exabrial

Hell yes!

Cry us a fricken river.

You'll be alright :)

and yet, I still haven't found the need to make it part of my daily commute. Fascinating.

Probably because it doesn't need to be fixed. Not every complaint requires government intervention, which we've often see is more expensive and problematic then anything it actually solves.

Pro tip: Take a different route, or drive 15mph.

root cause: young generation wants to rent, not own. Young generation wants high density living and a shift of ownership towards landlords and private equity. As such, entertaining in a walnut sized apartment is a little less practical.

Getting people to buy (their first and only) home is a really important issue. Creating more landlords doesn't not solve housing problems.

Ah, remember when a particular political party voted against filling it when oil was cheap?

I'm sure somehow this will pivot to enforcing taxes though

As it should be.

I think both sides are wrong. In no particular order:

US does not buy weapons that self-regulate generally. The US can and has purchased weapons with stipulations on how they should be used. For instance, and I'm making this up, they might purchase cluster munitions for smashing up an airfields, but with a stipulation they may not be used where humans are present or something. The munition doesn't check GPS and refuse to detonate if GPS doesn't indicate it's over some Russian airfield. Nor does an M4 fail to fire if it's on US Soil. Anthropic tried to build safeguards and out-regulate the government. Everyone here should know that such limitations would (can and have, see some famous IFF spoofing incidents) be exploited by an enemy, which is generally why they aren't acceptable in a military context. Without seeing the contract signed, one possibility is Anthropic tried to push regulations onto the government, and Anthropic gets to ride away on a high horse.

The other side: The Supply Chain Risk feels like an abuse. It's likely a valid designation and likely has its historical uses. If this was a contract issue, that would have been the correct way to litigate. Instead, again without seeing the contract, it feels like this is way to try and stifle their uptake in defense sector; basically attempting to strong arm them by choking a business segment off. Again, if there is a in fact a legitimate breach of contract here, it should be litigated as such. The alternative is there is no such breach, and Anthropic built limitations into the contract and the Pentagon just has buyers remorse. Honestly this wouldn't surprise me, the federal government generally incinerates tax dollars, and with the massive marketing hullabaloo pushed by AI companies, its completely likely a giant contract was signed without reading the fine print.

Honestly both sides of this annoy me.

HN is full of solar salesman.

His ignorance is on full display when he said plutonium.

I'm not so sure this is a victory lol

oof, that is a crap ton of steel. I doubt those panels will ever harvest enough energy to offset the energy use to produce both the cells and supports.

I imagine with cells in that configuration, lifting wind loads are significant which is why it's overbuilt like that.

Perhaps some laminate timber for the cross supports?

Lastly, the US has got to start eating seasonally. The water problem in the southwest is all agriculture: people want to grow baby spinach in January. Unless we figure out a way to create a crap ton of energy cheaply so we can supply industrial sized flows without worrying about the energy cost, we use far more water than we should in California and Arizona.

I don't think this is an accurate assessment. Oracle has its flaws and closet full of dead bodies/skeletons, but they've been good stewards of the JDK and JavaFX overall. Gluon and Oracle have done tremendous amount of work with JavaFX.

Splitting it off the JDK was definitely the correct call. It's a Desktop UI framework, it should not be bound to JDK releases.

One thing I think that's needed with JavaFX is integrations with DI frameworks! I started a project called DiFx that does exactly that: https://github.com/exabrial/DiFx

This makes state and shared data management in JavaFX much nicer, as you offload those concerns to a container. CDI also provides extensive capabilities with portable extensions and scope management, as well as a sync and async eventing framework.

The problem is that I don't have a "real life" project to try this out on, so development kinda slumped off.

This is the way the justice system should work.

Now please, go after every FAANG company.

Everything on TikTok is curated you make you believe something. Best you don't install or use the app.

This is dumb. Just enforce the existing antitrust laws. Yeah sorry Apple Google, this is going to hurt

Yes sir thats the one!

How do I get started though? :/ I feel like I need a couple mil in seed funding and a team that understands the mission.

Have the AI drive the tool, not direct generation, is what I've found works best.

Anthropic/OpenAI say rollover and he does then sticks out his hand out for a shake. what a good boy.

Someone please make a linux-based, using proper cgroups/containers for app isolation, where programs are one of: regular JVM ByteCode, or WASM. APIs follow a JEP-style Process with multiple incubators until we got it right.

If you're never watched/listened to the entire performance in London, go do it. I was in high school when it was published. Absolutely crazy what he did live. Nowadays most "DJ"s are just hitting play in Ableton.

These are the four flaws with Passkeys I've found after implementing them on our website. I actually like them now. But, It made me discover why people dislike them. The vast majority of problems are _the way websites implement them_ and _the way password managers today_ work.

Website problems:

* First big problem: you try to kludge them as an "add-on" to a password or SMS "2fa". Just rip the band aide off and let people go 100% passkey by default. It's actually really easy for users. We do a push at the end of their onboarding flow and have a 95% conversion. Users love it and its seamless.

* Don't make people enter a username. Just have a "login with passkey" button first, and thats it. If the HIPPO in your organizations insists a username-password still be available, make the user navigate to a secondary page first to do so. Make the passkey the first-class citizen.

Password Manager problems:

* Google, Apple, Microsoft are trying to lock people in to proprietary password managers. Microsoft's password manager, plus their "microsoft account" experience is a steaming pile of shit. The key here would be portability. An export format exists for the public key (thats how enrollment works): It's a but of digits in ANSI X9.62 format. Not hard. The private key would be an unbelievably simple export.

Protocol problems, and I'm happy to be wrong here:

* The client does not sign the server issued nonce (aka the 'challenge') during the authentication flow. This is kinda weird IMHO. Technically, yes it is secure, but it relies solely on the TLS channel heuristics. It'd be much better to have the client prove the signature on enrollment as layered security.

To address the author fears on attestation: This is a real threat to users... imagine a website "only accepting passkeys from OUR password manager". Luckily, Apple has done us all a favor and outright killed that part of the protocol by refusing to send this required fields there, protecting all users.

Overall, you should use them. We need one tiny change to the protocol and better password managers.

I just came here to say this is the best project name ever.

Do people just not type fast, ignorant of how IDEs work, or what exactly is the deal? I'd rather have the clarity of everything above. It tells me exactly what I need to know and what I can do with it.

Bug: I can't seem to make any overhead announcements over the PA.

I'm starting to tire of Anthropic leading the conversation on LLMs lately. I like the company's products, but lately their statements are more about squashing competition under the guise of "safety" and boasting about how good their internal models are.