bmandale

Was it released with it? Iirc they tried moving to such a license from bsd, which contains no patent grants whatsoever, and hence they thought it was a strict upgrade. The community did not agree so they moved back.

It requires the claim to be made with "willful disregard for the truth". Notifying someone, especially with a cease-and-desist on fancy letterhead, makes it legally clear that they know better, and thereafter would be definitely libelling you (assuming the claims are in fact untrue and harmful). But you can still sue them for the claim prior to the notice, you just have to prove they should have known better prior to making the claim.

A lot of these style of reframings seem to completely lack a theory behind them, as if reframing things will magically solve a problem. In this case, further vilifying or antagonizing drivers will do absolutely nothing to increase road safety. How would it? These memes won't reach the majority of drivers. Those it does, rather than feeling mollified, will feel accused, and hence will be more likely to drive recklessly around cyclists.

A reframing that would have the power to lower collisions between cars and bikes would be to blame the road design, or even the car design. These are things that can be easily changed for a large number of people if enough political will exists.

People misunderstood your original reply. Correcting you is not pedantry.

Language is a communication tool. If you misuse language you will be badly understood. The solution is to use the correct word for what you mean, not to accuse others of sophistry.

Having assets under management doesn't mean you have that money. You don't own it, you are just taking care of it for somebody. When describing a company as an $X billion company, conventionally this is referring to the market cap. You could use it to describe other things they possess if you wanted to, but assets they manage will never be something they possess.

One of our developers was compromised by a recent supply-chain compromise on Tanstack

...which in turn was caused by bad design of github's CI pipeline. Funny how it all comes back around like that.

Interestingly fails as well, in two ways. First:

The string may begin with an arbitrary amount of whitespace (as determined by isspace(3))

Second is that it only applies to signed long long, not unsigned.

Some people would set up tooling to look for compromises the moment they get published. What's neat about this is that as an attacker you have no way to determine beforehand whether you'll get caught by this. So you would run your attack, it would lead to a compromised package being published, then the world would get a chance to look at it and see if they can detect the issue with it. This would of course lead to attackers being a lot sneakier. But I think due to the opaque nature of what checks people are running against packages and what they might notice, a much smaller number of attacks would make it through. Of course the ones that did by definition would be the ones that were impossible to detect and would thus stick around a lot longer.

open source does not mean open community. you can just throw tarballs over the wall

Missed the original. That seems like a reasonable way to highlight software that you believe is fundamentally insecure. Obviously you can't be on the hook to fix deep architectural issues yourself, but just submitting a single PR will be treated as "problem solved". Since most of any software contains some vulnerability, just saying "this software has an RCE" isn't actually a disclosure at all. The real issue is that the given vulnerability was (supposedly) easy to find, which if true is not something that will be fixed by targeting just that exploit chain, and needs deep changes to fix.

There are no "defaults that work for everyone". Well designed tooling acknowledges that and makes it easy to tune the software to your preference.

Politics are generally off topic and tend to be flagged.

How do they get money for free?

market power

What is stopping everyone else from doing the same?

see above

That's protection money, though trump so far hasn't demonstrated to be particularly worried about honoring those payments.

tabs and spaces being mixed in the code

Python banned this in python3. Problem solved.

Clearer for the computer, but not for the human. Many errors, some severe, have been caused by a human only looking at the indentation and not realizing the braces don't match.

I would love to see a language try to implement a rule where only an indented line is considered part of the previous expression.

After python, it seems like every language decided that making parsing depend on indents was a bad idea. A shame, because humans pretty much only go by indents. An example I've frequently run into is where I forget a closing curly brace. The error is reported at the end of the file, and gives me no advice on where to go looking for the typo. The location should be obvious, as it's at exactly the point where the indentation stops matching the braces. But the parser doesn't look at indents at all, so it can't tell me that.

  $ base64 -d <<< SW50ZXJlc3RpbmchIFBsZWFzZSB0ZWxsIHVzIG1vcmUh
  Interesting! Please tell us more!

Remove all ASCII tab or newline from input.

the title is referring to inside html attributes, where they will be removed hence not affect where the link points.

Instead of making a sarcastic response, just state plainly what you mean. This prevents you having to get into dumb arguments that don't mean anything to people who don't already know what you're trying to say.

This could just as easily be someone at the top saying "find a legitimate sounding reason to refuse this because we want to refuse it anyways". They will always give such a reason, that doesn't mean it's the real reason.

As I explain, you can't perfectly reverse these filters because of quantizing. The more the signal is attenuated, the more information is lost when quantizing. So yes, it does matter what your kernel is.

This nets us another original pixel value, img(8).

This makes it all seem really too pat. In fact, this probably doesn't get us the original pixel value, because of quantizing deleting information when the blur was applied, which can never be recovered afterwards. We can at best get an approximation of the original value, which is rather obvious given that we can vaguely make out figures in a blurred image already.

Nevertheless, even with a large averaging window, fine detail — including individual strands of hair — could be recovered and is easy to discern.

The reason for this is that he's demonstrating a box blur. A box blur is roughly equivalent to taking the frequency transform of the image, then multiplying it by a sort of decaying sin wave. This achieves a "blur" in that the lowest frequency is multiplied by 1 and hence is retained, and higher frequencies are attenuated. However, visually we can see that a box blur doesn't look very good, and importantly it doesn't necessarily attenuate the very highest frequencies by much more than far lower frequencies. Hence it isn't surprising that the highest frequencies can be recovered in good fidelity. Compare a gaussian blur, which is usually considered to look better, and whose frequency transform focuses all the attenuation at the highest frequencies. You would be far less able to recover individual strands of hair in an image that was gaussian blurred.

Remarkably, the information “hidden” in the blurred images survives being saved in a lossy image format.

Remarkable, maybe, but unsurprising if you understand that jpeg operates on basically the same frequency logic as described above. Specifically, it will be further attenuating and quantizing the highest frequencies of the image. Since the box blur has barely attenuated them already, this doesn't affect our ability to recover the image.

All type checkers either permit incorrect programs, reject correct programs, or are turing complete.

That's not the only way to protect yourself from accusations of copyright infringement. I remember reading that the GNU utils were designed to be as performant as possible in order to force themselves to structure the code differently from the unix originals.

click fraud consists of the person who runs a website themselves clicking, running bots to click, paying someone else to click, etc ads on their own website. it becomes fraud first because they have contractually agreed not to do that, and second because they are materially benefiting from it. an unaligned third party clicking (etc) on ads has neither of those conditions being true, and hence isn't fraud or otherwise illegal.

Many reactors can be updated to last longer than their initial design lifetime. This is usually far cheaper than building a new reactor. I expect that if the political environment in germany was more conducive to nuclear, that is what they would have done.

macs are the hipster variant of lenovo.

The only way to protect against that is if a secure application boundary is enforced by the operating system. You can make it harder for other programs to uncover secrets by encrypting them, but any other application can reverse the encryption. I don't believe using the tpm meaningfully changes that situation.