Fun fact! Amazon (and probably other companies) do this on purpose. They can only fit so much onto a truck so they do their best to Tetris the shit out of it. Sometimes you end up with voids where things just don't really fill the gaps and then everything moves around and shifts and it's not good.

So sometimes they intentionally pack small things in comically large boxes for the sake of well tetris'd delivery trucks.

It's frightening to me that a bribe like "hey, just install this thing, I'll pay you a whole years salary. Hell, 2 years! Just install it. Easy" is so within reach to so many people! People have spent way more to get way less in the way of blackhat tactics.

@NoMad well obviously they can't stop showing you ads. They need to make money. Try it though. Take a week and just stop skipping ads. Change tabs for a second, look at Facebook, go get a soda. Let the ads play through. Especially the ones AFTER the video when you could totally just close the tab. Let it play.

In a week, you'll notice the amount of ads you see is significantly higher

@theKarlisK I don't believe so? But you might be seeing more unskippable ads if you aren't skipping skippable ads. It marks you as a person who watches ads. So it shows you more of them. And the more you don't skip, the more unskippable ones show up.

That said I'm not a YouTube dev, and I haven't peeked behind the curtain, this is what I've discovered from personal experience, articles, and other sources. Grain of salt.

One of YouTube's known metics is ad watch time. If it allows you to skip the ad and you walk away to get a snack instead of skipping the ad, despite not clicking it, it will mark that as potentially interested. Even if you change tabs to check something real quick. You only had to watch it for 5 seconds, but you watched for a whole 7 SECONDS! obviously that one was more captivating for you.

Among other things of course. Advertising is one giant ruse.

It's not about doing it faster. It's about never doing it again! I've probably done this 100 times by now. And one or two of those, the task actually needed to keep being done enough to make it worth it! Score! (Let's not talk about the other 98 alright?!)

Segmentation Fault (core dumped)

@shoop please leave 🤣🤣🤣

@drewbie another viewpoint: you are tackling problems beyond your ability. Because if you only do problems you can solve Everytime, did you really learn anything? look at the solution, understand it, reimplement, optimize, and now you can solve it. Self improvement ftw. Just cause you can't solve it right now is exactly why it's the right one to be working on.

One of my favorite quotes from a vim talk. "Vim is so configurable. It will let you map any key, to anything. Even defaults. It's awesome! It's awful! You never know what will happen when you sit down at someone else's vim session!"

@asgs I love doing that. Some of my best projects were made that way.... And some of my worst code was made that way. Much of it works but I couldn't begin to tell you how or why.
It's a gamble. But a fun one!

@crowdsurfer well of course! Computers are magic, and magic doesn't have a timeline! Programmers are magicians. And this waiting and timelines. It's just them being greedy, keeping all the magic for themselves!

Wednesday: is it done yet?
You: it will be done may 8th. It would've been the 6th, but you won't leave me alone to actually make any progress.

Anything can be used in production. We got deadlines to meet. We'll find a real solution later. Probably.

@netikras of course. Haven't you ever remembered only part of your password? I know it's kinda like this. Maybe. At least you can still log in. How nice of them...

Ahemm....

Admin
%

Nothing to see here. Move along....

@Wisecrack hmm? Wikipedia? Was that meant to be a reply to @coffemaker ?

Either way. Excited to see what happens Saturday, but i only meant for something so revolutionary, so amazingly impressive, with the power to completely change security as we know it, you chose a kinda weird way to announce this achievement.

Yo ow, if I'd solved this, I definitely wouldn't be posting it here.

Scream it from the rooftops, give it to cryptographers for peer review, release it for anarchy sake, sell in for millions, but the last thing I would do is try to prove I did it by factoring numbers from a rants comments.

But I'm eager to see the results

@-pthread I knew there would be one lmao! It's arch-based. Don't be like that. As long as OP isn't posting in the arch forums, I don't see the issue.

@Gregozor2121 you are correct. I never said they weren't.

I said we use them as if they refer to 2**10 instead of 10**3

It's still wrong, but what is wrong will become "right" if everyone misuses it enough (see: literally , Webster's dict)

I was only saying that the KiB and the like are not poisoned with the actual vs assumed, vs drive manufacturers, vs Microsoft issues. Everyone knows a KiB is 1024. No confusion

This is wholesome. Most downtime results in bitching and moaning.

It's nice to see developers praising developers. I approve!

@AlgoRythm honestly when it comes to drawing on screens y,x really is the more logical way to think about it.

But it still fucks with me everytime I get back in to ncurses.

I both hate and support this move!

Shaming sites is obviously not an amazing idea. Especially if their speed issues are due to DNS problems, hosting, server location, or other technical reasons.... But on the other hand:

Usually i just want to read an article. Or a rant, or an SO question. Occasionally videos or pictures, but honestly text is where it's at. And I can't read that text cause I have to wait for 17 animated gif ads for shit I don't want, a cookie banner, a full screen ad (or a "please turn off your adblocker. We will not show you anything at all until you do", so you turn it off, and THEN a full screen ad) and some JavaScript bullshit that dynamically loads some heavy widget you don't give a fuck about or a framework that they use literally one function from.

If this punishes sites who bloat their content with several megs of ads and iframes, and makes management reconsider, them I'm all for it.

@electrineer I agree. I wish we could just switch to metric but I doubt we ever will. And of course they pick the smaller. Bigger numbers are better.... Obviously. But even if 1024 was legally required, I don't think companies would make TB drives until their competitors force them to. Because why change the product, when it's way cheaper to change the box. Capitalism is the best.

@Fast-Nop @Root I 100 percent agree with you. It's a silly word. But a consistent one. Not tainted with the needless confusion of kilo/mega.

Devil's advocate: it's a little against the language to use kilo to mean 1024 just in computers when it means 1000 everywhere else. (Although it's English. It's already a nightmare where many words aren't consistent so ehh)

Ideally we use kilo/mega/giga to mean 1024, but then drive manufacturers either have to cram more bits into their drives, or sell "984GB" drives which is arguably more confusing and worse. It's more truthful but that will get annoying real quick.

I really wish we could commit to the kibi/mebi/etc standard. It's nice how words actually mean what the are supposed to and everyone understands. 1024. No ambiguity.

Kilobyte... wait. Do you mean 2^10 or 10^3? It's gotten so bad that some hard drive manufacturers write in small print on their boxes: " 1gb = 1,000,000,000" which they wouldn't have to if everyone can just agree on the unit.

Or we can all use GiB. because there is no room for confusion. 1024, no debating. Why does this have to be so hard?!

Of course he doesn't have js on his website.

He knows how js works. Why would you want it after that?!?!

This happens to me a lot. Try redefining the problem.

No: "why do I get a, when I expect b?"

Yes: "why do I expect b? And what is b really? How does it differ from a?"

Yes: "functions take things in, do some stuff, and return something else. So I'm putting in x,y,z and getting a. But I want to get b. So what should I put in to get there? What do those change?"

Also make sure what you want is what you actually want. Don't end up with an XY problem.

This bothers me so much. And I have no idea why. It's clever and mildly funny and WHY does this annoy me?!?!

How to get a raise:

1) :set expandtab

This is a problem I've run into frequently. Because of other hosts on the network, bandwidth limitations, cross talk, long cable runs or other things that cause signal degradation, fragmentation errors, the need to try closed ports multiple times in case a packet was simply dropped, etc

There's just too many factors. Even if you are trying ports in parallel, there's just a point where it's too fast to trust the results. Ports that you know for a fact are open report closed or filtered. Because the network is failing to deliver responses before the timeout.

My best suggestions are:
1) limit the ports you want scanned
2) scan at night or when it taking forever isn't a big deal
3) scan always, on a loop. Slowly. if a port was open 2 hrs ago, it's probably open now if it's a legitimate service. Is 2 hours too old for that specific port? Do that one again as needed in real-time.

I prefer 3 because let's be honest, if it takes 2hrs to run, then the first port tested is 2 hrs old anyways.