I don't know what's going on in this thread. Of course PKI needs some root of trust. That root HAS to be predefined. What do people think all the browsers are doing?

Lineage is signed, sure. It needs to be blessed with that root for it to work on that device.

They're assuming PKI is built on a fixed set of root CAs. That's not the case, as others have pointed out - only for major browsers. Subtle nuance, but their shitty, arrogant tone made me not want to elaborate.

"Subtle nuance" he says, after I've spent multiple comments explaining that bootloaders reject unsigned and untrusted-signed code identically, whilst he and others insist there's some meaningful technical distinction (which none of you have articulated).

Then you admit you actually understood this the entire time, but my tone put you off elaborating.

So you watched this thread pile on someone for being technically correct, said nothing of substance, and now reveal you knew they were right all along but simply chose not to contribute because you didn't like how they said it.

That's not you taking the high road, mate. That's you admitting you prioritised posturing over clarity, then got smug about it.

Brilliant contribution. Really moved the discourse forward there.

You seem angry. Perhaps some time away from the message boards would be beneficial.

Still not elaborating on that "subtle nuance," I see.

Right, now what would you say is the probability of getting a bug in compiler output vs ai output?

It's a great tool, once it matures.

I am not getting what that linked url is supposed to mean. It is a very decent business page where ubuntu is selling consulting for "your" projects and telling why ubuntu is great for developing AI systems.

I hope for our (India's) sake, it doesn't. We need to keep as much talent here as we can.

It's cheapest for the employer to keep it in India itself.

That would make sense if protobuf was complex, bloated, slow. But it's not, so the question should be why not use it, unless you are doing browser stuff.

If you are going to use it elsewhere, why not use it for browser stuff too?

I would advise against it. Too much friction, try it, maybe you will have a different experience than mine.

I am curious about what kind of friction you encountered. Were you generating ad-hoc protobuf messages?

Assuming you were using Protobufs as they are usually used, meaning under generated code, I saw no difference between using it in Javascript and any other language in my experience. The wire format is beyond your concern. At least it is no more of your concern than it is in any other environment.

There are a number of different generator implementations for Javascript/Typescript. Some of them have some peculiar design choices. Is that where you found issue? I would certainly agree with that, but others aren't so bad. That doesn't really have anything to do with the browser, though. You'd have the same problem using protobufs under Node.js.

Every time I hear any Indian trope, I find it interesting that it's only people in online forum who experience it.

Somehow none of my non/Indian colleagues over the course of more than a decade have faced these ridiculous situations. They must be unlucky.

Many wouldn't be comfortable discussing this with coworkers.

I don't know ruby or rails so probably wrong on this but why does the author say no framework for Java web. How different is Spring from that?

They talk about the programmer which doesn't know neither cares about the language stuff. So what is Spring lacking from that perspective?

"Java is a DSL for taking large XML files and converting them to stack traces"

"XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it."

XML is like a flyer saying "do violence" maybe, it doesn't do anything by itself.

Pretty damning evaluation of apple's capabilities to be sure that they won't be able to compete on merit! I don't believe that. So much apple software is absolutely loved.

I love Safari. I’ve used it since the day I bought a Mac not long after it was released. Back when they still bundled IE 5.5.

I don’t think they can compete. Apple doesn’t release Safari on Windows (any more, god it was bad) and that basically kills their chance at desktop relevance.

But even if they did my point is Google has way WAY WAY too much leverage and is already in an effective near monopoly position due to making Chromium. iOS is the only reasonably sized bastion left.

And that’s entirely due to Apple’s policy, whether one thinks it’s right or wrong.

The stakes are way too tilted. The market can’t function.

And we’re about to see it “freed”, which is basically handing it to Google for a total monopoly.

And I don’t like that future. Whatever I think of all the other issues with both Apple and Google right now and what has happened in the past.

Real world experience for the author which they probably lack in other langs. It would be an absurd statement otherwise.

Calm down. Hardly any drama except yours.

You're right. Signing off for the day.