Users unable to log into League of Legends due to an internal SSL certificate that was valid for 10 years expired today, 2026-01-04.
Temporary workaround is to set your computer's clock back to before the certificate expires, until a new client build is released with an updated certificate, presumably.
> Just as before, Enterprises using the ExtensionManifestV2Availability policy will continue to be exempt from any browser changes until at least June 2025. Starting in June, the branch for Chrome 139 will begin, in which support for Manifest V2 extensions will be removed from Chrome. Unlike the previous changes to disable Manifest V2 extensions which gradually rolled out to users, this change will impact all users on Chrome 139 at once. As a result, Chrome 138 is the final version of Chrome to support Manifest V2 extensions (when paired with the ExtensionManifestV2Availability key). You can find the release information about Chrome 138 and 139, include ChromeOS's LTS support, on the Chromium release schedule
I still have my copy of Skitch installed, and agree, it is and was the best solution for so many use cases.
However, given the fact that it has been abandonware for a long time now, I did look for alternatives for that fateful day when Apple fucks up macOS sufficiently where Skitch is no longer executable, which is not a question of if, but a matter of when.
I decided that CleanShot X was the closest thing to a suitable alternative to Skitch, although it has a number of really annoying design decisions that keep it from being a suitable replacement for Skitch, unfortunately.
If someone could convince the owners of the Skitch IP to open source it, I would be very interested in helping maintain it.
Very cool. I'd love to know what technique they used to build the dialogs with the simulated chat, with the text animation sequences filling out the "DMARC Results" area -- what does the source for this UI look like?
Edit: Just found the `terminal.analyze` function: very cool. That `terminal.echo` is so clever.
That's what I thought was neat about this site. There are plenty of MX testers out there, but I felt this was pretty unique. I thought it was a great idea that it interrogates a send email rather than just look up DNS entries.
Look at techniques such as Dependency Injection, and Feature Flags. Each deployment should only be a different configuration of Feature Flags. Otherwise, you're overcomplicating things.
Agree. The problem with forking or having separate long running branches for each customer is that you end up maintaining n slightly different mutations of the same system. X got a fix for a recurring issue, the fix has been copypasted or cherry-picked to Y. Y got a different feature . Z didn't get the previous patch because this customer does not really use the given feature. Another developer finds a new, common problem and now, he must create 3 different fixes in 3, slightly different systems.
Managing feature flags are not always easy, but creates significantly less maintenance overhead than managing multiple mostly similar, but different codebases.
> Last refreshed: 2024-01-26 21:04:32Z (UTC)
>
> Current status: Our failover operation did not provide the anticipated relief to end users in North and South America regions and we are now working to optimize traffic patterns as part of the mitigation effort. We’re applying configuration changes across the affected network infrastructure to reduce user impact as quickly as possible.
>
> Next update by: Friday, January 26, 2024, at 11:00 PM UTC
There are a number of companies out there that pay well above market rates, and are unable to hire enough _sufficiently skilled_ developers. They literally hire every single one they can find and pay them at top-of-market--I mean, what they pay developers actually defines what top-of-market is at any given time--and they'll tell you they would hire more if they could, but there aren't any more, which is the definition of shortage.
The statement "there is a shortage of skilled software developers" is true and not disingenuous.
There is a glut of unskilled software developers. There are many companies that are unwilling or unable to pay market rate for talent. But, neither of those things changes the fact that there is a real shortage of skilled software developers, as the demand for them cannot be fulfilled.
> What? b is 2? It should be 4. Or produce an error, or something. But not 2. There's no universe in which that result could be considered correct, it's just wrong.
It is correct, and what I would expect based on the behavior in MySQL documentation.
"An expression expr can refer to any column that was set earlier in a value list."
As the columns are evaluated in left-to-right order, "earlier" in this context means "to the left of".
Therefore:
INSERT INTO t1 (b,a) values (DEFAULT, 3);
At the time `b` is being evaluated, `a` is to the right of it, so the current value of `a` is its own default value, which is `1`. So, `a+1` will evaluate to `1+1` or `2`.
This is not a bug, this is the documented and expected behavior.
To try and illustrate more clearly, try this:
CREATE TABLE t1 (a int default 11, b int default 22, c int default (a+b+33));
To start simply:
INSERT INTO t1 (a, b, c) VALUES (DEFAULT, DEFAULT, DEFAULT);
This gives us:
SELECT * FROM t1;
+------+------+------+
| a | b | c |
+------+------+------+
| 11 | 22 | 66 |
+------+------+------+
No surprises.
Next:
DELETE FROM t1;
INSERT INTO t1 (a, b, c) VALUES (44, 55, DEFAULT);
SELECT * FROM t1;
+------+------+------+
| a | b | c |
+------+------+------+
| 44 | 55 | 132 |
+------+------+------+
Again, no surprises. Now, let's reorder things a bit:
DELETE FROM t1;
INSERT INTO t1 (b, c, a) VALUES (87, DEFAULT, 65);
Knowing that we're evaluating this left-to-right, and `a`, `b` and `c` start out set to their default values as defined in the table schema, what do we expect? <a=65, b=87, c=??>
At the time `c` is being computed though, what is the value of `a`? Is it `65`, or `11`? We would expect it to be equal to `11`, as we haven't evaluated the value of `a` in the INSERT statement, yet.
Therefore, we expect `c = 11 + 87 + 33 = 131` and NOT `c = 65 + 87 + 33 = 185`.
SELECT * FROM t1;
+------+------+------+
| a | b | c |
+------+------+------+
| 65 | 87 | 131 |
+------+------+------+
And, sure enough, there it is.
This is well-defined and expected behavior. Sorry, not a bug.
I can still use `pr` to paginate my source for printing, and use `enscript` to produce a PostScript document of it, then `ps2pdf` to convert that to PDF, then I can spool that PDF to any printer.
And, on my home network, I have a HP LaserJet 2300dn and I can actually just shove the plain text output from `pr` straight to the JetDirect port on 9100/tcp.
What exactly is the obstacle that's preventing you from printing out your source code?
A specially crafted malicious file when opened by Notepad++ may be able to execute arbitrary code on the victim's computer, without any further interaction, aside from opening the malicious file.
Temporary workaround is to set your computer's clock back to before the certificate expires, until a new client build is released with an updated certificate, presumably.
Surprisingly, not a DNS issue, for a change.