knorker

I assume this is another push to force people onto the terrible "new" UI.

When they eventually remove the old reddit, they'll lose this 18 year reddit veteran. No way in hell am I using that infinite scroll abomination.

Yup, "just don't do that, then" is better.

But I have to point out that NL gov did not round up jews, but the bad outcome arrived anyway, from outside the system. So in the example we're talking about, that was not a solution.

Other than that, I agree.

Ironic, since LLMs have had problems counting, and so do you in counting paragraphs.

I felt your comment was so uninsightfully vapid and arrogant that it's uselessness could not be described briefly.

But sure, it does boil down to "sigh, that's not even wrong", but I suspect you not only don't know what that means, but that you would not be curious enough about life to look it up.

I note that you still did not provide a solution. You didn't even describe the requirements, and the problem here starts with a problem definition that doesn't inherently lead to it being either logically unsolvable, or leading to turnkey tyranny.

Edit: I use punctuation because I was born in the 1900s. And was on the internet when this issue started in the 90s, which makes me react to your "why don't we just...".

And if you look carefully, you'll find my punctuation choices are clearly un-LLM-like.

Your comment sounds like a politician who has just heard a magic technical incantation that solves everything.

I'm sorry, you can't just drop "quantum computer", or "zero knowledge proof", or "flux capacitor", and think that you have solved the problem.

Just dropping "zero-knowledge proof" as if it's a mic drop moment is like when Turnbull said "the laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia".

The devil in all this is in the details. Just saying "zero-knowledge proof" is just barely more productive than saying "won't someone please think of the children?".

If you don't have a complete solution, then you're "not even wrong".

In addition to that, you have misunderstood how zero-knowledge even addresses the main problems. Not the technical problems, and DEFINITELY not the meatspace problems.

Sure, but the poster was not just wrong, but wrong like "peace in our time" wrong. "Adolf? What a charming name" wrong.

Amusingly fantastically wrong.

NL may have its own issues like you linked to, but more uniquely had their collected data abused more than other countries in probably the worst event in history.

I'm not even saying your conclusion is wrong. But choosing Netherlands about how information control is safe in the hands of the government is a bit of an own goal.

Like if I was the boss of a train company I would probably not put up a photo of Mussolini as a motivational poster. Well… maybe I would, but only ironically.

How is, of all things, an age verification app going to make that worse?

What are you arguing for, here? If everything were perfectly anonymous, maybe. But NOT ONCE in history has governments decided to not abuse power. It'd be so easy to just put a tracker in there or something.

All these "think of the children" arguments are ALWAYS red herrings. Literally any action, any freedom denied, can be justified in the fight against CSAM. And so they get rushed through and abused.

The EU DNS filter (CSAADF) was literally IMMEDIATELY abused to block other things too.

"It's just age verification". Is it, though? How do you verify age without verifying identity? How do you verify its use, without tracking. Provably without tracking. Provably without what's called "turnkey tyranny"?

I think if your argument, which is an extremely common argument, is "I just want to block children's access to bad stuff on the Internet", then you cannot possibly have been paying attention to this debate that's been going on since at least the mid 1990s. Were you even born when this was being discussed? If that's your argument then you have about 30 years of catching up to do before you should speak.

[1] yes, I know Mussolini did not in fact make the trains run on time.

Funny you use Netherlands as a good example, considering that famously, their existing unusually thorough registry was super helpful for the Nazis rounding up jews later.

I don't think it's Godwin's Law when you are so spot on, exactly describing the worst case.

What's worse about negative leap seconds? The "experienced" time by systems will just look like they froze for a second. Added leap seconds are worse, surely, as time goes backwards.

The explanation may be spelled ITAR.

The difference with this kind of tech, though, is tracking down the operator.

It's not a counter example to give examples of what does exist.

And it's not like the BGP daemon is on by default. That'd be dumb. You could equally say that any Ubuntu system has equally many steps to turn on a BGP daemon, starting with `apt install frr`.

I sure hope openbsd's BGPd doesn't have any suid binaries. And if it doesn't, well that might just as well be a vacation photo instead of a binary for all the "code" it is.

I agree that they're punching above their weight, but I would also say that they are falling more and more behind. 25 years ago they were more at par in what use cases they can address, and its performance. But now it's almost retro computing.

And it's fine! If you really only need a bog standard webserver, or router/firewall, then that's the use case and it solves your problem. And solves the problem without baggage.

I wouldn't use it for storage, though, since running a non-checksumming filesystem nowadays is a bit of a joke. (let's not get into btrfs. I acknowledge its history, but checksumming is not backups, and backups address the historical btrfs problems while not addressing at all the checksumming)

But Bluetooth is basically a giant blast of security vulnerabilities

Yes, but this is exactly the point. And running OpenBSD is not a problem, until you run into a brick wall like this.

If you don't need it (and things like it), then that's all fine. As with everything, the last 10% takes 99% of the work, and code, and therefore contains about 99% of the security problems.

IIRC they were also very late to being able to run virtual machines, and even USB.

If you simply don't implement the things you don't need for a use case (e.g. a webserver) then that scales down to the fact that the compressor controller chip in your (dumb) fridge is not remotely exploitable too.

I'd say it's true. They chose to not implement SMP until consumer CPUs surprised them by going multi thread.

And obsd has no Bluetooth, right? A pretty big subsystem to drop because security.

What do you mean? Are they valid flaws or not?

Would you like it to stop when there's still flaws in the code?

The bitcoin people bought a pardon for their hero, one of the biggest facilitators of drug smuggling in the world, and someone who personally paid money to have people killed. Including explicitly saying to indiscriminately kill whatever unrelated bystander happens to be there.

That was a stated goal for them, and they got what they paid for. So good ROI on that.

They've gotten PAAAAH-LENTY for their money.

Did they get their pet asset to go up in price? No. But they managed to buy "crime is legal now". The shitcoin rugpull industry is making BANK, and the DOJ has been paid off to look the other way.

Investigations have been shut down, and mobsters have been freed. They are not the losers. Society is.

When it's from an industry consisting 100% of organized crime and negative-sum grifting, it's a lot.

I'd read a donation with "from the oil industry" and "from The Organization Of Stealing All Copper from Public Spaces" as different types of "bad", even if I'd prefer that the oil industry also not buy politicians.

For the avoidance of doubt, blockchain people are the copper thieves.

You’re still making introversion out to be something that you should work at to compensate or fix

Not fix. You just to hold your nose and do anyway, with no expectations if your experience of it ever changing.

Compensate? Not the way I think you mean it, no. Say you hate exercising or brushing your teeth. Ok. Nothing wrong with that. That's not good or bad. But you still have to do it.

Now, am I saying that only the social interaction with random strangers, that only inane smalltalk does it? Of course not.

I still think when you use terms like "take my medicine" it's like you're trying to cure (or treat) a disease.

Well, that's on you. Especially since I also added "Or getting exercise" and another clarifying paragraph after that.

For me, being social is tiring and uncomfortable

Exactly my point. "But I don't wanna!". Yeah. That's why i compare it with taking your yucky tasting medicine, or exercising.

I don't see a benefit.

Pearls before swine, I suppose. Shrug.

You say this as if introversion is something to be "cured."

Not at all what I'm saying. You don't get cured by exercise either. You're never "done" exercising. It's just a thing you do, in order to have a long term better life.

I don't like talking to strangers. It still tastes like medicine. I have no expectation that I'll ever like it. But I still have to take my medicine, or I'll be worse off long term.

And like being sore if you've not exercised in a while, the aversion to being social is stronger after taking a "solitude vacation". But you can't not do it.

So yeah, you completely misunderstood.

As a fellow introvert, I would recommend that you see it as taking medication. Or getting exercise.

You don't do it because you like it. You do it because if you don't, then you'll be worse off years later.

I find myself questioning for whom am I leaving a trace for? What kinds of humans or entities?

How's your reasoning there? You only want to be nice to people who have earned it? This sounds a bit too close to the "you have to EARN my respect", which is a hallmark of somebody nobody wants to be around.

You can only control your own actions. If your "good deeds" are conditional or transactional, then that very much diminishes their goodness.

Shaming people for not leaving comments anyway, I infer. /s

I put my email address on these things. All spammers already have it anyway. I get some feedback.

Or a normal web form with a captcha will create minimal spam. Certainly sufficient for someone not famous.

Or you can have a google form. Either with or without google verifying the senders email address.

Yeah. Should we just magically infer that he likes getting non-gig contacts on his explicitly gig contact form? The form is under "Get in Touch", and under an offer for a 15 minute call. I don't want that.

This reminds me of a friend of mine who in a B2B setting contacted a potential vendor by filling in a form, with his email and phone number as contact details. Instead of emailing or calling back, this vendor continued the conversation by tracking down my friend on LinkedIn and messaging him there! They already had the email and phone number from their form.

I'm also not super impressed by the consulting gig's "Johnny Holton" reference talking about Jake's "engineering excellence". A google search says Johnny Holton is an American hand egg player.

If I were a potential client going in cold then this would not fill me with confidence in his attention to detail.

You're not kidding. There's neither comment box nor email address. Is he expecting us to cyberstalk him to find if someone has doxxed him, just to give a thumbs up?

"Why is nobody calling to invite me to parties", says man who unplugged his phone.

Edit: Ok, I'm old. For younger people, pretend I said "turned off his phone".

Web apps tend to be a mixed bag. After a while they become slow because of dozens of async operations relying on network.

That's not an inherent web-vs-native difference, though.

That can be an issue for native apps too, but they tend to be designed in a local-first manner

That's a choice.

which means that they'll always have a speed advantage

woah there. No.

assuming your typical dev team

So it comes down to the developers (and project management, etc). Yup, I 100% agree with that.

So we agree that it's not a technical difference?

That's not even remotely true.

Most top of mind was this tragedy that Microsoft somehow thinks is "good" and not something to be ashamed of at all: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/the-new-run-dialo...

like all web apps, it’s slow

No, that's a very uninformed take, and contradicted on two fronts:

1. Microsoft's other native apps have gotten unusably slow lately, too.

2. There's definitely plenty of fast web apps.

I don't mind snark, but make it factually accurate.

This is just Microsoft's poor strategic decision to try to drive as many as possible to Linux. Hell, weren't they bragging recently about managing to make opening the start menu take only a tenth of a second? It should be instant.

Maybe they think we'll replace users with AI, too. AI is the only thing slower than Microsoft's UIs lately.

Like I said...

It's hard. But if we make CG inescapable it should as a second order effect close the Buy Borrow Die loophole, and the super rich must fund their life some other way. Probably by selling assets to consume.

And putting a tamper on inheritance (which could be progressively taxed or capped) it has a second order effect of discouraging hoarding while alive.

So increasing inheritance tax (effectively) would mean a change of incentives for hoarding money. Which is the only thing that actually works.

Obviously, being a hard problem, there's no quick fix. But in the choice between slowing down the problem and not, we should do the former.

How do we "prevent" it? Well, we can throw the baby out with the bathwater. Is that your proposal?

As for your question: no intransigence please.

Are you expecting someone to drag your contribution to the discourse out of you?