitLab.

La restructuration en supprimant des niveaux hiérarchique me semble sensé pour un produit numérique. Je ne sais pas si cela est pertinent pour les autres domaines comme le marketing.

There are a number of serialization libraries that outperform JSON in NodeJS.

It's important to avoid generating extraneous garbage when doing these kinds of benchmarks.

It's important to provide an appropriately sized buffer when performing serialization.

If you care about serialization performance, consider using a different programming language with better tradeoffs.

A Finite State Transducer seems to be the best algorithm instead of a full index search.
The data don't need to be stored in a database indeed. They only need to be searched as text.

Tout le monde peut utiliser la config git user.name et user.email.

Afin de vérifier ces commits, ils faut indiquer à Git de les signer

Générer une clé
ssh-keygen -t ed25519 -C "votre@email.com"

Puis instruire à git de l'utiliser:

git config --global gpg.format ssh
git config --global user.signingkey ~/.ssh/id_ed25519.pub
git config --global commit.gpgsign true
git config --global tag.gpgsign true

Puis ajouter cette clé de signature dans la forge logicielle.

Pour GitLab: https://docs.gitlab.com/user/project/repository/signed_commits/

Github place ce bug comme "ineligible", puisque cela ne donne pas accès aux repos ni privilèges, donc ce n'est pas une faille au sens strict.
Cepeeendaaaaaant, l'identité affichée influence les décisions; et il incombe à l'utilisateur de vérifier les signatures.

Source: https://infosecwriteups.com/the-curious-case-of-github-commit-spoofing-a-lighthearted-exploration-54ddbaaaf40a?gi=861657732a48

You're running Android but not the official one? reCAPTCHA does not work anymore.

Practical resources created by the author, grouped by references

Maps are unrelated to the software release. That's definitely a good thing.

Les liens de téléchargement du logiciel ont été modifié.

D’après Thomas Klemenc de Malcat, le fichier distribué par les pirates contient bien l’installeur de JDownloader, associé à une charge malveillante de type RAT (Remote Access Trojan) écrite en Python.

Cette nouvelle méthode permet de sécuriser plus rapidement Firefox, puisque l'IA montre une faille et essaie de résoudre le problème. Cela sert de base de travail.

Rappelons que d’un point de vue réglementaire, les informations qui révèlent l’orientation politique relèvent de ce que le RGPD qualifie, dans son article 9, de « données sensibles ».

ainsi que l'article de Korben https://korben.info/les-donnees-de-120-000-adherents-lfi-dans-la-nature.html

During my research I identified nine types of comments:

• Function comments: They prevent the reader from reading code in the first place. Instead, after reading the comment, it should be possible to consider some code as a black box that should obey certain rules
• Design comments: they states how and why a given piece of code uses certain algorithms, techniques, tricks, and implementation. [...] With such background, reading the code will be simpler.
• Why comments: explain the reason why the code is doing something, even if what the code is doing is crystal clear.
• Teacher comments: They teach instead the domain (for example math, computer graphics, networking, statistics, complex data structures) in which the code is operating, that may be one outside of the reader skills set, or is simply too full of details to recall all them from memory.
• Checklist comments: sometimes because of language limitations, design issues, or simply because of the natural complexity arising in systems, it is not possible to centralize a given concept or interface in one piece, so there are places in the code that tells you to remember to do things in some other place of the code
• Guide comments: they do a single thing: they babysit the reader, assist him or her while processing what is written in the source code by providing clear division, rhythm, and introducing what you are going to read.
• Trivial comments: a bad one, a guide comment where the cognitive load of reading the comment is the same or higher than just reading the associated code.
• Debt comments: debt comments are technical debts statements hard coded inside the source code itself:
• Backup comments: the developer comments older versions of some code block or even a whole function, because she or he is insecure about the change that was operated in the new one. We have git now.

Comments can be considered analysis tools; and they are often harder to write than code.