Wild exaggeration. Wireshark is very limited in what it can do and has gained few if any new power-user features (especially when it comes to extensibility and programmability) in more than a decade of development. The macOS-specific functionality in this very post has been available for years.
Anyone who relies on non-trivial packet capture or processing workflows, ditches Wireshark (optionally reusing dissectors) and writes custom tooling (which is very easy to do).
Even the dissector stuff feels so.. broken? unmaintained? The lua api is very annoying to use and python support was removed over a decade ago. Have not used the C API so maybe thats just what most people use and its good, but for my usecase I usually just want to quickly sketch out a view for a custom protocol that I can see in the UI.
I would absolutely love for someone to write a good alternative to wireshark.
As a constant Wireshark user who's personally thanked Gerald Combs for this tool, we don't need an alternative to wireshark, just some architectural refactors. Many packet dissection fields are embarrassingly parallel, but because some of them can involve previous/future packets, wireshark does all packet dissection in a single thread. So when I scoop up 10M packets it can take 20 minutes for the GUI to load them all with a single core, while 100 other cores on the same machine sit idle.
Once loaded, you have to be super careful. One update to the filter bar, like "!icmp" and you'll have to wait another 20 minutes for all the dissectors to be re-run (for some reason.)
As a previous commenter stated, if you work with Wireshark a lot, you eventually write your own tool for your performance needs. It feels magical to have a 3-page C program sitting over libpcap giving reports in miliseconds that would take wireshark minutes.
FWIW, Wireshark 4.6.0 ships with `sharkd`, which encapsulates all the EPAN dissectors into a simple to use server that accepts JSON-RPC requests.
It is quite easy to write specialized performance tools on top of `sharkd`, and since it has the entire power of the EPAN (including statistics, charts etc.), using `sharkd` is significantly more effective than reading straight from libpcap.
The `sharkd` has been around for quite some while, but until recently one had to build it from source. But now it is included in Wireshark DMG, so it is easier to use.
You're right, and I didnt mean to sound dismissive of the great work that has been put into wireshark. I agree with you on the refactoring comment, and if that's something that can be solved in the current codebase and something I can help contribute towards with donations I would be perfectly fine with this outcome as well.
As it stands though, using the gui bits of the wireshark family of tools is just painful, and slow (as you stated)
Sadly proprietary, but the core of it was to open a file with pcap_open_offline() [0], and then calling pcap_next() from a loop and reading a few bits out of the packet buffer. With NVMe disks, the information I needed was instantaneous for a 10M packet file.
And I know with certainty that it did not work when I wrote my previous blog post about this, back in 2021.
So, from what I can see, the specific functionality to dissect Darwin metadata in pcapng captures, from macOS' tcpdump, has not been "...available for years.".
I think it is not an exaggeration to say that without Wireshark, so much of modern computing would never have been developed and we would be stuck in the past. The amount of visibility it gives is immense. I have used it for years, decades now.
As someone who's lived in the UK for years but no longer there (I'm American and currently live in another EU country) it's sad but also quite funny watching the rapid deterioration across multiple domains that has taken place in the last 20 years. At times it seems that the people at the upper strata of politics have completely broken with contemporary reality and went off into a fantasy make-believe space, but don't realize it and keep acting as if that's not the case.
You don't have to say, but I'm curious where you moved to.
I'm not originally from the UK, but have lived here for over 20 years. I'm fully settled here, with a family, children at school, sports, hobbies, friends etc, but lately it just feels more and more gloomy.
The annoying thing is, I had planned to use geoarbitrage at some future point to sell up and retire somewhere on the European mainland, but that arbitrage opportunity has or is disappearing as places like Portugal become more expensive.
I moved to Germany where my wife is from, and I currently split my time between a conservative US state where my kids are studying (I left California where I grew up when the liberal politics became too much to handle as I didn't want my kids to grow up in this sort of environment).
Read jonesforth if you want to learn how a Forth can be implemented and bootstrapped simply. Like other comments in this thread point out, this implementation isn’t really Forth and completely misses the point of Forth.
Flud vision IOL has been in trials for years and looks very promising. Unless you really need an IOL NOW, I'd wait a few years for accommodating IOLs to hit the market. They make monofocals/trifocals seem like medieval technology as they work at all distances, in the same manner as a natural lens (ie. continuous focus). For someone with myopia/presbyopia, they're an occular enhancement that can give better than 20/20 vision.
Trump is trying hard to get voter id passed (common sense in Europe) and he’s obviously not doing that because he wants to cheat in elections. Your characterization is therefore misguided in the extreme.
We only need to look at states like California and their complete absence of voter id to realize where and for whom rampant election fraud takes place.
You'd get most Democrats to support voter ID if it came with a national ID card, plus an affirmative duty to some agency to ensure that everyone has access to one.
We have neither of those things. The closest we have is driver's licenses, because our culture is such that everyone eligible wants one. The only broadly available federal photo ID is the passport.
Requiring a driver's license, passport, or equivalent is unconstitutional, though. This is because even non-driver equivalents cost money in most places, making it an unconstitutional poll tax. That's why even the places with strict voter ID laws allow really strange forms of identification - they rely mostly on people not knowing this.
Voter ID in a country without universal identification is just disenfranchisement. In the US, by and large you either have a driver's license, or no form of identification. Sure, states have non-driver's IDs available, but very few people have them. Somewhere between 5% and 10% of the population have zero up-to-date photo identification.
Voter fraud (people voting twice, voting illegally, etc) is basically a non-issue, especially in California where our elections are rarely so close that the marginal amount that's estimated to happen matters. Disenfranchisizing 9% of the population is a big fucking issue.
> We only need to look at states like California and their complete absence of voter id to realize where and for whom rampant election fraud takes place.
There are ways to make voter ID work, ways to make them free and easy to obtain, but they aren't interested in any of that because they just want to stop "the wrong people" from voting.
That's a mischaracterization of what took place. The alternate slates of electors were exactly what is prescribed legally and had to exist in case the courts ruled in his favor. If the alternate electors didn't exist, and the case was successful, too bad, so sad, original electors are sent to DC. That's why the electors who were charged with crimes had the charges all dropped. You were witnessing lawfare and media distortions of actual long-standing, but little used processes.
It is not a mischaracterization. Him and his people organized false slates of electors who tried to fraudulently claim that they were the official slate of electors for their state.
You are factually mischaracterizing what happened. It wasn’t just backup slates in case their case went through.
It’s actually the more legally damning set of actions he took compared to J6
> he’s obviously not doing that because he wants to cheat in elections
No, that's exactly why he wants to do it.
Requiring voter ID makes it much harder for poor people—disproportionately likely to be minorities, vastly more likely to be city-dwellers (who don't need a driver's license)—to vote.
There is no rampant vote fraud. There have been many, many studies on this. Even the ones from Republicans prove that there are no more than a tiny, tiny handful of people who ever deliberately try to vote where they're not eligible (including multiple voting, etc).
This is good example of how disastrous NHS can be (and it's not even that serious compared to horror stories that involve cancer) and makes me look at the flawed but also clearly superior US health system with renewed appreciation.
I think it's normal for the parents to resent the NHS for this, but from what I've read about about patient experiences, many US doctors believe "chronic lyme" is not a real diagnosis, and that TDOT blood test she took is not standard of care, so private insurers, wouldn't cover it either. So in the US, a patient would likely end up paying up to their deductible for all those tests that ruled out other things, and then still pay out of pocket for a specialist. I'm open to hearing otherwise, but just because the NHS experience was bad, doesn't give me confidence that the average US experience isn't also bad.
> The article makes several points about how the US medical establishment, including the US government, is doing better in this regard than NHS.
It claims that "US government agencies are taking tick-borne disease much more seriously", and that may be their words, but I challenge you to point to actions which support them. It also doesn't mention that Trump administration actions have decreased and destabilized overall federal support environments (NIH/CDC) that fund tick-related disease research.
I have a friend who's gone through a similar years-long journey with his daughter. In Silicon Valley, at least, the medical establishment spent years trying to gaslight the family about their daughter's symptoms.
I agree, much of what we knew about the USG position on health care research has recently been called into question, and so it may already be that the author's contention is untrue.
But on the flip side, the problem they describe with the NHS -- namely, that no means no, is less likely to happen in the US. And I think suggesting that there is just one 'medical establishment' in Silicon Valley is painting with far too broad a brush.
Our problem is probably more with particular insurance companies (UHC is so egregious, it is hard to be surprised that so many people were not horrified when their CEO was gunned down in broad daylight). But at least you can easily pick a new provider.
Ugh, I hear this from people in Canada too. I'm in the US, and given the decades long experiences with shoulder shrugs from medical experts around chronic health issues for myself and others, this comment really frustrates me. It is absolutely not superior. In fact I would argue that if the person in the article approached the same thing here, they'd never get the treatment they got through the NHS.
It took 5 years for my wife to get tested for rheumatoid arthritis (which she was finally diagnosed with after tests and exams proved it), and that's only because I kept insisting. The doctors here will easily hand wave any sort of complicated chronic illness. Mayo clinic - one of the top medical institutions in America - gave up on my dad's neurological illness. He was very active 3 years ago, today he is in a wheelchair. Diagnosis? Who knows, it's too complicated, they're not interested anymore.
In the US, if you actually care about fixing a problem, it really helps to do tests yourself privately and quickly if the doctor or specialist is unwilling. Let's say there are 30-50 blood tests that are relevant for a set of symptoms. I would do up to $500 worth of tests at a time, then repeat the loop, continuing with the next batch until an answer is found or until all applicable tests are exhausted. Each normal result helps refine the next batch.
citation needed? I'm a brit and will give you that the NHS has its failings but I hear bad things about the US system too. Probably the systems in France and Germany work better than either.
"Borges provided more than two dozen pages of emails, memos and other communications outlining how DOGE “potentially violated multiple federal statutes” designed to protect government data."
This reads like political theatrics from entrenched bureaucrats that are pissed off their authority is being challenged and their incompetence exposed. I have no issues whatsoever with "Bigballs" crawling through that data to find gross instances of fraud. I do have issues with parasitic bureaucrats throwing their dead weight around thinking this is and will remain their fiefdom forever and ever.
If folks are breaking the law by defrauding social security, they should be brought to justice. If DOGE employees broke the law, they should also be brought to justice. I'm good with both of those.
