2 out of 3 meerkats look in the same direction. Enough for consensus.
5,047 karma · joined January 12, 2008
https://cr.yp.to/djbdns/ipv6mess.html
Yes, it is old, many examples are outdated, but the main points still hold. Decades later his suggestions for making IPv6 succeed are still not implemented.
OAuth-based auth providers are nice, but they can have a weakness. When you have just one app, OAuth can be overkill: protocol is complex, and users suffer jarring redirects¹.
This is not surprising, because OAuth / OIDC is fundamentally designed for (at least) three parties that don't fully trust each other: user, account provider and an app². But in a single app there are only two parties: user and app itself. Auth and app can fully trust each other, protocol can be simpler, and redirects can be avoided.
I'm curious what OpenAUTH authors think about it.
¹ Except for Resource Owner Password Credentials (ROPC) grant type, but it's no longer recommended: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-oauth-secur...
² In addition, OAuth is mostly designed for and by account providers, and follows their interests more than interests of app developers.
> I believe that, appearances to the contrary, the quantum computing fervor is nearing its end. That's because a few decades is the maximum lifetime of any big bubble in technology or science. After a certain period, too many unfulfilled promises have been made, and anyone who has been following the topic starts to get annoyed by further announcements of impending breakthroughs. What's more, by that time all the tenured faculty positions in the field are already occupied. The proponents have grown older and less zealous, while the younger generation seeks something completely new and more likely to succeed.
I find your reaction to be a positive sign. The sign that IEEE is willing to push envelope of knowledge (as of 2018). One can't push it without taking a risk of publishing something wrong, possibly very wrong.
I don't have any opinion on this topic, it's not my field of expertise. However, it's the first semi-technical article about quantum computing that I can follow along and understand.
What's wrong with `=` debugging operator in f-strings?
Do you require your users to install Tailscale?
That said, in Finnish language people never count centuries. It's always "2000-luku" and "1900-luku", not 21th and 20th.
> If you buy an NVIDIA GPU, you do not get a document explaining the instruction set. It, and many other parts of the architecture, are secret. If you want to write code for it and don't want to use NVIDIA's toolchain, you are expected to generate PTX, which is a somewhat portable intermediate language that the NVIDIA drivers can consume. This means that NVIDIA can completely change the instruction set between GPU revisions without breaking your code. In contrast, an x86 CPU is expected to run the original PC DOS (assuming it has BIOS emulation in the firmware) and every OS and every piece of user-space software released for PC platforms since 1978.
Yes, it looks like it does. Also, the vote auth param is different for every link.
Details:
https://www.onlycfo.io/p/new-tax-rule-is-terrible-for-softwa...
> An example:
> A company has $1.2M in revenue; and $1M in costs (let's assume all costs are employing devs fulltime).
> Before 2022: the profit of the company is $200K. Pays corporate tax on this.
> In 2022: the profit of the company is $1M (of the $1M in salaries paid for devs, this needs to be amortized over 5 years: so $200K can be amortized for the year). Need to pay corproate tax on this. But the business might not have this much cash on hand, and so needs to borrow at a high interest rate. MASSIVE change!
> ... and so now companies are incentivized to have as little R&D expenses as possible (aka fire fulltime devs doing R&D, unless they can front the 5-year spread).
I would argue big companies care more about losing customers. Сompetitive pressure is more effective than laws and fines. And laws are not without downsides, including becoming barriers to entry into competition.
> JSON.stringify({'one': 1, '3': 3, 'two': 2, '2': 2, 'three': 3, '1': 1})
'{"1":1,"2":2,"3":3,"one":1,"two":2,"three":3}'I also gave an example of two implementations that are compatible for a useful subset of keys. By the way, SQLite JSONB keeps object keys in insertion order, similar to Python: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38547254
UPDATE: I think SQLite JSONB does maintain order. For example:
select json(jsonb('{"a": 1, "b": 2, "c": 3, "d": 4}'));"
-- {"a":1,"b":2,"c":3,"d":4}
select json(jsonb_insert(jsonb('{"a": 1, "b": 2, "c": 3, "d": 4}'), '$.e', 99));
-- {"a":1,"b":2,"c":3,"d":4,"e":99}
Yes, but only for non-integer keys.