I am Romanian. I don't think there is an "ongoing verbal, legal and sometimes physical harassment of the Hungarian minority". There were isolated conflicts, mainly artificially perpetuated by radicals for (pretty small) political gains. Also, the Hungarian minority political party (UDMR) is currently a part of the government coalition (not the first time it happens).

I guess Eastern Europeans were the normal workers until now.

Oh, well if that's the status quo that makes sense. I assumed the normal workers were unavailable due to quarantine/etc.

No, the 'normal' workers (you mean I guess local) were unwilling to do the work for so little, while intensively supporting this situation by their shopping habits.

I mean whoever was doing the work last year.

My comments in this thread have had some pretty wild score swings, I guess I stepped on a live rail. I'm not familiar with British agriculture politics.. I was thinking only of companies temporarily replacing a sick workforce with another (who would presumably themselves then become sick.) My comments were not intended to be commentary on British immigration, which I have no reason to care about.

Something similar happened in 2016 in Romania, with the chief prosecutor of the national anti-corruption agency.

>BTW, it's very hard to bring BEAM down. Most exceptions will bring kill the faulty process, but leave the supervisor tree untouched. Only "unmanaged" code (for example, calling a C library using a NIF) might crash the whole VM.

Not completely true. Try to allocate more memory than available and then see what happens.

I'm actually curious. Do you have some first-hand experience with that kind of issue? I've only played around with Elixir and my only experience deploying BEAM-based applications on production has been RabbitMQ and CouchDB and both of those were very solid.

Also, isn't ENOMEM a standard error that you can handle using the standard error handling techniques?

I have and it wasn't good. It is impossible to handle out of memory exceptions inside the BEAM. At best, you can hope for a crash of the VM. At worse, it just hangs. And one will most likely not find out about this until they hit this scenario.

Interesting, definitely worth knowing beforehand (I was thinking of implementing a small service that could be pretty memory-intensive using Elixir.) I wonder if there's a way to try and manage memory to avoid ENOMEM.

If BEAM is allocating memory it must either be copying a message from one process to another, allocating space in a process for its stack, or for some bookkeeping like to spawn a new process. In the first two cases why doesn't it just kill the process and send the usual link and monitor messages to let other Erlang processes handle the failure?

How would it send a message if it can't allocate memory anymore?

Haha, yeah, that's the problem with ENOMEM handling in general: unless you have a very clear path to free memory immediately and then try to do some reasonable cleanup, you are screwed. Back in the bad old days of running Windows machines with 8mb of memory, I'd religiously handle that kind of error code... but I can't recall the last time I actually bothered. Commoditized hardware makes us lazy.

yeah I have to make liberal use of :hibernate to avoid just this.

I am not disagreeing with you, but I want to point out that, usually, the certificate is generated locally during setup and then installed in the trusted certificates store. So no one else should have that certificate. I also assume there is an option somewhere to disable the MITM scanner.

> I also assume there is an option somewhere to disable the MITM scanner.

By default this is ON and users don't have the competence to recognize that this is in fact increasing the surface area for attacks and to disable it. The mere existence of a setting that is ON by default doesn't absolve such AV companies.

But speaking of Bitdefender in particular, I installed it on my wife's computer, disabled that option, confirmed that it survived a restart, then one month later I discovered that it is ON again, probably due to an automatic update. It's also an "admin" setting and my wife's user account does not have admin privileges to turn it on or off.

So even with a setting in place, it's untrustworthy.

When I was using bitdefender, this was the first setting I disabled after installing it. Bitdefender also has a slew of other issues, including BSODing after installation.

Bitdefender likes to revert to default settings frequently. I prefer Windows Firewall (Win7) and have to turn off the Bitdefender firewall usually at least once a week.

What is the reason you're using the software at all? What is it achieving for you? Genuinely interested in the motivations.

Bitdefender free version doesn't have ssl MITM feature. Neither it installs root cert as far as I can see.