baobun

> At the Electronic Frontier Foundation, we call this "privacy first": you can't solve all the internet's problems by fixing privacy, but you won't fix most of them unless we get privacy right, and so the (potential) coalition for a strong privacy regime is large and powerful:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/12/06/privacy-first/#but-not-ju...

Everyone who said "A technical solution can not fix a social problem" needs to read this. In our technical society, for many things a technical part is required to enable social change. The proactive technical work is important and necessary, despite the fact that there is more to it. It may not be sufficient but it is necessary.

> I don't understand how a company like OpenAI could be so reckless with user data integrity and access

I don't understand how one can have such a rosy view of OpenAI at this point after all the dishonesty, subversiness and shadiness we have seen in public. Transitive trust is an insidious thing, I guess?

And this one doesn't even sound particularly egregious, I could hardly call this evil.

Either shift down expectations of this company considerably or be disappointed again.

Or just pay whetever's due when you return to exit. Having to schedule and reschedule sounds unnecessary to begin with.

Have you checked out uboot?

https://u-boot.org/

Also, there is UEFI firmware for it.

https://0ink.net/posts/2024/2024-07-01-pi-uefi-boot.html

One thing to keep in mind when reading about any "ZKP protocol" is that on its own the term has the same inherent vagueness as "end-to-end encrypted" - especially when like here there are more than two parties concerned to solve a single verification.

What information is not disclosed to whom? In what way is it ZK?

One example is Googles "zero-knowledge age verification" where AFAICT, Google still has full insight into all the sensitive data and metadata. It's not like they inherently need to be the designated middleman but that is how the scheme is designed. Therefore I find it ingeniously marketed. A bit like saying "Facebook Messenger protects all your messages with end-to-end encryption", which is arguably technically true but misleading and not an honest statement.

Great! And no plugins or scripts needed. Thank you!

Some underappreciated and forgotten tiling wms that are still viable today:

- ratpoison ("tmux for X11". Ultralight, great for kiosks and similar where you barely want a WM at all)

- stumpwm (ratpoison on steroids in Lisp)

- Xmonad (A bit different tiling dynamic that some prefer. I dig it despite Haskell, not because of it)

- Qtile (Very flexible and easily hackable in python yet reasonably stable and fast. You can reproduce for example the Xmonad or i3 experiences pretty easily)

There is a new last line of TFA:

> In case the sarcasm isn’t clear, it’s better to leave the warts. But it is also worthwhile to recognise that in terms of effectiveness for driving system change, signage and warnings are on the bottom of the tier list. We should not be surprised when they don’t work.

Looking at comments I guess everyone whooshed.

There is no way this is not a degradation compared to a physical meter accepting cash plus whatever. My country doesn't really have parking apps yet here and paying for parking is never a friction.

This prompted me to ask the crowd about a similar use-case of editing your command line as it's already running your command

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46234678

Prompted by https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46231293 - piping from stdout/stderr would be extra cool but we only really need the exit code here.

Yeah, the problem here is it requires preparation and preemptively adding that '&' to the first command. It doesn't work for the "oh, right" situations. Running all commands this way by default wouldn't make life easier.

But along those lines yeah, it's basically the same as the "wait for it in another terminal" approach and I guess a solution would contain something similar.

How about that build script cloning the same git repo or wgetting the same release bundle over and over?

Heads up: The main thesis of the post is paywalled.

> it’s hard or impossible to define hash functions that map approximately equal keys to identical hash values. Why? Let’s take a look at what happens with the common epsilon comparison, for example: two numbers a, b are considered equal if |a – b| < ε. With this definition of equality all numbers between -ε/2; and ε/2 are considered equal and therefore must have the same hash value h. But the numbers between 0 and ε are also equal to each other, so their hash value must be h as well.

> If we continue in this manner we see that all all numbers must have the same hash value h regardless of the choice of ε. The idea of approximate comparison is unfortunately hard to reconcile with the non-approximate nature of hash functions.

I think there is at least one non-sequitur in there? The only thing you prove is that directly modeling hash keys on top of that notion of equality is not useful / the model is weak. I don't think equality is typically associative with epsilon comparison.

(The license of this comment forbids it from being used as support in favor of floats as hash keys)

> decades-old, chemically degraded cassette

Somehow it never occurred to me. I wonder how all the C64 games in the basement are doing...

AGPL all the things. If there's a sequence it seems sensible to start with client-side for obvious reasons. Document the relevant protocols (autogenerated from well-annotated sources can be helpful enough and reduce maintenance overhead).

If you want some further mechanisms beyond what that license gives you, you can consider a CLA for some parts and perhaps talk to an expert when you formulate it if you want to get it right for your exact case.

Hm, I've recently noticed kwin taking up what seems like way too much CPU at idle. Fedora with KDE. Happens on both X11 and Wayland with Wayland being worse and perceptibly slower.

General heuristics only get you so far and at the limit come with their own overhead compared to what you can do with a tailored solution with knowledge about your usage and data access patterns. The cases where this makes a practical difference for higher-level apps are rare but they exist.

75% or so of venture-backed startups fail within 5 years. OLPC results certainly aren't enough to invalidate the concept or model.

That list would be incomplete. Americans at least don't tend to "helpfully" automatically proxy their whole site through Google Translate when they detect foreign IPs.

The intro gives Ctrl+1 and Ctrl+Shift+A as examples. If you tried configuring emacs keyboad shortcuts that won't work with your terminal then this software might help to make them configurable.

If you don't already have this problem it's not really relevant.

> I'm making the point that, in modern English, no other verb is available for the act of creating a poem.

Make, Create, Formulate.

> I am forced to tell people who ask me that the English translation of 姓 is "last name", despite the fact that the 姓 comes first.

"Family name" is availabe, commonly used and a better traslation than "last name" here, no?

> Similarly...

You're probably pretty alone in this thinking.

I don't think the metaphysical argument about Sisyhus is interestng or relevant.

I don't consider all movies to be literature. Do you consider all movies to be literature by definition?

I also write computer programs and banking checks. Does that make them literature to you?

As if that's a solution. I feel we need a "Falsehoods programmers believe about language" campaign.

> I also had the same experience with the magic convention over configuration in Ruby.

I'm not sure what this is a reference to? Is it actually about Rails?

On default modern Android I get the same: Only U+76F4 renders, not the other two.

Due to clerical error the frontend updates of GitHub was not part discovery so not allowed as evidence. Still, though.

> No, the argument is even dumber than that. The person who writes a poem hasn't created any literature.

Sure they have, by virtue of writing it down. It becomes literature when it hits the paper (or computer screen, as it were).

(Unless you mean to imply that formulating an original poem in your mind counts as "writing", in which case I guess we illustrate the overarching point of value in shared symbols and language and the waste of time in stating our original definitions for every statement we want to make)

If I understand it right they bundle a publicly trusted shared cert and want to allow their users to get running on vanilla devices without having to provide a domain.