Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | zweifuss's commentslogin

If you can do a successful switch to cloud only Entra (aka. AzureAD) first, you are 90% ready for a migration to Open Source. You need Entra for Licensing anyway. Yes, I'm aware that this is hard.

Univention Nubus (Keycloak + OpenLDAP) or FreeIPA as alternatives for Entra come to mind. You can even leverage your Powershell expertise.


The text was mangeled by some OCR-software. This ad can be found as image on Wikimedia: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Apple_1_Advertisemen...


Yes and no.

They all have a very solid industrial base, like 30% to 50% of the economy, with ~50% of workers living abroad (not fully part of the welfare state). Comparatively high R&D. Low taxes.

And plain tax evasion is now illegal, but those countries are still an important stop to hide money elsewhere.

But the main secret sauce is a flexible fast legal system. Stability, low crime, and less gridlock in the legislature when the need for change is realized.



Modified Condition/Decision Coverage

It's mandated by DO-178C for the highest-level (Level A) avionics software.

Example: if (A && B || C) { ... } else { ... } needs individual tests for A, B, and C.

Test #,A,B,A && B,Outcome taken,Shows independence for

1,True,True,True,if branch,(baseline true)

2,False,True,False,else branch,A (A flips outcome while B fixed at True)

3,True,False,False,else branch,B (B flips outcome while A fixed at True)


I made a mistake:

  Test #  A      B      C      Result
  1       True   True   False  True
  2       False  True   False  False
  3       True   False  False  False
  4       False  True   True   True


AlgoDrill is so futuristic, that Gemini 3 included it in the HN front page 10 years from now (#5): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46205632


what a terrible future


I can remember perl vs python flame wars ca. 2002.

Also, the early 2010s are not that recent: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Pythonista%2Cp...


The history of the Windows TCP/IP stack went most likely like this:

IBM (NetBEUI, no TCP/IP) -> Spider TCP/IP Stack + SysV STREAMS environment -> MS rewrite 1 (early NT, Winsock instead of STREAMS) -> MS rewrite 2 (make win2000 faster):

https://web.archive.org/web/20151229084950/http://www.kuro5h...


It's interesting how STREAMS pervaded everything for a short while (Apple's Open Transport networking stack for System 7.5 and up was also based on STREAMS) but everyone almost immediately wanted to get rid of it and just use Berkley sockets interfaces.


I still don't quite get how you should had communicate with the other systems over the network with STREAMS.

With IP you have an address and the means to route the data to that address and back, with TCP/UDP sockets you have the address:port endpoint so the recipient doesn't need to pass a received packet to the all processes on the system, asking "is that yours".

So if there is already some network stack providing both the addressing and the messaging...


STREAMS isn’t a networking protocol, it’s an internal data routing thing some UNIXes use locally, and amongst other things to implement the network stack in it.

You’d still be talking of stuff like IP addresses and the like with it. Probably with the XTI API instead of BSD sockets, which is a bit more complex but you need the flexibility to handle different network stacks than just TCP/IP, like erm…



Berkeley, for disambiguation.


Oops, too late to edit my comment!


ZTE is also under scrutiny. The reason it's only Huawei and ZTE is that other Chinese providers are so insignificant that the telecoms will likely be able to replace the infrastructure themselves with spares or consolidation. However, in an emergency, the government would have to foot the bill for replacing Huawei/ZTE systems quickly, as the telecoms couldn't finance this and lack of capacity would mean very high prices.


Huawei at least is giving their source code to be scrutinized. What can be said of other vendors?


"Chat Control" is mass surveillance, not targeted Action. Targeted action mayhaps needs some readjustment, but by and large is already easy to obtain for law enforcement.

Normalizing mass surveillance would set a precedent for authoritarian regimes worldwide to demand similar access, further eroding privacy and human rights on a global scale.

I also oppose it on technical grounds, since it would be some kind of local or hybrid ai that does the scanning. A high number of false positives harming innocents would certainly be the result.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: