FateOfNations

A "Windows Subsystem" is a concept that dates back to the original Windows NT line of operating systems. Historically, there've been a number of supported "Windows Subsystems", essentially APIs for the kernel. In Windows NT 3.1, there were multiple subsystems: Win32, POSIX, and OS/2, plus a separate one specifically for security.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_POSIX_subsystem

While WSL2 isn't implemented as an architectural sub-system (it uses a VM instead), WSL1 was far closer to the original architecture, providing a Linux compatible API for the Windows kernel.

Your bank/credit/debit/etc. card is a “physical token with a crypto key that is protected by a password and tied to one's bank account”. FIDO and EMV even both use the same underlying ISO/IEC 7816 and 14443 protocols for communications.

As somewhat of an aside, this development doesn't necessarily mean much in the way of changes to the way the program is currently run. The foundation can act as a conduit/collection point for funding from industry, with the program remaining run under a contract with MITRE.

People have really bad memories of Mini- and Micro-USB, or aren't old enough to have experienced that era. Those things were fragile. At that point in time, it made all the technical and business sense in the world to replace their existing proprietary connector with a new, improved proprietary connector. The MFi program was a thing before Lightning, it's still a thing today, and has nothing to do with the specific connector.

Yeah, I'm going to have to spend some time trying to understand the math too. I was mostly waiting for things to calm down standardization wise. This newly selected algorithm is based on error correction codes (the same ones used in communications protocols), which look interesting.

Given how seriously the spookie parts of the US government are taking it, I would treat it with a similar level of urgency. While we obviously aren't privy to everything they know, their public actions indicate that they don't think it's a hypothetical risk, and is something that we will need to be ready for within the next decade or so, given technology refresh cycles: they need to get these crypto algorithms in place now, for devices that will still be in production use well in to the 2030s.

There's also a good chance that the initial compromises of the classical algorithms won't be made public, at least initially. There are multiple nation-state actors working on the problem in secret, in addition to the academic and commercial entities working on it more publicly.

I'd summarise it as:

Apple can ask Google to do business, but Google will be under court order to respond, "Sorry, we can't."

In that situation, Apple would not have any obligations to the court. Google would be responsible for avoiding doing business with Apple.

Obviously, this would impact Apple's economic interests, so they want a seat at the table.

The $1199 I paid for my iPhone is how they make money on Apple Maps.

> SpaceX tells you how much it costs to ship something INTO SPACE.

https://www.spacex.com/rideshare/

Yes.

In a few states, there is a state-run short-term disability insurance program that pays if you are sick. Some employers offer short-term disability insurance as part of their benefits package, which is also available to purchase privately. If you don't have this, you are on your own in the short term. If you or a family member are sick, your employer must give you job-protected unpaid leave for up to six months.

If you have a long-term disability, which is expected to last longer than a year or result in death, you are eligible for Social Security Disability payments and Medicare health insurance from the federal government. Again, some employers offer supplemental term disability insurance as part of their benefits package, and it is also available to purchase privately.

There actually is, but it isn't the employer's responsibility. It's called Unemployment Insurance. The one-week waiting period is waived as part of the state of emergency declaration.

A natural disaster is neither the employee's nor the employer's fault. If a business's operations are interrupted due to a natural disaster (or for any other reason) and it cannot productively use an employee, it is appropriate to furlough or lay off that employee until operations can resume. Impacted employees can seek temporary or permanent employment elsewhere and, if eligible, apply for unemployment insurance compensation. The one-week waiting period for unemployment insurance is waived as part of state of emergency declarations.

If an employer wants to pay employees to stay home and do nothing because no work is available, potentially to avoid losing valuable employees, they can do that, but they are not expected to. If working remotely is feasible, it can be mutually beneficial to both the employer and employee, but like everything employment-related, it's also voluntary on both sides of the deal.

The ideology that the employer-employee relationship is fundamentally one where labor is exchanged for money? The most I expect is, "Don't worry about things at work. Take care of yourself and your family. You are welcome to use any accumulated leave you have available, and your job will be here for you when you get back on your feet."

My perspective may be colored a bit by working in an environment with strict labor cost accounting where labor is accounted for down to the tenth hour (even for salaried-exempt employees), and there isn't some magical slush fund that can be used to pay for what would otherwise be unpaid leave. We do have "disaster leave" for salaried employees, but it's on a "work extra hours over the next X weeks to make up for it" basis, where X is a reasonable number given the nature of the disaster. For run-of-the-mill "snow days," it's typically 4 weeks. Taking PTO is also an option, including running up to a 40-hour negative balance. Thankfully, I don't have to deal with any of these RTO shenanigans.

10 days per year.

"abusing the registration system" apparently.

This is a messy legal situation…

For the most part, it looks like consumers weren't directly harmed aside from the false promises about "finding the best deal," but consumers weren't paying anything to Honey for that promise.

The harmed parties, the referring affiliates whose links were overwritten, would have to argue that Honey, as a third party, tortiously interfered with them and the merchants paying the affiliate commissions. Third-party claims are challenging, especially when the merchants seem complicit.

Most of the merchants seem to be somewhere between indifferent and complicit in what Honey is doing, so there is no problem there (the teaser for part two seems to elude to what happens to the merchants who don't play along).

The Chrome team seems like the one that would be most pissed about this. While some aspects of their management of the extension ecosystem are problematic, they make an effort regarding trust and security. The reason Honey has to be so aggressive in getting you to click a button in that popup window is the browser won't allow it to interact with the page (to swap out the cookies) until the user has affirmatively interacted with the extension on that page. That is intended to prevent extensions from maliciously manipulating third-party sites without user consent.

Establishing a company in the US is easy, but you'd have difficulty finding a bank willing to do business with a brand new company with Russian beneficial owners (at least in the current geopolitical climate).

Technically, jurisdictions could try to collect the taxes directly, but they generally lack the infrastructure for it, and it isn't feasible to set it up. Instead, they must play by the state's rules if they want the state to collect for them. Jurisdictions also can't customize exemptions; they can only add an incremental percentage amount to the existing general state sales tax. In general, it's in everyone's best interest to play along.

Or they do something silly where there is an "Online Convenience Fee" when you buy online, but if you try to buy it at the box office, there's a different "Box Office Ticketing Fee." The event promoter should pay the cost of their ticketing service provider(s) out of the money they make, not have the purchaser pay it separately.

At least here in California, the state collects the sales tax on behalf of all the local jurisdictions, so they publish and update them all simultaneously (twice a year) and in the same format.

Various restaurant operators have experimented with what you described but haven't succeeded. The big issue is that servers hate it specifically because owners use the additional revenue to "pay a decent salary to their employees. " This generally includes all the employees, not just the formerly tipped ones. The kitchen staff ends up getting a significant pay bump, and servers get what amounts to a cut in their take-home pay.

At the higher end, the labor market for waitstaff is competitive, and restaurant operators who have experimented with this have had trouble keeping server positions filled (with the opposite effect in the kitchen).

We almost eliminated those here in California until they chickened out and exempted restaurants.

Surprisingly, neither Dish nor DirectTV has gone bankrupt. Satellites are pretty capital-intensive. They both faced challenges over the years but have managed to skate by. AT&T kept DirectTV afloat for quite a while. The proposed DirectTV + Dish merger fell apart for multiple reasons. While the government didn't explicitly reject it, there was a lot of uncertainty about whether they would bless it. The deal also required Dish's bondholders to voluntarily write off a chunk of their debt, which they ultimately got cold feet about.

The model weights.

OP seems to be Irish. Outside the US, "pension" means retirement plan/savings in general, including defined contribution plans. This contrasts with the US, where "pension" is a defined-benefit plan, almost always sponsored by one's employer or union.

Overall, it seems pretty reasonable. The regulators seem to have understood that obligations should fall on the entities in the supply chain where money is made. They shouldn't flow upstream to open-source developers who do their work non-commercially. The stewardship role for better-resourced open-source projects focusing on information sharing also seems reasonable.

Looks like it was this:

https://www.theregister.com/2018/03/01/trustico_digicert_sym...

There are around ~3,000 cases per year in the United States[1]. Since cancer is the result of cell division gone wrong, it can develop pretty much anywhere in your body. However, areas where cell division occurs more frequently are more common.

[1] https://www.mdanderson.org/cancer-types/appendix-cancer.html

Good news: the system successfully detected an error and didn't send bad data to air traffic controllers.

Bad News: the system can't recover from an error in an individual flight plan, bringing the whole system down with it (along with the backup system since it was running the same code).