As I mentioned in the mailing list post, the Microsoft paperwork shuffling matter got dealt with rather quickly, following all the attention the HN thread from the other day got. And now we're finally out with an update! NT programming is a lot of fun, though this release was quite challenging, because of all of the toolchain updates. On the plus side, we got to remove pre-Win10 support -- https://lists.zx2c4.com/pip…
Good to know everything was resolved, but did you ever find out why your signing account was suspended? That's not something you brush off as haha silly Microsoft..
WireGuard makes new Windows release following Microsoft signing resolution
81–90 of 175 posts
Re: WireGuard makes new Windows release following Microsoft signing resolution
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apparently it's quite widespread, so I would assume a bug on their side. That's what support seemed to imply at least. We're still blocked at my company for one month+ now.
"so I would assume a bug on their side" Why a "bug".
I doubt someone manually went and flagged all the accounts as invalid suddenly or whatever and that was their goal.
By a bug I mean some kind of automated action that did not produce the expected outcome.
Also because, at least on our side, the account was in an inconsistent state: we were correctly enrolled/validated, but could not access the signing interface.
Re: WireGuard makes new Windows release following Microsoft signing resolution
#83An interesting point I don't think I've seen someone make -- people compare the LLM revolution to other technical revolutions. You don't need to worry about skill decay in the same way that you don't know how to bake bread from unprocessed wheat, or you don't know how to build a loom, etc.
But local models aside (which no matter the protests from HN, will only be available to the technically savvy few) all of these LLMs are a service, so, the company could degrade the service, they could charge more than you're willing or able to pay, they could ban you. They could disable your account with no meaningful way appeal or seek support. LLMs could look at lot more like the scenario in this thread than something like not knowing how to make your own shoes.
Re: WireGuard makes new Windows release following Microsoft signing resolution
#84LibreOffice, VeraCrypt, WireGuard. 2 questions: Whats next? Is that a pattern?
And Windscribe
Re: WireGuard makes new Windows release following Microsoft signing resolution
#85Why do people put so much effort into supporting a hostile platform? I really don't get it.
Re: WireGuard makes new Windows release following Microsoft signing resolution
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
> incompetence is always more likely than malice. "Incompetence" of this degree is malice . It is actively malicious to create a system that automatically locks people out of their accounts with absolutely no possibility for human review or recourse short of getting traction in the media. "No sir, I didn't grind those orphans up. It was this orphan grinding machine I made that did it, teehee!"
i am positive that you understand the spirit of what that saying means. incompetence is always more likely than [intentional, directed] malice. microsoft employees did not deliberately attack the wireguard project with a goal of taking it down for whatever grand scheme people's hatred cooks up. if you have evidence that microsoft did this deliberately to ruin the wireguard project, please forward it along to jason (t…
Malicious people are quite good at feigning incompetence.
Re: WireGuard makes new Windows release following Microsoft signing resolution
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
And the person you are responding is asserting that the response to incompetence of this level should be the SAME as if it directed and intentional malice. Which is a completely valid way to view a fuckup like this.
> response to incompetence of this level should be the SAME sure. but this was not a deliberate attack by microsoft employees to shutdown wireguard. that is what i was trying to say and the essence of the quote in question.
Microsoft drove a truck through a school yard at 150mph. It was not a deliberate attack, it was just the fastest route and their map says there's a highway there. Is it malice?
A certain level of recklessness is automatically malice.
Re: WireGuard makes new Windows release following Microsoft signing resolution
#88What's going on at Microsoft? Why did they suddenly declare war on VPN and related software projects?
Wouldn't comply with CIA backdoor requirements, but now they do ;)
Re: WireGuard makes new Windows release following Microsoft signing resolution
#89An interesting point I don't think I've seen someone make -- people compare the LLM revolution to other technical revolutions. You don't need to worry about skill decay in the same way that you don't know how to bake bread from unprocessed wheat, or you don't know how to build a loom, etc. But local models aside (which no matter the protests from HN, will only be available to the technically savvy few) all of these L…
It might settle into a situation where cutting edge LLMs are a service, while older and smaller LLMs are self-hosted. So you are not at risk of being cut off, but of being degraded.
Re: WireGuard makes new Windows release following Microsoft signing resolution
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
> response to incompetence of this level should be the SAME sure. but this was not a deliberate attack by microsoft employees to shutdown wireguard. that is what i was trying to say and the essence of the quote in question.
Microsoft drove a truck through a school yard at 150mph. It was not a deliberate attack, it was just the fastest route and their map says there's a highway there. Is it malice? A certain level of recklessness is automatically malice.
>[...] It was not a deliberate attack [...]
in that case, it certainly wouldnt be called a deliberate attack, right?
the edit in my original comment should hopefully clear up any confusion of my intended point. and, well... the comment you replied to should also make it clear that my entire point is centered around something being deliberate attack vs. ridiculous incompetence.
the deliberateness of it is the entirety of the reason i wrote my comment. choosing the phrase "malice vs. incompetence" was a poor choice on my part, when i should have been extremely explicit. it would have avoided all of this back-and-forth.