It sounds like their architecture enables them to solve much more interesting problems than would usually be encountered in meeting their business requirements.
Readit Newsfirethief commented on Exactly-Once Payments at Airbnb news.alvaroduran.com/p/ex... · Posted by u/ohduran
firethief commented on Welcome to the Login.gov Developer Guide developers.login.gov/... · Posted by u/ustad
To use ID.me one must:
* Consent to the collection, use, and sharing of their personal information to third parties (i.e. data brokers).
* Agree to binding arbitration and a waiver of class action rights.
* Agree to limits on liability for any indirect, punitive, special, exemplary, incidental, or consequential damages.
* Consent to arbitrary termination of the account at any time for any reason.
Login.gov does not.
ID.me also seems to be the only way to interact with the IRS online, and has arbitrarily decided my identity is unverifiable.
firethief commented on Windows TCP/IP Remote Code Execution Vulnerability msrc.microsoft.com/update... · Posted by u/gjvc
"javascript is required to load this page"
Is there a CVE database noscript/basic (x)html reader?
Apparently surfraw has an elvis for it: https://gitlab.com/surfraw/Surfraw/-/wikis/current-elvi
firethief commented on In Japanese You Need a Dictionary to Count Things aethermug.com/posts/in-ja... · Posted by u/mrcgnc
All languages have redundancy; it serves as a form of forward error correction. I recall some sort of study (sorry, no link) finding that information density was (by some metric) similar across different languages. So it's not just inefficiency; it's part of the language's necessary inefficiency.
Of course, some forms of redundancy would be better than others--in cases where people aren't sure which particle to use, it probably isn't doing much good. However, language evolution is able to achieve some optimizations, and I suspect the particles people know tend to be the most important. For example, the many sushi or shellfish particles might sound particularly silly, but if you're in those industries, maybe they are helpful in maintaining important distinctions in a noisy kitchen/market, or in written records. If you're a customer you probably don't know them, and you don't need to.
Epistemic status: Wild-ass guessing from my armchair.
firethief commented on How far should a programming language aware diff go? semanticdiff.com/blog/lan... · Posted by u/thunderbong
Interesting idea. I've just tried it with a couple of languages:
- TS with Vue: SFC are not really working (it's showing a style change as if the whole stylesheet were replaced with a mostly-identical stylesheet).
- Rust: It doesn't seem semantic at all. It's showing a lot of character-level insertions and deletions that seem worse than how git-diff or GitHub would break down the changes.
It doesn't seem ready yet for what I'd like to use it for.
Why don't we have programming languages that use this as their fundamental design principle?
It would be great if programs were collaborative out of the box.
I can't picture how that would work. While collaborative features require that some objects are shared and synchronized, efficiency and programmer sanity rely on the fact that some objects are not. If synchronization is opt-in, how would a language integrate it any more fundamentally than a library can?
Also, CRDT's don't provide synchronization for free. They ensure that all concurrent modifications will be merged somehow. If the data being synchronized has any structure, it requires careful CRDT-aware data model design to ensure the merging is semantically reasonable (or that, in the worst case, incompatible changes produce a detectably broken state).
It's not about the money, man. At a price like $800 you could hire out a personal trainer for 3 months of twice weekly sessions. No way some wrist gadget is going to do the average computer weenie more good than receiving regularly scheduled and personally tailored training regimens.
I don't know what kind of computer weenies you know but speaking for myself: needing to interact with someone to get exercise would add a major hurdle for me. OTOH, I'm really getting in to minmaxing myself in Garmin...
I always hated running, but I had always been doing it for exercise. Perversely, this meant if I moved inefficiently and made the movement harder, I was doing better. I characterized running as "competitive suffering". No pain no gain, right? And like you, I always did more than felt good, and figured that meant I was doing it right.
But I don't think that way now. I want to enjoy moving. I want to move playfully and powerfully and efficiently. Exercise until it feels good, not until it feels bad. Love the body you have and take care of it and build it up, rather than hate-exercising to change it.
I went through the same paradigm shift with cycling. I used a cheap bike that was slow and heavy because higher efficiency wouldn't allow me to get exercise any faster. Then I got a nice road bike, and it's so much more fun to ride, so I'm riding a lot more.
firethief commented on SSDs Are Worse for the Planet Than HDDs tomshardware.com/news/ssd... · Posted by u/tender_euler
Well yeah. SSDs are worse than HDDs in every way when the denominator is capacity. The headline would be the opposite if they were comparing per IOPS. The shocking conclusion: Use SSDs when you need fast random access; use rotating media for bulk storage.
This seems a bit disingenuous. To people with a bit of understanding of cybersecurity, they are admitting that they haven't solved it; but to most of their customers, it will sound like they fixed it and are being cautious.