@grainloom but they (we|a)re better sandboxes than OSes
Flawed though they are
@electroCutie not really, there are OSs that don't suck at sandboxing
browsers are also bad at multi-level sandboxing because you can't easily sandbox JS inside JS, so they are not even good language VMs in my view
@grainloom fair. I guess from my point of view OS sandboxes are incredibly difficult to get right. I guess that is why docker is a thing, but it is still pretty hefty and I don't know all the caveats
Browsers are sandboxes which have a very low cost of entry (costs come later)
@electroCutie something something Plan 9 per process namespaces
just restrict the process to a trusted set of services and you should be good to go afaik
(as long as the kernel and hardware are safe of course, and the services uphold the guarantees that you expect. but that's pretty much the same as with browsers, except things should be easier to verify thanks to their relative simplicity)
@grainloom also: π©οΈ π
@grainloom Cloud-heart
This cloud appreciates you and sends her love to you
Basically those two emojis, were they to be combined, would form electroCutie (me!), the cotton candy cloud with a bow
Until the unicode folks make that a zero width joiner, though, they will have to do ^_^
@electroCutie ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
thank!!! *appreciates back*
@electroCutie thunder and.... uuuuh, heart wrapped with some kinda ribbon??