@mwl what constitutes a static site generator?

Does sed / awk / m4 / make / SSI backing HTML+CSS count?

I strongly suspect that you are versed is the art of text manipulation a la command line pipe sequences.

Oh be still my beating heart! 💗
https://mastodon.social/@jpmens/114704482276463993

@CursedSilicon /bin/yes

@hackerfactor I don’t remember seeing them in Longmont : Thornton where I spent time.

Maybe I missed them.

But it seems that people responsible for the signs didn’t object to the stickers.

I would be shocked if the people responsible for the signs were in on it.

@jpmens I share the toot with myself.

Then I check a few days later when reviewing email.

@hackerfactor are you in Boulder Colorado?

That’s the last place I saw hula hoop stickers added to official signs.

Despite the critiques, I’m enjoying what I’m reading.

@PurpleJillybeans Thank you! I am very satisfied with your explanation as it makes perfect sense to me.

TIL 😁

@gewt ah that makes more sense.

Thank you. 🙂

@gewt is that a window manager of some sort?

I thought the DECserver 300 was a serial console server.

@PurpleJillybeans it surprises me that QEMU is more efficient than 86Box.

Where can I learn more?

@gumnos sadly I had to go through them and make sure I knew what the alert was for and that we were addressing it.

@gumnos nicely done.

I woke up to 700+ emails from monitoring about problems communicating with the DR site.

One core switch reboot later and it’s time to shovel email and tickets with a skid loader.

Indeed...

#QOTD #Quotes #Quote #AI #IA

Look, maybe newer generations don't *need* to understand computers in as excruciating detail as us millennials had to do growing up, but could they at least be taught a grasp of "what kind of information might someone need to solve a problem you're reporting"? There's a wide, wide chasm between "hi I got an error but tried XYZ, Z worked for me but could you check X and Y" and "hi I got an error".

@benjojo I’ve been known to report these as abuse / phishing / spam

Evetually someone will get a hint.

I created some code to reformat the output of ip --brief to look a bit cleaner (IMO).

You can find the code in https://github.com/SebastianMeisel/mybashrc .

#ip #ipv6 #bash #awk #cli

@SebasTEAan interesting.

Thank you for your efforts and sharing.

I’ll check this out.

Remember the threads¹² about #LetsEncrypt removing a crucial key usage from certificates issued by them in predictive obedience to their premium sponsor Google?

We were at first concerned about #SMTP. While I had lived through this problem with #StartSSL by #StartCom back in 2011, I only had a vague recollection of Jabber but recalled in detail that it broke server-to-server SMTP verification (whether the receiving server acted on it or just documented it).

Well, turns out someone now reported that it indeed breaks #XMPP entirely: https://community.letsencrypt.org/t/do-not-remove-tls-client-auth-eku/237427/66

This means that it will soon no longer be possible at all to operate Jabber (XMPP) servers because the servers use the operating system’s CA certificate bundle for verification, which generally follows the major browsers’ root stores, which has requirements from the CA/Browser forum who apparently don’t care about anything else than the webbrowser, and so no CA whose root certificate is in that store will be allowed to issue certificates suitable for Jabber/XMPP server-to-server communication while these CAs are the only ones trusted by those servers.

So, yes, Google’s requirement change is after all breaking Jabber entirely. Ein Schelm, wer Böses dabei denkt.

Update: it also breaks the connections between domain registrars and registries, with most being unaware that there even is a problem at this time, let alone the crazily short timeframe. See the thread linked to in a self-reply, which also confirms that the CA/Browser forum is supporting Google in this (possibly by means of Google paying, my interpretation).

While https://nerdcert.eu/ by @jwildeboer would in theory help, it’s not existent yet, and there’s not just the question of when it will be included in operating systems’ root CA stores but whether it will be included in them at all.

Google’s policy has no listed contact point, and the CA/B forum isn’t something mere mortals can complain to, so I’d appreciate if someone who can, and who has significant skills to argument this in English and is willing to, to bring it to them.

① mine: https://toot.mirbsd.org/@mirabilos/statuses/01JV8MDA4P895KK6F91SV7WET8
② jwildeboer’s: https://social.wildeboer.net/@jwildeboer/114516238307785904

@timoj @tomjennings a certificate authority should actively avoid policing where their certificates are used.

Hosting companies should enforce their terms of services and take down clients doing illegal things.