jonny (good kind)13h ago
People already are using "i saw this video before 2023" as a signature that the video is eligible to be believed. Soon, "this software was developed before 2025" will be the only sign that makes software eligible to be run.
Show threadjonny (good kind)13h ago
when a project is developed in such a way that every line of it might be changed tomorrow in incomprehensible ways, how could you ever trust that software?
Show threadLu wilson13h ago

@jonny could be ai or #pastagang

i trust neither

Show threadjonny (good kind)13h ago
@TodePond pastagang code is the complete opposite end of the pool - code that you take delight in knowing that it cannot possibly be trusted
Show threadLu wilson13h ago
@jonny hahaha
Show threadjonny (good kind)12h ago
@TodePond (i am feeling the need to be hyper-clear tn, but hopefully that was received with all the love that was intended)
Show threadLu wilson12h ago
@jonny of course!
Show threadTudbuT
@TodePond @jonny it not being trustable is good. that makes it live-er
9:59amWeb
Show threadTudbuT12h ago
@TodePond @jonny i can think of two vulnerabilities in the current pastagang deployments that i host, but probably noone will find and use them, and its on the server that has no sensitive data anyway so whatever
Show threadTudbuT12h ago
@TodePond @jonny this is also why i didnt use forgejo actions. id have to have a runner but i dont have anything competent enough to run docker except for things that carry sensitive data. so i improvised with a horrible bad shitty bash script (excellent)