4,793 karma · joined February 14, 2011
my public key: https://keybase.io/sangaline my proof: https://keybase.io/sangaline/sigs/uKMqGQ_auE6z2qTdrkpZihnoA-DcJ4BeHb35KLA1KZI
exodus jq | ssh my-server
locally, and then immediately have access to jq on the server. I personally find it very useful when working with servers or containers that have limited package repositories or where I don't have root access. aura -A radarr
Yes, you need to use the CLI to run that, but it's trivial to do so and a real package management system brings many advantages over exe installers. The AUR, inspired by BSD's Ports, is one of the major advantages of Arch. It's very rare to find a package that isn't supported.You can actually pipe the output of strace into exodus and it will include the files that were accessed by the program in the bundle. For example:
strace -f nmap --script default 127.0.0.1 2>&1 | exodus nmapThat's true, but it would require some combination of major compromises on the SSD, RAM, hot swappable battery, build quality, form factor, and keyboard/trackpoint. I'm almost never CPU limited in my day to day workflows, even on a 2nd gen i5, and I have cloud resources available when I need to do something CPU intensive like model training for work. It's a tradeoff that isn't right for everyone, but those other factors are far more important to me than the CPU.
I recently purchased one, and I did a bunch of research before deciding which to get. I settled on an X270 because it's user upgradeable, supports two SSDs, has two batteries, has hardware VP9 encoding/decoding, includes a USB C port, and is hopefully much closer to the ruggedness of the impeccable X200-X230 range than the newer models. The only thing thing I felt like I compromised on was the lack of support for 32 GB of memory. I was able to purchase an i7 X270, 4TB SSD, 16GB RAM, and replacement batteries all for under $1k, and it blows any new laptop that costs twice as much out of the water for my needs.
Isn't it also the case that pylance doesn't work and has some form of DRM to prevent it from being used with the open source version? I'm not saying that as a reason not to use the open source version, just wondering if Microsoft has already rounded the corner on that second "E" in EEE.
There's also viXra [1] which is like arXiv for fringe content that arXiv won't accept. One of the people who publishes there underwent a huge email spoofing campaign where they would send emails from one of my coworkers to others in the field promoting the papers. It was a really difficult situation because the coworker didn't know exactly who they were being sent to unless they replied, so it damaged his reputation without him getting a chance to explain what was happening.
[1] - https://vixra.org
I would love to hear more about your personal project ideas that involve remote-browser. My contact info is in my profile, feel free to reach out.
The ability to execute arbitrary JavaScript in content scripts at runtime. Remote-browser works by making it very easy to run code in content and background script contexts from a remote client. Typical browser automation tasks like filling out an input, clicking a button, or extracting the HTML of an element are accomplished by marshaling code and results between the browser and the client.
your point is that the API was stable with V2
My point isn't that the API was stable, it's that Google is moving towards removing key features from the API because they consider them to be too powerful. Blocking webRequest and executeScript are two notable examples.
I find it very unfortunate that the capabilities of browser extensions are being crippled. I understand that there are significant security issues with browser extensions, but the same general purpose APIs that allow abuse simultaneously allow really wonderful and powerful things to be built. As a developer who loves extending and personalizing their browser, it's simply depressing to see that go.
The first publicly funded, organized police force with officers on duty full-time was created in Boston in 1838. Boston was a large shipping commercial center, and businesses had been hiring people to protect their property and safeguard the transport of goods from the port of Boston to other places, says Potter. These merchants came up with a way to save money by transferring to the cost of maintaining a police force to citizens by arguing that it was for the “collective good.”
In the South, however, the economics that drove the creation of police forces were centered not on the protection of shipping interests but on the preservation of the slavery system. Some of the primary policing institutions there were the slave patrols tasked with chasing down runaways and preventing slave revolts, Potter says; the first formal slave patrol had been created in the Carolina colonies in 1704. During the Civil War, the military became the primary form of law enforcement in the South, but during Reconstruction, many local sheriffs functioned in a way analogous to the earlier slave patrols, enforcing segregation and the disenfranchisement of freed slaves.
From Wikipedia [2]:
For approximately 150 years, union organizing efforts and strikes have been periodically opposed by police, security forces, National Guard units, special police forces such as the Coal and Iron Police, and/or use of the United States Army. Significant incidents have included the Haymarket Riot and the Ludlow massacre. The Homestead struggle of 1892, the Pullman walkout of 1894, and the Colorado Labor Wars of 1903 are examples of unions destroyed or significantly damaged by the deployment of military force. In all three examples, a strike became the triggering event.
These aren't the only influences on modern policing in the US, but it's hard to argue that the history of US policing isn't deeply intertwined with slave patrols, union busting efforts, and more generally protecting the interests of the ruling class.
[1] - https://time.com/4779112/police-history-origins/
[2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_union_busting_in_th...
Even if the platform had terrible and dangerous content on it, we should avoid assuming that everybody on it supported that content, and we shouldn't celebrate their personal information being leaked.
Awesome work by the way, it's a lot of fun to play with.
I used to blog extensively, and I've spent a lot of time thinking about this. The content I would write was loosely for marketing purposes, but I put a lot of effort into generating high quality content that I would genuinely enjoy reading myself. An article that I spent 50+ hours on and felt very proud of might have a 30% chance of reaching the front page of Hacker News. A fluffy post with a decent title that I spent only an hour or two on would still have a 10-15% chance of front paging. The way the math works out, it's simply much lower ROI to generate quality content. It's also a bit heartbreaking to invest a lot of time making something for other people to enjoy only for nobody to ever see it.
The second chance queue on Hacker News is a major step in the right direction, and I'm grateful for all the times where my posts were given another chance. A lot of great content still slips through the cracks however, and relatively small actions by community members would go a long way towards helping incentives align towards generating quality content.