"Hello,

This does not qualify as an infringement to our Terms of Use policy. Deprecating such images and repo(s) is the responsibility of the owner and we recommend you reach out to them. Docker advises its users to opt into using images under our official programs and offerings such as Docker Official Images and Docker Hardened Images.

Thank you, Security@Docker"

In their ToU under section 6.6, they outline how they may scan images for vulnerabilities and request the owners of said packages fix it, or simply remove it from their site. They clearly do not do this though even when notified of the high criticality vulnerability.

Given the developers have not replied to the thread after a day and the one who was enthusiastic is now the one doling out the information that they are no longer supporting their docker image, I highly doubt they will perform a 180 on policy and suddenly work with them to provide an official curated image. If they wanted to keep the docker image alive they would have continued updating it and not shut down community feedback begging for them to maintain it.

Docker has a vested interest in keeping popular images maintained and a billion+ download package suddenly becoming defunct is noticable to them. Minio seems to be prioritizing their commercial offering and removing support for their open source offering though. Nuking their community documentation doesn't spell anything good for the future of minio for the FOSS community.

The minio image is basically a community one that anyone could have created, but still shows in overall docker hub. It's created by minio themselves. I'm kind of surprised they haven't removed it, but with over a billion downloads they are easily in the top ten of whatever category they fall under creating substantial free advertisement.

Best to get insecure and vulnerable software out of the hands of those who may not be familiar with this CVE or their change in policy that has not gotten a press release in any way.

Why wouldn't you go with a week or a day? isn't that better than a whole month?

Why isn't it instead just a minute? or a few seconds? Wouldn't that be better?

Why not have certificates dynamically generated constantly and have it so every single request is serviced by a new one and then destroyed after the session is over?

Maybe the problem isn't that certificates expire too soon, maybe the problem is that humans are lazy. Perhaps it's time to go with another method entirely.

I'm guessing they lost a wealth of great talent due to this test on how to support a platform that they give to fresh off the street applicants rather than having even a modicum of training about their product. They want you to study it for free, probably as a marketing tactic - but also so they don't have to pay to train employees. it's great like cancer.

Disclaimer: I have never applied to a role with datadog, nor interviewed with them. Just had multiple friends complete the process with mixed results. Seems like you need to put in ~two full weeks of self directed study to pass their on site interview 'exam' where they don't tell you about the exam being 100% or fail (but it is!)

The way I see it today, ideological reviews are what is mainstream. It's not about how the game is, it's how inclusive they are to minorities that is what reaches the front page. It's fucking bizarre but it makes sense when the goal is to reach as many people as possible. On both sides of politics it's just rage bait depending on which way the needle swings. Rage bait creates the clicks that brings the mass appeal not just "nerdy gamers."

I'm a nerdy gamer. I just want to know how good of a game stuff is. When you go to actual niche forums you find real information without the bullshit. You aren't going to find that at all on mainstream mass media sites like the Verge, Motherboard/Vice, Kotaku, et al. I think the goal of aftermath is to just create another mainstream outlet. I hope they prove me wrong.

Yearly upgrades of consumer electronics is a pretty non-sustainable idea. Imagine if every year everybody tossed their television, monitor, computer, phone, tablet, headphones, speakers and all their other smart devices into a landfill and bought new ones. Now realize this actually happens with phones in some cases and batteries in almost all cases.

No kids with android. No wife, husband, whatever with android. No friends with android. Just that trusty ole iphone and airpods.

Plus no iPad, no laptops with USB-C chargers, no battery banks with USB-C inputs/outputs, no other ereaders with usb-c, no USB-C desk fan, no USB-C headphones...

Must be interesting.

I don't know where this guy gets data but I don't think the availability is that far off from the peak. https://twitter.com/Econimica/status/1698596620022186428

You're talking less than 2 percentage points with the fed estimate anyway right?

Is it possible past releases of terraform having the MPL license means the creator cannot release it under a commercial license? e.g. by using the license you can't escape it for future versions and make it commercial, or does that not apply to the creator/owner.

I know what i'm hoping for is a pipe dream but once you start an open source project using an open source agreement for use it really shouldn't be possible to make it closed source. Open source means anyone could contribute and profiting on someone else's contributions feels very, very wrong.

>...Once complete, the center is planned to be used as a training center for police and fire services and is expected to open at the end of 2023....

>265 surrounding acres of the site will be used as green-space.[6]

265 acres of green space sounds good?

Except to improve services (ML training!), Advertising (We'll sell your data to advertisers!), and by government order (pick your favorite three letter agency.)

Alternatively: They'll just use your data anyway and not tell you about it. How is anyone going to prove their data was used as the source? It's like all the NDAs people sign when they join a company and they pinky promise not to use it at the next job where they land a big fat raise and promotion... suuure they aren't going to take what they've learned and improve upon it to try and get more promotions and raises in the future.

It can't be stopped.

Revenue based on selling copies of a recording is down. The cost of reproducing copies is less than ever. The barrier to creating your own music and distributing it to everyone in the world is less than ever.

All the middlemen cranking out wasteful copies of just one thing are not necessary since music is trivially reproduced with digital copies.

How much should music make as an industry? Who should be making the money from the music that is made? how much money should you make off of a single song that is performed a single time?

This is always a controversial issue. The loudest opinions typically say "they need to make more", which is the same opinion about nearly any profession in the entire world aside from the ones that make the very most money. Some musicians still fall into that category.

At the end of the day the lion's share of revenue doesn't go to a performer anyway, it goes to middlemen who add no value to the actual performance - they just make it be distributed and decide the winners and losers based on arbitrary gatekeeping. The contracts are predatory and the whole thing seems f'd to me.

I know many people with primary and side gigs as performance artists who don't make superstar money, there's no shortage. Live musical performance is all over the place and the ticket prices are outrageously high for any in-demand performance.

Most of us don't have the option for income in perpetuity for work performed - we just get paid for hours worked. Is there an argument around payment in perpetuity vs pay for work performed that should apply across the board?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36633702

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

Change, remove, modify letters until you reach 200 based on the sum of their atomic numbers.

For easy cheese, add H to increment by 1. Repeat capital H until you have reached the sum if you are under. Easy to later add and remove H until you satisfy the condition.

It is known to have major vulnerabilities https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/over-80-000-e...

Then their purchased company gets bankrupted, sells their assets to cover their debts (including said PE's 'debts' of services provided.)

They probably make 200-300% of their initial investment back by paying for the initial purchase with debt that is tacked onto the purchased organization and simply drain them dry. PE doesn't make a ton of money by being dumb, they make a ton of money using any and all tactics necessary to make big stacks in short time. Obviously not all PEs operate like this and there are likely many loopholes and strategies.

They bankrupt it by basically pumping it full of debt while taking money out and dumping it once it's out of money - zero liability with a LLC right?