If you run the ancient software on modern Windows, you might consider windows sudo, which is a thing nowadays.
I wonder whether you cannot use Windows user permission ACLs. They are pretty fine grained. Might be hard to find the right set of permissions, but for me this sounds the more relevant place compared to PAM.
If this is also some ancient Windows version, such as w2k, I would isolate the overall machine and stick with admin permissions.
To clarify, a good title would be "Loading Doom entirely from DNS records"
Neither one plays Doom over DNS nor is the first paragraph in the README correct, because DNS is only abused for storage, not for computing/processing/executing instructions:
> At some point, a reasonable person asked "DNS resolves names to IP addresses, what else can it do?" The answer, apparently, is run DOOM.
Same here. What I hate most is the fact how tooling decides what should be hidden files and what not. Hiding important configuration files (also done by some SSGs) is a bad habit which makes it hard to explore a new project. At least such files should be refered to in some README.
Traffic for the static payload is super cheap. And the insane amount of requests is handled easily by modern event-based architectures. The operation costs are most likely only a tiny amount of the overall economics of the tracker's buisness model. The generated tracking data is certainly worth an order of magnitude more then it takes to generate it.
The tragedy of the commons affects not only grey-haired astronomers but everybody who wants to learn about nature. Light pollution is already so real that I assume the majority of people in "industrialized states" haven't seen milky way with naked eyes if they cannot afford traveling to very remote areas (me included, despite I have a PhD in astrophysics, which makes me technically a grey-haired astronomer).
Of course technology will eventually solve the problem and space-based observatories are superior, despite more expensive and thus makes it more difficult to make science inclusive.
The big question is: Will the shift to orbit exclude a big part of mankind from participating? Capitalism most likely days "yes" and this is, in fact, a tragedy.
We can't avoid altering nature, especially when we expand our capabilities, which in turn lets us learn more about it. It's like quantum mechanics. Our act of observation affects the world.
And anyway, satellite constellations don't stop us learning about the universe. We can put telescopes in space. They're better than terrestrial telescopes! It's fine. We'll be okay, especially in the long run.
Please remember that change is only bad if it's change for the worse. Change in itself isn't bad.
More subtly: Change can make things worse for certain individuals, those with "night sky photography" as a hobby, or individual researchers working with solely with terrestrial telescopes. The motorcar was terrible for buggy whip makers too!
> I assume the majority of people in "industrialized states" haven't seen milky way with naked eyes if they cannot afford traveling to very remote areas (me included, despite I have a PhD in astrophysics, which makes me technically a grey-haired astronomer).
You really don't have to go that far, even from the most light-polluted places. Simply driving outside of the "greater city borders" will get you a more than good enough view to experience the awe.
> The big question is: Will the shift to orbit exclude a big part of mankind from participating? Capitalism most likely days "yes" and this is, in fact, a tragedy.
Satellite constellations in no shape way or form affect amateur astronomy, other than the "pretty pictures" aspect, and there's workarounds for that too.
It does upset professional astronomers, but I'm betting they'll adapt in the same manner that they've figured out workarounds for everything else. I suspect they'll end up using something like video capture and "median of 'n' frames" digital post-processing to filter out the satellites. Even space telescopes have to filter out noise due to radiation and the like! It's the nature of science.
I don't want this to come across the wrong way, but fundamentally: science never was "democratic", doesn't (really) pretend to be so, and especially modern science can't possibly be anything other than the plaything of very rich nation-states.
Historically, science was done by the wealthy. Lords, and the like.
These days, science is done with budgets in the millions or billions, especially astronomy where bigger and better telescopes are the name of the game.
I don't accept criticism of "global internet coming down from space" because it might stop someone from doing astronomy that is so poor that they can't even drive a few hundred miles to get a better view of the sky! They're not going to meaningfully contribute, no matter how noble their effort.
I wonder whether this requires particular GUI toolkits to be used, such as WFC. In any GUI there are enough "bad boy" toolkits which just "draw lines" and thus are not accessible at all.
The coverage varies by toolkit. Win32/WPF/GTK expose rich trees. Electron apps expose key elements but the tree is shallower. Custom-drawn UIs (games, OpenGL) have minimal or no accessibility tree. That's the main limitation.
To be honest, the same applies when a developer gets promoted to team lead. I made this experience on my own that I no longer got in touch with the code written. Reasons are slightly different (for me it was a lack of time and documentation)
I am a scientist who rarely collaborates (unlike programmers and unlike most scientists).
When I wrote a paper in collaboration some time ago, it felt very weird to have large parts of the paper that I had superficial knowledge of (incidentally, I had retyped everything my co-author did, but in my own notation) but no profound knowledge of how it was obtained, of the difficulties encountered. I guess this is how people who started vibe coding must feel.
I wonder whether you cannot use Windows user permission ACLs. They are pretty fine grained. Might be hard to find the right set of permissions, but for me this sounds the more relevant place compared to PAM.
If this is also some ancient Windows version, such as w2k, I would isolate the overall machine and stick with admin permissions.
reply