RedClouds

Fair!

So for sure, everything you said is correct. One compiler, the push to rewrite software (This one I do 100% agree with, I do write Rust, but for greenfield stuff, it's not really useful to rewrite working, stable, secure software, in Rust). Security work isn't mutually exclusive, and what agencies do elsewhere doesn't represent what it doe here.

I guess my best argument here is that I don't think Lunduke cares about what he claims, I think he's a right wing propagandist that looks for any reason, no matter how small, to push controversy and pull people to his blog to make money.

So yeah, you're right, security wise it's not a nothing burger, and is suspicious. Though I will still say that even though the Rust evangelists have rightfully been told to back off a bit, there's lots of companies that have decided to rewrite a lot in Rust.

About this issue:

The self-replicating back door is a.... real stretch of an argument. This is the kind of things that governments and billion dollar corporations think about. It's (one of) the reasons the Apple has maintained it's own programming languages. Big tech agencies often house their own compilers and make their developers use it (even if it's just a copy of the open source ones) to ensure that if a compiler is compromised, they can continue working on it under their own direction. Also, if Germany could get a self-replicating compiler vulnerability in a compiler, it would hit much harder and further to just attack GCC, which is the main compiler for 90% of c code, which is 90% of the infrastructure of software (Yes, many of those language libraries you use, use C underneath, or at least, their compiler is written in C).

Furthermore, this is a problem for any language that only has one compiler, and a second implementation of rust has been in the works for gcc for awhile (gccrs I believe). Also, there's many many places where there's a push to move C code to Rust to increase security, this isn't 'wierd'.

There are so many other problems to consider before going down this route. supply chain attacks, trust verification, code signing, all these come in play way before this. Plus it's not like Germany owns rust, they can't necessarily inject a compiler issue into rust the way Lunduke argues.

The real issue is that most security vulnerabilities are caused by things Rust seeks to fix, use-after-free and double-free causing crashes that can be taken advantage off by a clever malware writer. Writing in Rust is (a slow and somewhat painful way of) making software more secure, not less.

About the agency

Additional note, this govt agency (and I'm no fan of Germany's govt necessarily, but just to note) has given millions to many open source projects. Let's encrypt, pypi, yocto, the openprinting stack, activitypub (you know, from the fediverse, how this platform runs...). They've also recommended languages other than Rust for projects too.

About Lunduke

He's a racist transphobe maga hat wearing techie (keeps the hat hidden, also don't know if he's actually a fan of trump, but he's an alt-right conspiracy theorist). I'm "passionate" about talking about him because I followed him for a number of years, now kinda regrettably (we all make mistakes, it's best to learn and move on, but still, this one hurt, I was a big fan for awhile).

He used to live in Portland, Oregon, and during the pandemic, he moved away because the city had become something that he "didn’t like". That was when the city started to show its real anti-fascist and anti-Trump sentiments. That was also when the whole anti-police movement happened in Portland and Seattle.

I became suspicious of him after that, and then he basically said that he didn’t want to talk in public about the things he actually wanted to talk about, but that you could pay him money to subscribe to his journal and he would actually discuss those topics. He then left YouTube on his other channel and, I think, left the Lunduk Journal channel, but later came back for a video once in awhile.

I found some of his writings that were public and non-paid, and he talked about anti-trans topics, gender-neutral bathrooms, and things like that. He has a big enough base that he can pretty much single-handedly create controversy. Although he’s a big Linux fan, he’s a massive critic of all the diversity, equity, and inclusiveness that the field tends to promote.

He really fuels the conspiracy that "the left" is the worst part of technology. He wants to make technology seem like a right-wing thing. He’s been denouncing the fall of Linux for a while now, mostly because he thinks the developers of Linux are too woke.

"It is difficult and time-consuming to do the work to lie about China all the time."

Fixed that for you Beth!

Yeah, they said all the cities looked ugly with parking lots so they just "pretend all parking is underground" and igore the costs/upkeep with something like that.

I think about it like this, those things are heavily influenced by your material conditions. Looks can be adjusted with surgery and makeup. Intelligence, skill, dexterity are all part of education and practice which requires time and effort and money that a lot of people don't have. Health is almost entirely based on your access to healthcare and knowledge about taking care of yourself, which again is something you have to learn and take time to study, which not everybody has. Attractiveness is in the eye of the beholder. That's probably the least material conditions based.

Luck doesn't exist like a measurable, scientific thing. But if you consider luck your ability to get a job quickly when you lose yours, or your ability to pay off problems that happen in your life, or just always having a backup plan that comes through for you. Then yes, luck is entirely based on your material conditions.

Okay, first my honest review is it's one of my favorite shows I've ever watched. It portrays hacking relatively well. It portrays Anxiety and mental issues fairly well for a show. And it's a fantastic execution of the unreliable narrator. If you haven't heard of the unreliable narrator, then go look up the trope so you get the gist of what's going on.

Now for my full disclosure I fell in love with the show before becoming a Marxist. So this has absolutely nothing to do with my Marxist identity now.

Yeah, it's pretty anti-capitalist, and they use the term "revolution" a lot. But it's kind of a bougie revolution, like an anti-technocrat thing.

I wouldn't watch it for any marxist vibes, but in the end I still heavily recommend the show. Even as Marxists can enjoy some regular old TV shows and this was one of the highest claimed and most well-rewarded shows on TV when it came out.

All of that being said, the first season is the best season. I do think it gets a little bit hard to track over time, but the creator of the show built the entire series to be one fluid storyline from the beginning. So I think it's worth finishing. You will literally learn things in the very last season that will affect the first episodes that you're watching right now. I'm not trying to spoil it, but I am trying to get you excited to watch the whole thing. I had to watch the entire series twice to truly come to my understanding of the show and what it really means.