neilalexander

You seem to be desperate to talk about blame but ultimately they're called accidents for a reason. Not because we want them to happen, not because we can always prevent them. Regulations like this are about changing the outcome, not the initial reason it happened.

You know what else will be braindead in your nice world? The child who runs out in front of a car after a rigid tight-angled metal corner drives into their skull. These regulations aren't about blame or "drivers/pedestrians/cyclists should be more aware!", they're about reducing or avoiding as much harm as possible when things don't go to plan and an accident happens.

EU legislation requires a number of design considerations for pedestrian and cyclist collisions, like specific energy absorption requirements for front-impact and side-impact protection, restrictions on sharp corners/steep angles that could concentrate impact forces, minimum clearance around hard internal structures, mandatory ADAS (automated emergency braking, lane departure warnings) etc. Not saying that US cars are "not safe" in a binary fashion but for the most part these things are either optional or unregulated in the US.

Yes.

> I have serious doubts who are the target of this or what is the point of this to exist at all. It is literally worse than email.

Yggmail is a fun proof-of-concept and that’s about it. It isn’t perfect, nor does it have to be.

“It’s email, but not as you know it.”

Should be noted that this does not apply if you install Yggmail only without mainline Yggdrasil, as Yggmail embeds its own node and does not use TUN.

I was surprised to see this on the HN homepage, I didn't create Tyr but I did create Yggmail (https://github.com/neilalexander/yggmail) which it is based on. There is no store-and-forward as such, the sending node will keep the message in its outbox and will keep retrying until the destination is online.

30 years ago, Microsoft was writing books that were hundreds of pages long detailing not just how to build effective and consistent user interfaces but also with explanations from user-centric research as to why those things mattered. Every user interface component carefully considered and rationalised, every reusable pattern carefully reinforced, all to build a desktop where interactive elements look interactive, skills learned in one application pretty reliably carry across to others, and avoiding dead ends that result in user panic. Windows 2000 was the last vaguely-consumer-oriented Microsoft operating system that was built with any of those lessons in mind.

Everything they have developed since then has strayed further and further from those principles. With Windows 11 and their "modern" application lineup, it is like they have absolute amnesia about ever having done any of this. It is clear as day that nobody inside Microsoft has ever gone back and read one of those books in the last decade or two, nor is there any evidence that they spend any amount of time researching and testing their products with real users or trying to understand the ways that users get stuck or fatigued.

All of the user interface consistency is gone thanks to the half-dozen competing/failed UI toolkits and webview-driven applications scattered everywhere. Visual cues and interactivity hints are either gone or are no longer reliable. You can't even tell when something in Windows will allow you to drag-and-drop or copy-and-paste or even what new and horrifying form the Open/Save/Print dialogs are going to take in any given application. "Disastrous" isn't a strong enough word for it.

I don't really know how to articulate exactly how I'd classify into one bucket or the other but I think there are two types of "app" and I tend to have differing preferences on whether they should be native apps or web apps as a result.

One is where relatively-static content is the priority, deep-linking is important or essential and the web platform is pretty ideal for those. News articles or blogs or Wikipedia pages or those sorts of things. Things where I might want to be switching between tabs or forgetting about for a while and coming back to later.

The other is where the app is primarily interactive or where the content is a lot more likely to be real-time or ephemeral. Not least because if you're on a low-bandwidth or high-RTT connection, navigating between web pages or having interactivity blocked behind a backlog of XHRs (particularly where caching isn't permitted) is utterly miserable. My experience is that native apps usually continue feeling responsive to input even when the network itself is not responsive but that is often not true with many clickable elements in many web pages.

PWAs might be the middle-ground here but they feel a lot like Electron apps to me: still foreign to all platforms, not responsive in the way that native UI controls are, weird/missing "back" behaviours and still no better support for deep-linking than the average app would have.

> ofcourse, if you're in the UK, the only country worth moving to at that point is the US

I don't even know where to begin with this remarkably dreadful take.

This may not help if you can’t control your environment. You will often benefit from nearby routers hearing you and each other if you are forced to share a channel with them, as that is what enables the carrier sensing to work correctly. Otherwise neighbouring APs that can’t hear your quieter use of the channel may shout over your devices rather than backing off, creating collisions and resulting in retransmits.

> the OS is an excellent point to limit what they can do – including overwhelming your network interface

One might even call this "congestion control"!

> How would you swap out the TCP congestion control algorithm in an OS, or even hardware, you don't control?

On the contrary, introducing their own novel/mysterious/poorly implemented congestion control algorithms is not a thing I want userspace applications doing.

There isn't a single XMPP client for iOS that properly follows the iOS HIG and isn't ugly or unusable. There are very few clients that are even fully featured. The XMPP landscape on macOS is even more bleak.

Routing through another country unexpectedly already makes your latency worse. Adding a VPN on top possibly worsens it again.

I have long believed that the biggest issue here is that engineers and power users generally have a much higher “pain threshold” when it comes to poor or complex UI/UX. They are not always the best people to judge how or if less experienced users will tolerate or adapt to those patterns. It’s fine to have opinions but they must be prepared for them to be challenged. Even better if they can invite others to challenge them, which is essentially what talking to your users achieves.

The windowed mode is indeed optional and can be turned off in the Settings or Control Center.

This is surely satire. Obviously most people wouldn’t understand the relevance of or know where that number came from.

> "Why didn't the semantic web happen?"

Advertising.

Activity Monitor has an "Energy" tab that is useful in situations like this. It can tell you when an application is preventing sleep altogether and it can also show power usage of a process over the last 12 hours, so if you investigate this straight after a "night's sleep", you can usually spot culprits pretty quickly.

Mullvad even let you send cash in an envelope in the post.

They are potentially operationally cheaper. Answering a few API requests is cheaper than sending the same HTML over and over and over again.

Your information is out-of-date. Safari on iPad has served up desktop versions of web pages by default for years now.

Most people can’t explain the difference between a website and an app, to them the web browser is just a more confusing construct with additional overheads (tabs/links etc).

A platform does not need to have revolutionary changes year-on-year to still matter or be important to its users. That does not mean it "doesn't matter" — macOS works just fine for a lot of people.

Incremental quality-of-life improvements are nice from time to time, and bug fixes are always welcome, but otherwise I would be quite happy for them to leave good alone.

Historically, FIPS 140-2 compliance. However I believe mainline Go 1.24 is now going through validation for FIPS 140-3 compliance for crypto in the standard library.

A good 30% of Twitter is now just this verbatim.

> WiFi is obsolete tech. Even 5Ghz WiFi often barely works, let alone 6GHz (which no Apple device supports)

Sorry, _what_? This is an absurdly ludicrous take. Wi-Fi is one of the most successful and ubiquitous wireless technologies of all time. 5GHz has been working fine for people (especially in locations where 2.4GHz is crowded) for I don't know how many years—at least over a decade, or even two if you count 802.11a. Most Apple devices from the last 2 years support 6GHz too.

Logically? Because the world’s needs are changing and one day there will be something you want or need that will be accessible via IPv6, at which point you can either move with the times or be left behind.

IPv6 global adoption is on the rise whether you see the point in it or not. The religious arguments and nitpicking no longer matter.

No, their policy is that you have to use IPv6-capable sockets and APIs, not that the remote endpoints are accessible over IPv6.