lapcat

> I thought the humanities were supposed to train you to better express and share ideas?

Of course. But that applies to ideas broadly, whatever you happen to be working on.

Whereas the OP apparently wants something like a top 10 list of brilliant humanities insights, which is a misunderstanding of what students are learning: skills, not atomistic facts.

Even in the sciences, students are learning skills, not just facts and equations. The key is the ability to use them, and that takes a lot of practice. The result is a skilled scientist, not a container of facts.

If you think an education can be reduced to simply-stated aphorisms you can follow, you're missing the point. If that's all there was, you wouldn't need to spend years in school.

It's like thinking you can become a tennis player by watching a single instructional video. There's no substitute for doing the work. The result is the skilled person.

It's interesting that you seemingly want to erase the humans from the humanities in order to distill the "insights".

As a former philosophy PhD student, I don't think it's good career advice. My philosophy degrees got me precisely zero jobs in tech. Nobody cares.

The best career decision I ever made wasn't studying philosophy; it was starting my own business. I hired myself, because nobody else would, and now I don't have to worry about layoffs, job interviews, or all the other employer BS.

> It seems I misread the original comment - he actually told the audience he was nervous.

Correct.

> I'd love to know which product announcement that was and see it for myself.

Some NeXT computer.

> I'm still not sure how a coworker would be able to know what he was feeling any better than the audience did.

Because his coworkers had known him for years, worked through many product announcements with him, and the audience did not?

The whole book "Steve Jobs in Exile" was basically the reminiscences of his coworkers.

I don't understand your question.

You wouldn't be nervous without an audience, so why would the coworkers be talking about the practice talk and not the real talk?

The pause may have been rehearsed, though.

An anecdote from the book "Steve Jobs in Exile" I just read: at the beginning of one product announcement, Jobs told the audience that he was a little nervous, but his coworkers said that he was never nervous for keynotes. It was pure manipulation.

"Hackenburg found that models trained to become more persuasive also ended up being less truthful."

It sounds like the arguments were basically AI slop hallucinations.

> Hackenburg found that models trained to become more persuasive also ended up being less truthful.

> Even in Hackenburg’s recent preprint, Claude spouted numerous inaccuracies and falsehoods

> when Hackenburg ran his competition of coached elite debaters and AI, there was one way he could bring AI down to human levels of persuasiveness: by forcing it to write human-length messages at human writing speed.

> they found that an AI could talk people into conspiracy theories, and that the magnitude of their increase in belief was roughly the same as that of the decrease in belief after talking to a debunking bot.

None of this seems good.

> The browser handles the passkey matching to the domain which is obviously a better place to do it.

I'm not sure why you're making a distinction. In many cases the browser is the password manager.

> Some password managers will only fill if a domain matches, but IRL the response I've seen from most users when it doesn't match is to assume the integration broke and manually copy/paste it in. I've also seen lots of them do stuff like happily autofill on any prefix of the domain, so your credential for `something.example.com` will autofill into `fake-something.example.com`.

Why would you trust the very same password managers that don't handle passwords properly to handle passkeys properly?

Two crucial things you can do with a password that you can't do with a passkey:

1. Write it down on a piece of paper and put it in a safe deposit box.

2. Read it on one device (or from a piece of paper!) and enter it manually on another device.

Plain text is the ultimate form of cross-platform portability. Passkeys are the ultimate form of vendor lockdown. The passkey vendors won't even allow you to view the private key, unlike with ssh keys, which you can also write down on a piece of paper. It's vendor cabal to destroy computing freedom in the name of "security", always the excuse. Tech company paternalism at its worst.

> doing the test on the same computer wouldn't have caught this problem.

Doing it on a second computer wouldn't have caught this problem either with macOS 26.3 and earlier, because it was introduced in 26.4.

Look in the Keychain Access app.

> This is pretty much how it's suppose to work...

No, it's not, and that's not how it ever worked in macOS 26.3 and earlier.

This change was introduced in 26.4 for some reason.

Then you're in trouble.

This was introduced, unannounced, in macOS 26.4! See my blog post for more information: https://lapcatsoftware.com/articles/2026/9/4.html

I've tested with VMs. However, I'm unclear about the relationship if any between VMs and the secure enclave.

The iCloud keychain is separate from the login keychain. The Passwords app doesn't use the login keychain.

Migration Assistant uses the old Mac, which can unlock its login keychain and allow the keychain items to be copied.

Does the macoOS login keychain get backed up by Time Machine backups

Yes

> in a way that could restore the keychain if the original machine's Secure Enclave is lost or destroyed?

Apparently not

Original title "Manually copying login keychain files from one Mac to another no longer works on Secure Enclave-equipped Macs running macOS Tahoe" trimmed to fit HN maximum length.

I've just learned that initial-scale was removed from the MDN recommendation only a few days ago... by the submitted article author!

https://github.com/mdn/content/pull/45479

> I argue that the latter is preferable

I disagree vehemently. I couldn't disagree more. The text has to be readable. If you force the reader to zoom in order to read the text, your website is fundamentally broken.

Moreover, neither of these considerations apply to images: "you risk having content off-screen which cannot be focused by a keyboard" "A user is extremely unlikely to think to scroll horizontally to see the rest of a document"

"There is even great president for it with documents on the web" Typo: precedent.

> either way should never reach users

This seems practically unavoidable with images, especially screenshots for example. Device widths vary, image widths vary. There is no magical image width that fits every device width, unless the image is very narrow. Moreover, I try to avoid JavaScript altogether when possible, so I don't want custom JS image viewers all over the place.

> I researched and tested this extensively the other day. `<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width">` is all you need.

This is incorrect. Try adding an <img> that's wider than the device width. Then the whole page gets zoomed and the text unreadably small.

I would add this:

  <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">

All you need is initial-scale=1, not width=device-width, which is redundant.

"You do not need to set every viewport property. If only a subset of the properties are set, then Safari on iOS infers the other values. For example, if you set the scale to 1.0, Safari assumes the width is device-width in portrait and device-height in landscape orientation." https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Ap...

I've confirmed the behavior in testing.

> when incompetence becomes an accepted excuse

I couldn't have been any more explicit that it's not an accepted excuse: "Google has no excuse for incompetence".

Fielder's "The Rehearsal" on HBO was madly brilliant.

> just for "I want to show you the address bar"

I just said that there was another reason: "Also, the first screenshot shows that my start page in Chrome is not Google Search, which is in fact quite relevant to the content of the blog post." So contrary to your claim, I did in fact choose carefully to convey meaning with images.

> you hide behind that

I'm not hiding anything.

> can't even see why it's disrespectful to the readers.

You're right, I can't see why it's disrespectful to the readers. But you speak only for yourself, singular reader, not other readers, plural. I suspect that if we took a poll, we might find that you're the only person on Earth who thinks my first screenshot was "disrespectful". It's such a bizarre cause for offense, I'm truly baffled by that.

Moreover, the HN guidelines say, "Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Thus, your comments are disrespectful to HN readers.

Perhaps the sibling comment was correct: I have to ignore your comment if I want to stay sane.

This submission appears to be a self-promotional advertisement by the developer, who created a HN account literally an hour ago.

"Please don't use HN primarily for promotion. It's ok to post your own stuff part of the time, but the primary use of the site should be for curiosity." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

If anything, this should be a Show HN.

Interesting, thanks for testing!