The checksums are verified automatically, based on a key bootstrapped by the original install (which could, though likely not done, be verified by other means). As happened with xz, you either get everyone or no-one.
I'm not sure how someone is supposed to use attestations if PyPI refuses to support the forge they use? I'm not sure how this prevents a package getting maliciously uploaded via Github Actions? To me, this is going to lead to another bincode incident, because it conflates trust in the maintainer with trust in the platform.
Is it 99% of users? Of the linux (desktop/laptop) users I know, the majority use X-forwarding over ssh at least occasionally, while non-linux (desktop/laptop) also use X-forwarding (this is in an academic context), so while this may be an improvement for a subset of linux (desktop/laptop) users, across the whole linux user base (excluding both Android, which does not use wayland, and embedded, which I understand does use wayland), it's not.
I'm not up-to-date with the internals of tailscale, but my impression was they run additional services on top of the actual VPN (that is their "value-add" to wireguard), some of which are actual proxies, which hence blur that line in the minds of users (along with some so-called "VPN" providers who are just providing proxies).
It does do a fair amount of filtering of submissions, and it's a long term archive (e.g. for the next 100+ years). I suspect both (but with the former dominating) are the issue.
Is an SSH jump server a VPN (or forwarding a port from another machine at VPN)? I'd suggest neither are because it's connection-based rather than setting up a network (with routing etc). Absent a network, it's a proxy (which can be used like some deployments of a VPN).
No, it's not about whether masters or PhD, it's whether you did something new (the novelty aspect). It sounds to me that you did a coursework masters of some kind, which gave some basic literature analysis projects. This is like the first month of any research project, and is so you understand the context of the project. The actual work is doing the novel thing, and dealing with the repeated failures.
My suggestion is do a summer research project, and see if you enjoy it. If no-one will take you on, reflect on why that is (and to me that's a strong reason not to do it).
Where do you think they get the training data from ;) Galaxy Zoo has been used to train ML models for at least a decade, it's a standard dataset for intro to ML courses.
It's worth noting that while splitting the PKI hierarchies is a good thing, the CABF does provide rules S/MIME (email signing) and Code Signing. Also, "WebPKI" never actually appears in the BR documents from what I can see, nor do they require the use of HTTP (hence why you can use these for SMTP).
The issue is corporate-managed systems are universally bad (with the endless cycle of something new coming in and being ruined), and so while in theory email can be great, the workflows to make it work inherently conflict with the corporate setup...
How do you know you're more productive? Humans are excellent at fooling themselves, and absent a metric (or multiple metrics) by which you can measure your productivity, you can't be sure you're actually being more productive.
I'd genuinely be curious what fraction of those changes actually requires porting to other Python implementations. The free-threading changes are inherently interpreter specific, so we can ignore those. A significant change in Python 3.12 is dropping "dead batteries", so that can be ignored as well. From what I can see, the main language changes are typing-based (so could have parser implications), and the subinterpreter support being exposed at the Python level (I don't know whether that makes sense for PyPy either). I think this hints that while certain area of Python are undergoing larger changes (e.g. typing, free-threading), there is no obvious missing piece that might drive someone to contribute to PyPy.
Also, looking at the alternate (full) interpreters that have been around a while, PyPy is much more active than either Jython or IronPython. Rust-python seems more active than PyPy, but it's not clear how complete it is (and has going through similar periods of low activity).
Would I personally use PyPy? I'm not planning to, but given how uv is positioning itself, this gives me vibes of youtube stating it will drop IE 6 at some unspecified time in order to kill IE 6 (see https://benjamintseng.com/2024/02/the-ie6-youtube-conspiracy...).
There's a difference between dead (i.e. "unmaintained") and low activity ("not under active development"). From what I can see PyPy is in the latter category (and being in that category does not mean it's going to die soon), so choosing to claim it is unmaintained is notable.
You can in theory set TERMINFO with the terminfo definition, and you could skip faffing with terminfo files but it isn't passed or accepted by openssh by default.
I've personally given up on using the various "modern" terminals, they end up missing too many features (and then try to claim xterm compatibility), and especially if you use devices outside the standard linux systems (e.g. old/embedded hardware, switches), they have too many rendering issues.
Putting aside Ubuntu's/Canonical's failed custom projects (e.g. upstart), they have a history of shipping software that isn't ready and turning the community against it, with pulseaudio being the headline example. I'm concerned that the upcoming Ubuntu LTS (which is only 2 months away) will add rust to that list.
I'm aware of the different periods involved (I have a degree in astronomy), my point is that because the Russian Empire put off the switch for so long the difference became a historical joke. Similarly, I would suggest that it is generally best practice to make small changes quickly rather than large changes slowly. So why is it in the case of leap seconds (given we can and do perform measurements below the second scale to take account in variations in local and global gravity) are we seemingly unable to handle something so trivial?
I personally wouldn't use dnsmasq for this (as its far more suited as a recursive server and DHCP provider with some basic authoritative records, rather than an authoritative-only server), but every open source authoritative DNS server worth using about has RFC 2136 support.
This definitely seems like a sensible starting option to generate 256 colours from a custom set of 8 (and then let the really pedantic users fiddle with the extended set). I would presume for "standard" themes these values would be pregenerated and adjusted slightly if needed.
It's not only the transition from low -> high that removes communities, there are multiple examples of public housing communities (of medium to high density) replaced by similar (or effectively low) density (as new expensive apartments) within Sydney.
I wouldn't do this where it's not clear there was an issue, but for something like the really poor OCaml PR that was floating around, reporting the user to me seems like a logical step to reduce the flood.