ilammy

Don’t put your words in their mouth.

Giving government money doesn’t really change the way government operates. The government has the budget for the year and that’s the spending for the year. If government needs something done, an item gets budgeted, money is borrowed, and paid out to get stuff done. Giving money to the government only offsets the debt; nothing else changes from that besides the number in the spreadsheet.

Not just more than one employer, but some healthy number of available options.

You thought A is great but you think you can find better so you go to B. They turned out worse, you then tried C and those weren't great either. But now A won't hire you back because they already filled the position, and there are no other available companies doing the thing you want to do. Now you're stuck with inferior employment options compared to the choice of not changing jobs in the first place, unless you're willing to do something else entirely or start your own business.

Depends on the field obviously, but there are reasons why people might want to stick with a not-so-bad job instead of looking for a perfect one.

I'm sure the horrible lock screen UX is simply a dark pattern to nudge users towards Face ID.

Yes, breakpoints will still work. Debuggers generally use POKETEXT to write breakpoints, which ignores any write protection on pages. mseal does not affect this use case.

It's more about the slippery slope of security vs convenience.

I do git rebase -i often. Do I want to touch my yubikey exactly 37 times for the 37 commits amended, or do I want to touch it once and just trust the software for the next N seconds to sign only these commits and not anything else?

Now, if I'm the verifier, do I trust the signer to do it properly? Or the half their commits are actually made by their cat and automatically signed?

Signing a tag is a relatively rare and very deliberate action. A more secure approach is less likely to impact convenience, reducing the chance of compromising security because it was inconvenient.

I tend to agree with the argument Linus put forward a long time ago, saying that there is little reason to sign commits instead of tags in git.

* Commit references the tree. If you sign the entire commit object – which is what you want, not leaving a way to change something about the commit without invalidating the signature – you sign the file tree as you saw it and implicitly all its history. Might as well sign the tag then.

* Signatures separable from the commit have a benefit of allowing someone other than the author and committer at the time to certify authenticity of the file tree. For example, if the key needs to be rotated later, you can slap a new signature over the previous one.

* Signing every single commit is tedious, so you're bound to get it automated at some point. Now your signatures are worth less because your keys are always around to indiscriminately, automatically sign whatever.

Besides what does it even mean?

That one side believes they can win.

It’s a bit tautological. In order for you to prevail you must be stronger than your opponent in one or more critical areas. If you think you can win then you believe to know the weakness of your opponent.

Depending on your morals the causation here could easily be turned: once you see what you believe to be a weak opponent, you go for the win.

Usually people don't care what the bank does because they consent to the government making them whole in case the bank fails to return the deposit.

there needs to be a short-term solution

What is the long-term one then? Keep importing people and hope for the best?

The idea is to disincentivize hoarding cash and promote active usage of money in the economy, because governments believe that having useful markets is better than not having them. Regardless of the current living standards and your wages. Rising prices and wages are not the goal per se.

So all your dollars are put on fire and lose 2% of their value annually. You can watch your cash burn to spite the Fed, or you can give it to someone else and make it their problem what to do with dollars while you enjoy whatever you bought.

You will be kindly asked to log in with Google everywhere, for your convenience and security.

Next you’re going to tell me LiveLeak logo does not appear on the premises shortly before an accident?

As many as necessary and then some. No such thing as too few cat pictures!

I use AI to generate the pictures when natural supply is scarce. Cache them locally, address by host key hash. Use the hash as seed for bonus points.

I have literally patched OpenSSH to show me cat pictures instead of the usual randomart.

It’s not necessarily a copyright violation if the license permits copying. Under a permissive license, you are expressly permitted to copy the code and distribute copies provided you comply with whatever conditions the license mandates, without an explicit blessing of the copyright holders. Most popular licenses do not include a prohibition on training AI models. Maybe people should start including a clause.

Explains it rather well: older people dismiss their symptoms as “not real illness” because that’s what society taught them when they were kids.

You now if these financial markets just evaporated, who would care really, except a few aristocrats?

Everybody, because retirement is tied to financial markets.

We can’t possibly not pay out 401k’s, right? Isn’t that a neat trick to ensure that everybody cares about the health of financial markets?

The goal of WW2 appeasement was not avoiding war but gaining enough time to prepare for the inevitable. It worked well enough for Britain.

How about monthly statements? Purchase history? Stats, analytics, budgeting? In a mobile app? Without you personally or the merchants you buy stuff from having to do anything for that?

How about removing ability of private banks and payment systems to unilaterally decide without a court order who you can or cannot transfer money to?

How about giving that power to a random government official instead? And paving a way to non-fungible earmarked money while we’re at it.

Open-source developers are not supposed to customize their applications for distributions. Leave that to distro's maintainers, they know more about that.

Closed source? Your users are paying you for the headache of making your software run wherever the users need it to run. The differences aren't really that big unless you're shipping something deep in the stack or have to support ancient systems. And you still have to test software everywhere.

Yes, and then 2014 happened and Russia withdrew from the agreement entirely, since they didn’t really need it anymore.

They had it on a lease from Ukraine until 2017. Renegotiation of the lease barely passed Ukraine's parliament back in 2010.

What stops the inspector from turning a blind eye to app-based tickets?

If you want a true technological dystopia solution then the train car should be engineered in a way that nobody gets in or out of the car without a valid ticket. Like, make entrances a double-door, then you gotta swipe your ticket to board, deboard, go between cars while enroute, etc.

Rust defaults loosely follow platform’s libc defaults for improved interoperation. On major platforms the default stack size is 2 megabytes of mapped address space. You can ask for less, but it gotta be explicit for every spawned thread.

That’s mapped space, so depending on the OS it could be more or less friendly to its memory subsystem. Linux won’t bother finding you actual resident pages until you do need them. But if the stack drops back down, it will be swapped out as any other dirty memory. Rust does not do any MADV_DONTNEED magic behind your back to aid with reclaiming memory.

There is also a story that US cannot change the design of their $1 bill because of Big Vending.

they have to store some of it somewhere. This is one of the uses of currencies

Currency is for current things. You don’t store wealth in currency. Even in poor countries wealthy people store wealth in assets, be it real estate, businesses, cars, or cattle. Only poor people store their “wealth” in currencies, because they can’t afford any assets.

there is no incentive for people to keep pouring money into it, so its value relative to Gold, USD should not increase too much

If there is no incentive to keep pouring money into it — not feeding the miners who maintain security and turning gears of the network — then indeed the value will not increase, but rather rapidly decrease.

Then they’re going to advertise rental prices for off-season, when nobody actually needs the machines. During the harvest week The Market will demand that rent quadruples. And of course you better pay a reservation in year’s advance, to avoid being told, “I’m sorry sir, we’re out of capacity today, all machines nearby are busy. We can maybe get you one from across the continent for 10 times the price, be ready here in a week.”

Quite a lot of countries have a fast-track for restoring citizenship if you had one. Not on the “when you feel like it” basis, but often without onerous requirements of foreigner naturalization.

Arguably, US Navy power projection services are provided worldwide.