Japan is great, because they realized that if you stop giving a fuck about public debt you can make a great country happen.
Who could have thought that with investment rather than letting everything crumble things would get better?
Meanwhile here everyone is close to tears if you propose anything for the public, because that might lead to lowering the tax break for some huge multi national that then would not get the well-deserved pay-off for their lobbying work.
And to be fair who wants to live under a regime that is the worst kind of communism, treating people who want need pee, but don't pay with respect, like Japan? (sarcasm)
> Japan is great, because they realized that if you stop giving a fuck about public debt you can make a great country happen.
Japan can largely ignore its public debt because its mostly owned by the Japanese themselves, and thus contained within the nation & erodible via inflation.
Most other countries are restricted from doing this due to the massive foreign ownership of national debt, & ending up in hands/firms/governments outside of their nation.
> Japan is great, because they realized that if you stop giving a fuck about public debt you can make a great country happen.
I don’t know if that’s a key contributor but with those economic policies you also it seems wind up with low economic growth and in a time when you might end to raise interest rates doing so is catastrophic - leaves little room for flexibility.
Seriously, it's long and still common, even in the context of computing, even in programming languages. Why would you choose a long name with two words and then not choose something somewhat unique? Such a horrible decision.
Really sad given that otherwise this seems like one of the more interesting new languages I've seen on HN.
I think one has to keep in mind where that slogan came from. A time where every OS tried to start a million services listening on the network, when OpenBSD ended up minimizing that, because it was aware of attack surface.
Nowadays it does the same with being very defensive of complexity and adding features just for the sake of it. They actively remove features and technically break standards to reduce surface. So while the phrase might be dated the whole idea of doing the minimal thing to provide minimal attack surface is something that some other projects could very much benefit from. Especially in times where people use LLMs that happily write ten classes instead of a simple five line function everyone can easily understand and verify.
Also I think it simply became a bit of a meme and like with the art and music it became a bit of a project culture thing. Don't overanalyze it. It's a joke like "days since last accident" and how Shodan is a video game reference and firewall probably came from some fantasy nerd. Hey, the term sharding came from a video game as well!
There is another take on "heavily audited". Many OSs and eg. browsers have the issue that there are huge amounts of pretty complex codes. OpenBSD is extremely inviting and among actual general purpose operating systems used on a daily basis in production one of the projects that sees a quite big amount of reads because of the relative simplicity and (intentionally) low amount of code.
Really, try making sense of pretty much anything in the Linux kernel compared to the OpenBSD kernel or any of the bigger browsers. Like fully grasping it. There is worlds in between.
This has secondary effects of people actually looking at code that is not their area of expertise and developers also working outside their subsystems.
Meanwhile in eg Linux you have huge swaths of code that essentially only some guy in some company somewhere has somewhat of a grasp of. And that's where Linux constantly sees its vulnerabilities, while OpenBSD actively removes such things, eg they removed Bluetooth support back in 2014. This leads to a situation where people actually are able to dig into things. They also have a huge amount of guardrails turned on and I know people that compile their code on OpenBSD despite not targeting the OS at all because of those guardrails uncovering issues.
Think about any bigger software company. There is a huge chance you basically have no idea how the stuff outside your team works maybe not even all of your team.
These kind of are the attack vectors we see in Open Source all the time (and actually closed source software too). It's not the stuff that everyone uses and wants to understand deeply in browsers that cause exploits. It's that one tiny thing that is part of the standard or somehow support was added, but despite nobody using it it's still there, either because well.. it's a standard or because nobody bothered to remove it.
OpenBSD even decided to break some standards for security reasons, but that's another topic.
What I wanna say with that is: I can think of a lot of projects that have more devs and more people looking at parts of it, but these projects tend to be quickly changing huge codebases, where no single person can have a good understanding of everything. This means that there is a good likelyhood that parts are not audited until some group or individual comes along and picks such a bit.
It's actually also what likely happened in this case, given it's 37 years old.
This isn't to defend OpenBSD, but to point out that X amount of people doesn't mean much without taking the size of the audit into consideration. I would think that big projects is something where LLMs really shine, but I also think that reducing attack surface by reducing code and complexity might be the biggest defense and as far as I have seen OpenBSD does a great job there and should be considered something that others can learn from.
And it's not just these kinds of software. It's not even just software per se. It's also infrastructure, where complexity usually means increased attack surface. And just to be clear: One always adds complexity, but it should be the minimal amount to fulfill the goal and not more and try to not add side goals you don't actually care about and want to maintain.
Especially with LLMs it's so incredibly easy to add complexity only for tomorrow's LLM (or human) to find huge amounts of bugs.
I was an early Amazon user and introduced many people to it (was nice to easily acquire books). Have deleted my account 15ish years ago and noticed weird mindsets people developed, thinking they cannot get products elsewhere, thinking that Amazon ships faster than others when using Amazon Prime, thinking Amazon has cheap products and so on.
Showed what make believes people have.
I'm a guy that is pretty lazy and spends most of his money on convenience and not having to do stuff. It's not even convenient.
It's always a bit scary what things people believe end up believing about completely depending on one company.
I think it is interesting you think that people are believing fiction about Amazon when it comes to convenience. This reminds of the AI debate. Some people think AI is great and others think it is stupid. Neither side can see the others perspective.
Ah, I see, Ireland and McKinsey are trying to copy and capture McDonalds audience. /s
Yes, you said burger, but also AlphaNIST is not a technology conglomerate holding company. And the term Alpha is not at all used in their products. It's neither Alpha Phones, not AlphaGemini, nor is Google called Alpha. More than that Alphabet is never shortened Alpha.
I would strongly argue against that. I would argue that Google Deepmind has consistently used AlphaSomething for their scientific models. Not for their consumer models which are Gemini, but their models which are more cutting edge and specific to niche problems.
Got any in a single category which all start with Alpha and named by the same organization? Say something like... I don't know... Deep learning models published by Google?
If there's 10 breakfast cereals from the same company all starting with Alpha, I would give you some credit. But like this I don't even know what your reply is trying to tell me.
I honestly feel like I am taking crazy pills here.
OK I'm telling you that I'm not as keen as you are to cede every possible name that starts with "Alpha" to Google.
And to answer your question directly, DEC had a whole series of things called "Alpha". eg AlphaStation family of workstations, the Alpha AXP series of processors etc (alpha 21064, alpha 21164, alpha 21264, alpha 21364).
That's silly. Neither is Discord the only one with that layout (Slack and even things like Gajim have similar layouts) nor would/should it count as something that cannot be copied.
The fact that Apple back in the early iOS days thought it invented desktop icons is still absolutely ridiculous.
There are still reasonable, noticable differences in the layout between slack and discord.
Compare strafe and discord, the only differences im seeing is the strafe icon instead of the discord icon and a small difference in the embed in the chat message.
Sorry, but that's just a silly comment. There are many many things causing suicide, including things like celebrities dying or marrying. Should that now be outlawed?
Talking about suicide can cause people to commit suicide, should it be outlawed?
And there were books banned for similar ideas and society at large decided that in most cases it's overreacting and does more harm than good.
Yes, I'd do everything for children to not die, but I wouldn't want them to spend their whole lives in a padded room being only allowed to consume nutritional paste and essentially have no life at all.
There is that idea of laws shouldn't be made for individual cases. It's a bit like how many people believed things like rock music made people into murderers or suicidal only to now have lots of people claim it saved them.
There are people claiming that LLM systems helped them through harsh times.
I say claim, because I neither know all the details about those cases nor claimed suicides, but the idea of absolutes like that is a lot more bothering than what you quoted. And not being able to take (maybe understand?) nuanced stances.
Who could have thought that with investment rather than letting everything crumble things would get better?
Meanwhile here everyone is close to tears if you propose anything for the public, because that might lead to lowering the tax break for some huge multi national that then would not get the well-deserved pay-off for their lobbying work.
And to be fair who wants to live under a regime that is the worst kind of communism, treating people who want need pee, but don't pay with respect, like Japan? (sarcasm)
reply