Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | ape4's commentslogin

If I recall correctly:

    dd if=/dev/urandom of=/home/myrandomfile bs=1 count=N

If you want to do it really quickly

    openssl enc -aes-256-ctr -pbkdf2 -pass pass:"$(date '+%s')" < /dev/zero | dd of=/home/myrandomfile bs=1M count=1024
Almost all CPUs have AES native instructions so you'll be able to produce pseudorandom junk really fast. Even my old system will produce it at about 3Gb/s. Much faster than urandom can go.

bs=1 is a recipe for waiting far longer than you have to because of the overhead of the system calls. Better bs=N count=1

That’s also not great if you’re trying to make a 10 gigabyte file. In that case, use bs=1M and count=SizeInMB.

Modern computers are crazily overengineered...

Most current desktops (smaller than your usual server) won't have any problem with the GP's command. Yours is still better, of course.


Even if the block size (bs) is really big? Say, 10GB

(Not saying you're wrong, just asking)


Can they ask the Claude to clean up the duplication etc its English code?

Can the "app" just load the mobile website. Then everyone is happy?

Didn't they rename everything "dotnet" when that was the hot thing

Shouldn't a scientific paper be using metric units (like 30T) rather than 30B.

There are two distinct billions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billion


Objective one should be to communicate effectively, not confuse everybody.

that disqualifies like 80% of papers lmao

Lol, you're probably not wrong. But have you ever noticed that the most important papers tend to be on the clear and readable side of things? It's as if researchers understand that being understood is important, but deemphasize that when the paper itself isn't important in the first place. (Maybe if they're only publishing to not perish, not being understood is actually a goof thing from their perspective?)

ATT=All TLAs are Taken

So many more layers than the original simple DNS protocol.

"Simple" doesn't always mean "better". A car without seatbelts is less complicated than one with, but it definitely doesn't make it a better car.

Similarly, The original DNS protocol doesn't have any form of verification: it is is trivially easy for a MitM attacker to alter the responses - or even for a non-MitM one to send spoofed responses "in the blind". It also doesn't have any form of confidentiality: it is trivially easy for a MitM attacker to log all the requests you make, which essentially means your entire browser history.

It takes an awful lot of hacking to turn classic DNS into something even remotely representing a mature and well-designed protocol. By the time you are done bolting on all the other stuff it really isn't all that simple anymore.


> it is is trivially easy for a MitM attacker to alter the responses

This is true even for DOH. There is no guaranty that your TLS certificate issuer is to be trusted. And, by the way, most of them are in the USA, a country known for its surveillance programs.


Too bad ISPs are real dicks and capture all your DNS requests for tracking and resale.

OK. It is still there, and you are welcome to use it.

Remember when we worked on new hashing, cryptography, compression, etc algorithms? Now we are trying to find the best ways to tell an AI to be quiet.

Yeah, the first example on that site doesn't need any formatting. It just says your code is <code>

So will I be able to upgrade my old computer without a Trusted Platform Module 2?


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: