I never understood the appeal of web-based password managers. KeePass all the way, all offline, no randomly changing UI, everything in a single .db file. Need syncing? Use Cloud storage service.
the appeal is that it's a one click solution that works everywhere. If you have multiple devices, even worse if it's a mix of Android, Iphone, Windows, Mac, Linux you now have to find some cross platform sync solution on every device, the autofill functions of the various plugins don't work half the time, it usually ends up being an annoying mess. And if you need secure credential sharing with family members it's ten times more complicated yet again.
Notably though, Keepassium from the App Store is licensed differently than the version on GitHub. Only the Keepassium team can ever actually submit to the App Store as GPL software is banned, and so they do not accept contributions so that they have the ability to submit under a proprietary license.
My reading from the License section[1] of the Keepasium README and this Stack Exchange post[2] is that the author of KeePassium wishes to license KeePassium under GPLv3. Accepting applications licensed under GPLv3 would require that Apple provide certain forms of source code alongside App Store downloads which they are unwilling to do. As such the App Store terms of service has terminology stating that you give Apple the right to not do that, which is something that only the copyright holder(s) of a work can do. The simplest way to have clarity over who holds the copyright is to have a single author. So long as the KeePassium author is willing to assign Apple the permission implicit in submitting to the App Store, that’s fine. It just means that all other uses of KeePassium must follow the GPLv3 license.
I am not a lawyer, nor really even well-versed in IP law, and you should not take this as legal advice.
Yes, you got it right. The source code is published under the GPL, but App Store ToS impose additional restrictions that are incompatible with the GPL. So we have to dual-license the project, and only the copyright owner can do that. In order to maintain that role, we can only accept contributions with a CLA (two pages of legalese that transfer the copyright). This is obviously a deterrent for contributions: over the 5 years, I believe there were only 3 people who signed it :)
The impact of going from a non-X3D to X3D CPU is incredible in that game. I could be off on the details, but I recall benchmarks showing that just switching to an X3D has a much larger impact than jumping multiple generations of GPU. I get like 120 FPS with a 5600X and RTX 3080. I've been dreaming of a 9800X3D based build when it comes out, but realistically don't have the time to actually play.
Each server has a 1 Gbps connection. Some servers are storing more than average, some have 160 TB. That's already 2 weeks at full line rate. But I also need to keep serving user traffic. I can't take the site offline for a month for a data migration, that would completely kill my business.
I'm guessing you're banned because you have such amounts of data/servers and push a substantial amount of bandwidth under the free "1gbps" card for each (even if the cache layer handles most requests directly)
perharps if you moved all servers to 10G and payed for the egress over 20Tb they would reconsider your account?
They still unreliable pulling stuff like this but difficult to find these hardware options off the shelf, ready for order, at this rpice
That is some site owner who wanted free cdn/ddos protection, accepted the default settings, and has no way of knowing which the blocked users are blocked wrongly.
I used to use cloudflare on my static website and I had no idea I was blocking all tor users until someone on HN let me know.
Cancer is too strong a word though. It’s more like a bad case of jock itch IMHO.
I use Cloudflare Pages, and having heard these sorts of stories from HN and other places, I did spend some time exploring the settings to ensure the largest number of people could access the site. My impression was that the default settings were pretty much the loosest options around. In particular, for Tor, I would have needed to manually enable to block (it's off by default), and even then, Cloudflare automatically generates a magnet link for each site they host, and allow Tor browser users to automatically redirect to those magnet links.
I agree that it's a bit opaque, but I think that comes with the territory. If Cloudflare could tell you exactly which groups were getting blocked, then DDOS protection wouldn't be so big a problem in the first place - you just select all the bad actors and block them, and you're fine.
> Why don't they make zstd images surely that would beat webp
zstd is a general-purpose compressor. By and large (and i'm unaware of any exceptions), specialized/format-specific compression (like png, wepb, etc.) will compress better than a general-purpose compressor because format-specific compressors can take advantage of quirks of the format which a general-purpose solution cannot. Also, format-specific ones are often lossy (or conditionally so), enabling them to trade lower fidelity for better compression, something a general-purpose compressor cannot do.
I read that they pushed a new configuration file, so possibly they don't consider that a "software update" and pushed it to everyone. Which is obviously insane. If I am publishing software, it doesn't matter if I've changed a .py file or a .yaml file. A change is a change and it's going to be tagged with a new version.
For privacy reasons, it's kept out of Cloudflare's cache. But one could argue that it doesn't matter since traffic is flowing through Cloudflare anyways. What do you think?
It's not a real option. You'll eventually get banned or forced to pay for an enterprise plan if you try to use Cloudflare's CDN for an image hosting site where the origin is outside of Cloudflare. They require you to use R2 or Cloudflare Images.
From their terms: (emphasis mine)
> Unless you are an Enterprise customer, Cloudflare offers specific Paid Services (e.g., the Developer Platform, Images, and Stream) that you must use in order to serve video and other large files via the CDN. Cloudflare reserves the right to disable or limit your access to or use of the CDN, or to limit your End Users’ access to certain of your resources through the CDN, if you use or are suspected of using the CDN without such Paid Services to serve video or a disproportionate percentage of pictures, audio files, or other large files. We will use reasonable efforts to provide you with notice of such action.
Yeah it's going through CF anyway. I also don't live near Europe or North America and noticed even small images take over a second to load, would be nice to have images cached locally after they are opened for the first time
Got it. Thanks for your feedback. All servers and user content are hosted in the EU, so for some parts of the world, it may not perform as intended. I've also thought of creating replicas for latency reasons, but it does introduce extra costs.
Not really, if she understood well what the photograph was being used for at the time, you can't retrospectively wish against it. That's like saying Oh I don't want to be a pornstar anymore, take down all my content thanks.
That’s not what she’s saying. It’s a very simple and reasonable request. Choosing to not respect her wish is essentially choosing not to out of spite for her since the effort to respect it is essentially nothing.
She absolutely can. And we, collectively, can choose to respect that wish by using a different test image in future. And why not? It's no real burden to make the change.
I mean, I don't think Beyoncé should have (or does have) any legal recourse in that kind of situation, but publishing unflattering photos of people just to make fun of how they look is a fairly crappy thing to do. The decent thing to do in that situation would be to refrain from publishing the image unless there were public interest grounds for doing so.
The whole dynamic of this discussion is weird. There's a bunch of people coming up with long winded arguments, not-really-relevant examples and other guff.
And there's a bunch of us repeatedly saying "why not just be decent?"
I agree, being a decent person is an active choice we should all strive for.
The burden here is that a number of people are so afraid of being "woke" that they'd rather double down being scummy than just find a different jpeg. If it was their daughter I'm sure they'd have a different opinion
> If it was their daughter I'm sure they'd have a different opinion
Are we back in the 60s where a father has to sign off on the daughters job application? We are talking about a woman who willingly signed up for a playboy photoshoot, had been aware of the image being used and circulated for decades with no issues.
How could she possibly have known what the internet would become, or how vast? Nobody could have "understood" how their photo could be widely disseminated like today.
At the end of the day its a stolen photo, and immoral to continue to use against the express wishes of the subject, no matter how you want to justify it -- she asked, so just respect it instead of finding ways to justify being a jerk.
Thanks for giving the OP some firsthand advice that answers his question and might actually work, rather than chiding him with some variant of "You shouldn't have trusted YouTube in first place ('you big dummy', implied)". That type of "advice" accomplishes nothing, other than maybe boosting the ego of the person making it.
They tend to get moderated away most of the time, which you can help by flagging them or emailing them to hn@ycombinator.com. Supercilious PSAs don't do any of that.
It's very common on HN. I do it too. Mostly because we spend a lot of effort avoiding these platforms, and when something bad happens to a person because of it, we can shout, "Ha! My paranoia is justified!"
If you're working day to day as an engineer, you end up mostly thinking in unhappy cases and 99.99% uptime scenarios, so it actually seems like helpful advice.
My parents had until couple of years ago photos and 8mm film from my early childhood where I staggering around in just shoes. I hated clothes even in winter.
These days that would be classified as child pornography and likely land them in prison. They were upset about destroying innocent memories but.. well..
