I am surprised to see it here too. I find it unkind.

Not that you need to hear it from me, but you will be remembered and missed.

Inappropriate / unkind, perhaps. I did make at least one solid friend over it. She saw the post on here, emailed me, and I ended up talking for over an hour with an understanding person who has lots in common with me and gave me some things to think about. I could have done without the email from someone else who said that "people in Gaza are suffering worse than you and they aren't doing what you're doing, so get mental help."

The absurdist humor of my impending demise making the front page of hackernews and being debated by the denizens thereof is not lost on me.

I was quite moved by the blog post and the brief explanation. That someone found the time to talk to you is good. Even though we don't know each other, I think of you.

What's unkind?

Well, sharing someone's deeply personal post on here could be seen as unkind or inappropriate. I get the sentiment; I can agree with it to a point. If someone else wrote a similar thing on their blog, I wouldn't submit it here without asking. But I also think frank, honest, and open discussion of this sort of thing is a net good, which is why I published my post, and why I don't mind it being here.

I'm not sure any party in office this last term could have won this election, given there was going to be significant inflation as a rebound from COVID.

The doctors had to be so certain that it was life threatening before acting that once they decided it was life-threatening, she was already going to die no matter what they did. And this is not an isolated incident.

The law has to allow for more uncertainty for the carve-out to be effective.

The way to do this is with MA3, not traditional AM:

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/12/03/2020-25...

"In addition, digital broadcasting allows visual and other metadata, such as song and artist identification, station identification, and emergency information, to be transmitted along with the audio content."

https://www.radioworld.com/tech-and-gear/upgrading-an-am-to-...

It looks like MA3 has a longer range:

https://www.radioworld.com/columns-and-views/guest-commentar...

Me and my partner exclusively charge at work.

We are a 2 EV household. We charge exclusively at work (for free) or at public chargers.

I wonder if there is anything else cmake related that should be looked at.

Wasn't cmake support originally added to xz to use with Windows and MSVC?

But that's a check for a Linux feature. So the more interesting question would be, what in the Linux world might be building xz-utils with cmake, I guess using ExternalProject_Add or something similar.

Yes this is Linux.

At this time we don't know exactly how much is affected and what originally drew the attention of the attacker(s).

For bad-3-corrupt_lzma2.xz, the claim was that "the original files were generated with random local to my machine. To better reproduce these files in the future, a constant seed was used to recreate these files." with no indication of what the seed was.

I got curious and decided to run 'ent' https://www.fourmilab.ch/random/ to see how likely the data in the bad stream was to be random. I used some python to split the data into 3 streams, since it's supposed to be the middle one that's "bad":

I used this regex to split in python, and wrote to "tmp":

    re.split(b'\xfd7zXZ', x)

I manually used dd and truncate to strip out the remaining header and footer according to the specification, which left 48 bytes:

    $ ent tmp2 # bad file payload
    Entropy = 4.157806 bits per byte.
    
    Optimum compression would reduce the size
    of this 48 byte file by 48 percent.
    
    Chi square distribution for 48 samples is 1114.67, and randomly
    would exceed this value less than 0.01 percent of the times.
    
    Arithmetic mean value of data bytes is 51.4167 (127.5 = random).
    Monte Carlo value for Pi is 4.000000000 (error 27.32 percent).
    Serial correlation coefficient is 0.258711 (totally uncorrelated = 0.0).
    
    $ ent tmp3 # urandom
    Entropy = 5.376629 bits per byte.
    
    Optimum compression would reduce the size
    of this 48 byte file by 32 percent.
    
    Chi square distribution for 48 samples is 261.33, and randomly
    would exceed this value 37.92 percent of the times.
    
    Arithmetic mean value of data bytes is 127.8125 (127.5 = random).
    Monte Carlo value for Pi is 3.500000000 (error 11.41 percent).
    Serial correlation coefficient is -0.067038 (totally uncorrelated = 0.0).
    

The data does not look random. From https://www.fourmilab.ch/random/ for the Chi-square Test, "We interpret the percentage as the degree to which the sequence tested is suspected of being non-random. If the percentage is greater than 99% or less than 1%, the sequence is almost certainly not random. If the percentage is between 99% and 95% or between 1% and 5%, the sequence is suspect. Percentages between 90% and 95% and 5% and 10% indicate the sequence is “almost suspect”."

Now to be fair, such an archive could have been created with a “store” level of compression that doesn’t actually perform any compression.

My reading of the commit message is they're claiming the "data" should look random.