💻 Customer-friendly design
Meet Fujitsu Lifebook U904 (2013). This bad boy completely defies the corporate rule of «if it doesn't fit, it isn't included». They managed to achieve this by making the Ethernet port... foldable.
While the construction is certainly not network admin friendly, and isn't going to last an exceedingly long time, it's far better than no port at all!
Remember this post when a corporation like Apple uses thinness as an excuse to strip your product of features or make you buy overpriced dongles! 😉
Meet Fujitsu Lifebook U904 (2013). This bad boy completely defies the corporate rule of «if it doesn't fit, it isn't included». They managed to achieve this by making the Ethernet port... foldable.
While the construction is certainly not network admin friendly, and isn't going to last an exceedingly long time, it's far better than no port at all!
Remember this post when a corporation like Apple uses thinness as an excuse to strip your product of features or make you buy overpriced dongles! 😉
❤148👍22😱8🎉6
Enderman
Photo
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Here is how the foldable port works!
😱138❤41👍13🎉5👎3🤔1
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
👍65❤14😱7🤔4👎3
Enderman
funny pisi photo behind this paywall (maybe it isn't worth it don't buy it)
free pisi photo (it's not as freaky)
😱98❤69👍8👎2🎉2🤔1
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
YouTube
The day Windows actually died
Hello, my friends! Let's hit 20K likes? Check out my website! https://enderman.ch
This isn't the type of video I commonly produce on this channel. I don't really talk about current topics, but this one I was following too closely to pass by on. The editor…
This isn't the type of video I commonly produce on this channel. I don't really talk about current topics, but this one I was following too closely to pass by on. The editor…
👍51❤10🤔3👎1
😢 The downgrade in software quality
It's not a secret that in recent years the software quality significantly degraded. Many bugs, previously unthinkable, started surfacing, but even more importantly, the developer communication skills have been lost. We've all experienced it with Microsoft's classic «Something happened».
Well, today I stumbled upon a new Blue Screen of Death concept on Twitter (figure 3). That looks awesome, doesn't it! It almost sends chills down my spine how great it actually looks. Seriously. Great job on that design. However, there's an inherent problem with such a design — it's a blue screen, it's designed to be lean and mean, and whatever it takes — let the user know why the computer crashed, as well as give helpful information about the crash to help prevent it in the future.
I've provided you with a chronological arrangement of Windows blue screens. The first one is the Windows XP blue screen, and as you can see, it gives you plenty of information:
▪️ The stop code;
▪️ The parameters;
▪️ The module that caused the crash;
▪️ Debug information for the module;
The Windows 10 blue screen looks nicer and cleaner, but lacks the module debug information, and hides the parameters behind a registry hack. They're not present in a BSOD by default.
The concept is looking so much better, but doesn't provide any information except the stop code! Now imagine your computer bootloops into a blue screen. Not a helpful wingman, I should say! You have better luck firing up WinDbg and analyzing the crash dump just to get the culprit module image name...
Regardless of that concept, it seems like we're headed that way anyhow, unfortunately. That's not the only problem. Let me explain why making the blue screen look nice is a bad idea.
Each element needs to be drawn out, and fancy graphics come at a cost. The computational cost doesn't matter in this case, any modern computer is capable of drawing basic geometry. The cost here is linking additional libraries to import necessary functions or implementing them within the lean bootvid library (I think they still use that).
The number one rule of software engineering — the more dependencies you have, the less reliable the system becomes. That's not what we want with the blue screen of death! We need it to fire each and every time, 100% of the time. The blue screen is actually a program in a sense that it's a routine that's being executed, when certain conditions are met, so it can also crash. The code may fail to execute, and all the user will see is a black screen.
That's certainly not favorable and shouldn't happen. That's why developers should always favor functionality over design.
— Enderman
It's not a secret that in recent years the software quality significantly degraded. Many bugs, previously unthinkable, started surfacing, but even more importantly, the developer communication skills have been lost. We've all experienced it with Microsoft's classic «Something happened».
Well, today I stumbled upon a new Blue Screen of Death concept on Twitter (figure 3). That looks awesome, doesn't it! It almost sends chills down my spine how great it actually looks. Seriously. Great job on that design. However, there's an inherent problem with such a design — it's a blue screen, it's designed to be lean and mean, and whatever it takes — let the user know why the computer crashed, as well as give helpful information about the crash to help prevent it in the future.
I've provided you with a chronological arrangement of Windows blue screens. The first one is the Windows XP blue screen, and as you can see, it gives you plenty of information:
▪️ The stop code;
▪️ The parameters;
▪️ The module that caused the crash;
▪️ Debug information for the module;
The Windows 10 blue screen looks nicer and cleaner, but lacks the module debug information, and hides the parameters behind a registry hack. They're not present in a BSOD by default.
The concept is looking so much better, but doesn't provide any information except the stop code! Now imagine your computer bootloops into a blue screen. Not a helpful wingman, I should say! You have better luck firing up WinDbg and analyzing the crash dump just to get the culprit module image name...
Regardless of that concept, it seems like we're headed that way anyhow, unfortunately. That's not the only problem. Let me explain why making the blue screen look nice is a bad idea.
Each element needs to be drawn out, and fancy graphics come at a cost. The computational cost doesn't matter in this case, any modern computer is capable of drawing basic geometry. The cost here is linking additional libraries to import necessary functions or implementing them within the lean bootvid library (I think they still use that).
The number one rule of software engineering — the more dependencies you have, the less reliable the system becomes. That's not what we want with the blue screen of death! We need it to fire each and every time, 100% of the time. The blue screen is actually a program in a sense that it's a routine that's being executed, when certain conditions are met, so it can also crash. The code may fail to execute, and all the user will see is a black screen.
That's certainly not favorable and shouldn't happen. That's why developers should always favor functionality over design.
— Enderman
😢104👍43❤6👎4
Enderman
Photo
🥲 There is a chance for software
The guy whose design I previously critiqued, shared an updated version of the blue screen concept!
Looking much better now, what do you think?
The guy whose design I previously critiqued, shared an updated version of the blue screen concept!
Looking much better now, what do you think?
👍213❤62🎉12😱7👎3🤔3😢2
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
😱96👍10❤6👎5🤔2
😢 Software quality rot
Did you know the Copilot key is simply a macro for Win + Shift + F23? I wonder why they didn't implement a separate keycode for their AI button. I guess the software quality in general just keeps degrading.
Did you know the Copilot key is simply a macro for Win + Shift + F23? I wonder why they didn't implement a separate keycode for their AI button. I guess the software quality in general just keeps degrading.
🤬138😱22😢13👍9❤8🤔6🎉2👎1
My ᣰљᥠѝૠѠ᧸ѝঀѠஐѠీѠ㒠ћѠ᪐ѝᲰљ㏀ћ꩐љꢰљᬨѝචѠ๐ѠᵰљༀѠᯀѝ᱘ѝ¢ў膐ѝ聰ѝ舠ѝᳰѝ芰ѝᶈѝ荀ѝ菐ѝ烈с煐сྰѠџၠѠꬠљᄐѠḠѝᇀѠḰљ㖀ћተѠẸѝ葠ѝ蓰ѝ薀ѝɩɩ룠ɢɩ륐ɢɩɩɩ롰ɢ?ɧ?ɧɩɩɩ?ɧɩ맀ɢ?ɧ먰ɢ?ɧ禐р몠ɢɩɩɩɩɩ?ɧɩɩ?ɧタрр蘐ѝ
ᾰљᚐѠ⁰љ襰ѝὐѝ膈р䊐ѭࠨɧߠɧ⭰ɩ붰ɢ脐рс舀р뵀ɢ븠ɢ뺐ɢ艸р苰р뼀ɢ뽰ɢ뿠ɢ荨р䌰ѭ䋠ѭ䎀ѭ䏐ѭ䐠ѭ䑰ѭࡰɧ䓀ѭࢸɧऀɧैɧঐɧ?ɧ?ɧ䔐ѭ䕠ѭਠɧ䖰ѭ쇠јⰰɩ䐂圅摩桴贃效杩瑨ᔂ合扡牏敤ɲЂ敔瑸आ片畯䕰楤t乔睥瑓瑡捩敔瑸匠汥捥却慴瑲敍畮潆摬牥牂睯敳慌敢Ѭ敌瑦 吃灯Ⰲ圅摩桴ꄃ效杩瑨ข䄈瑵卯穩ࡥ䌇灡楴湯Ćപ桓睯捁散䍬慨ࡲ合扡牏敤ɲࠁ潗摲牗灡 乔睥瑓瑡捩敔瑸匚汥捥却慴瑲敍畮潆摬牥慌敢Ѭ敌瑦Ⰲ吃灯 圅摩桴甃效杩瑨ข䄈瑵卯穩ࡥ䌇灡楴湯Ćപ桓睯捁散䍬慨ࡲ合扡牏敤ɲࠀ潗摲牗灡
捩敔瑸匐汥捥呴獡獫慌敢Ѭ敌瑦 吃灯 圅摩桴ꄃ效杩瑨ข䄈瑵卯穩ࡥ䌇灡楴湯Ćപ桓睯捁散䍬慨ࡲ合扡牏敤ɲࠀ潗摲牗灡
敌瑦᠂吃灯ᰂ圅摩桴褃效杩瑨ᄂ䌇灡楴湯Ćܪ桃捥敫।合扡牏敤ɲ܂慔卢潴॰嘇獩扩敬 ༀ乔睥慒楤䉯瑵潴ၮ牐灥牡湩乧副摡潩䰄晥ɴ̘潔ɰԸ楗瑤ͨƉ䠆楥桧ɴܑ慃瑰潩ٮ⨁合扡牏敤ɲ܃楖楳汢ࡥ
敬ଇ灮獢乴牯慭l doesn't let the installer continue
ᾰљᚐѠ⁰љ襰ѝὐѝ膈р䊐ѭࠨɧߠɧ⭰ɩ붰ɢ脐рс舀р뵀ɢ븠ɢ뺐ɢ艸р苰р뼀ɢ뽰ɢ뿠ɢ荨р䌰ѭ䋠ѭ䎀ѭ䏐ѭ䐠ѭ䑰ѭࡰɧ䓀ѭࢸɧऀɧैɧঐɧ?ɧ?ɧ䔐ѭ䕠ѭਠɧ䖰ѭ쇠јⰰɩ䐂圅摩桴贃效杩瑨ᔂ合扡牏敤ɲЂ敔瑸आ片畯䕰楤t乔睥瑓瑡捩敔瑸匠汥捥却慴瑲敍畮潆摬牥牂睯敳慌敢Ѭ敌瑦 吃灯Ⰲ圅摩桴ꄃ效杩瑨ข䄈瑵卯穩ࡥ䌇灡楴湯Ćപ桓睯捁散䍬慨ࡲ合扡牏敤ɲࠁ潗摲牗灡 乔睥瑓瑡捩敔瑸匚汥捥却慴瑲敍畮潆摬牥慌敢Ѭ敌瑦Ⰲ吃灯 圅摩桴甃效杩瑨ข䄈瑵卯穩ࡥ䌇灡楴湯Ćപ桓睯捁散䍬慨ࡲ合扡牏敤ɲࠀ潗摲牗灡
捩敔瑸匐汥捥呴獡獫慌敢Ѭ敌瑦 吃灯 圅摩桴ꄃ效杩瑨ข䄈瑵卯穩ࡥ䌇灡楴湯Ćപ桓睯捁散䍬慨ࡲ合扡牏敤ɲࠀ潗摲牗灡
敌瑦᠂吃灯ᰂ圅摩桴褃效杩瑨ᄂ䌇灡楴湯Ćܪ桃捥敫।合扡牏敤ɲ܂慔卢潴॰嘇獩扩敬 ༀ乔睥慒楤䉯瑵潴ၮ牐灥牡湩乧副摡潩䰄晥ɴ̘潔ɰԸ楗瑤ͨƉ䠆楥桧ɴܑ慃瑰潩ٮ⨁合扡牏敤ɲ܃楖楳汢ࡥ
敬ଇ灮獢乴牯慭l doesn't let the installer continue
❤144😢25🤔20👍14😱11🤬7🎉7👎2
⛔️ Bypassing Internet censorship
In light of the recent events taking place in 🇧🇷, I decided to compile a list of state-wide Internet censorship bypass methods. Let's get ready to connect in the upcoming fragmented world!
🔻 DPI Bypass. A VPN might be unnecessary! While a virtual private network may be a solution, state restrictions are commonly implemented via DPI (Deep Packet Inspection). The software on the ISP's routing devices filters out packets based on certain conditions, and most of the time they are hardcoded. Which means there's room to contest it.
There are two kinds of Deep Packet Inspection:
▪️ Passive DPI cannot block the packets, but can inject them. Usually a TCP RST (connection reset) packet. If it is being injected on the client side, it's possible to configure the iptables to drop it, but RST might also be sent directly to the server, rendering the iptables method pointless.
▪️ Active DPI (used in 🇷🇺 and 🇨🇳) is an upgrade — it's a physical box, and it is capable of blocking the packets. The only way to bypass it is to break its detection algorithm. The algorithm is possible to break by sending data the inspection software doesn't expect to encounter and process.
For instance, by spec, you can split the application-layer HTTP request into TCP segments:
There is a myriad of ways to break the DPI algorithm aside from the ones I've mentioned. That's the optimal way to avoid state censorship. Naturally, it doesn't work for direct IP set blocks, but it's destructive and not all too common (at least in 🇷🇺). Luckily, there's open-source software that already does it for you!
▪️ zapret 🐧
▪️ GoodbyeDPI🪟
▪️ ByeDPI 📱
As time goes on, the states will eventually fix their DPI software to account for all the edge cases, so it's preferrable to know how the bypass strategies work to cook up fresh combinations they haven't defeated yet. It may quite literally be considered hacking, so it's not guaranteed to work, but if it does — it's significantly faster than any VPN, so give it a whirl.
🔻 Simple VPNs. If the above does not work for you, your next best option is a VPN. The VPNs aren't magic, they're virtual networks that coincidentally allow delegating sending packets to a different gateway. The problem with a VPN is that it adds a whole bunch of hops and overhead that comes with them for your packets to overcome. Almost 100% of the time it slows the connection down.
Personally, I have network-wide split tunnelling set up with the VPN interface used solely to bypass regional blocks. That's extremely advanced, and I suggest you starting by simply setting up a client and a server. Speaking of it, which one should you use? Well. Forget the free VPNs. These sell your data, show you ads, install malware and do other unspeakable things to keep their service free. The best way out is to host a VPN server yourself. The client and server always go in conjunction.
The biggest problem with hosting a VPN server yourself is that it costs money to rent a server. However, you can find a cheap VPS ($3-5/mo range) with a 100Mbit/s throughput practically anywhere right now. If you can't afford it, unfortunately, you have to resort to using a free VPN. I morally cannot recommend any free VPN, as you're being the product, but a decent pick would be ProtonVPN.
In light of the recent events taking place in 🇧🇷, I decided to compile a list of state-wide Internet censorship bypass methods. Let's get ready to connect in the upcoming fragmented world!
🔻 DPI Bypass. A VPN might be unnecessary! While a virtual private network may be a solution, state restrictions are commonly implemented via DPI (Deep Packet Inspection). The software on the ISP's routing devices filters out packets based on certain conditions, and most of the time they are hardcoded. Which means there's room to contest it.
There are two kinds of Deep Packet Inspection:
▪️ Passive DPI cannot block the packets, but can inject them. Usually a TCP RST (connection reset) packet. If it is being injected on the client side, it's possible to configure the iptables to drop it, but RST might also be sent directly to the server, rendering the iptables method pointless.
▪️ Active DPI (used in 🇷🇺 and 🇨🇳) is an upgrade — it's a physical box, and it is capable of blocking the packets. The only way to bypass it is to break its detection algorithm. The algorithm is possible to break by sending data the inspection software doesn't expect to encounter and process.
For instance, by spec, you can split the application-layer HTTP request into TCP segments:
GET / HTTP/1.1\r\nHost: google.com ... → GET / + HTTP/1.1\r\nHost: google.com .... It's also possible to alter the case of the header keys, as the header is case insensitive: Host: → hOst:. As a final example, a «DNS root» dot after the hostname is also allowed by spec, but may break the algorithm: Host: google.com..There is a myriad of ways to break the DPI algorithm aside from the ones I've mentioned. That's the optimal way to avoid state censorship. Naturally, it doesn't work for direct IP set blocks, but it's destructive and not all too common (at least in 🇷🇺). Luckily, there's open-source software that already does it for you!
▪️ zapret 🐧
▪️ GoodbyeDPI
▪️ ByeDPI 📱
As time goes on, the states will eventually fix their DPI software to account for all the edge cases, so it's preferrable to know how the bypass strategies work to cook up fresh combinations they haven't defeated yet. It may quite literally be considered hacking, so it's not guaranteed to work, but if it does — it's significantly faster than any VPN, so give it a whirl.
🔻 Simple VPNs. If the above does not work for you, your next best option is a VPN. The VPNs aren't magic, they're virtual networks that coincidentally allow delegating sending packets to a different gateway. The problem with a VPN is that it adds a whole bunch of hops and overhead that comes with them for your packets to overcome. Almost 100% of the time it slows the connection down.
Personally, I have network-wide split tunnelling set up with the VPN interface used solely to bypass regional blocks. That's extremely advanced, and I suggest you starting by simply setting up a client and a server. Speaking of it, which one should you use? Well. Forget the free VPNs. These sell your data, show you ads, install malware and do other unspeakable things to keep their service free. The best way out is to host a VPN server yourself. The client and server always go in conjunction.
The biggest problem with hosting a VPN server yourself is that it costs money to rent a server. However, you can find a cheap VPS ($3-5/mo range) with a 100Mbit/s throughput practically anywhere right now. If you can't afford it, unfortunately, you have to resort to using a free VPN. I morally cannot recommend any free VPN, as you're being the product, but a decent pick would be ProtonVPN.
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
👍74❤6😢2🤬1