IPv6 brings more address space but also a whole bunch of other stuff, it is much more complex and changes basically everything to how you manage a network. The fact that it's not been widely adopted after 30 years indicates that people generally think the tradeoff is not worth it.
I've been a user of the Java/Maven ecosystem for decades. Maven has had local caching of artifacts for as long as I can remember, and there are several ways to set up a private repository mirror for caching and reproducibility.
I find puzzling such comments that present things as if they were possible in a capitalist society. People still need to buy food, clothes, pay rent. Are those off-the-beaten-path, uncorrupted pursuits going to provide for that? We would need a major societal change, the undoing of centuries of economic structure, and we're not heading that way just a little bit.
Self hosted means you host it yourself. I.e. you run the software. Running on your own home machine is definitely self-hosted. Hosting it on a VPS in some datacenter still is. Running it in a cloud platform somewhere is stretching it but I'd say that sill is. SaaS definitely is not self hosting even if the software is open source. The important part is that you're the one in control of the software.
A cover story for what ? We have eyewitnesses of Hiroshima. We have videos of atomic bomb tests. We have seismic recordings of underground blasts. Multiple countries claim to have independently developed the bomb. A coverup on a global scale, lasting for decades, implicating people from the military, scientists, everyday people from many countries, without a single person breaking secrecy. Why ?
One of the main problems with UX in my opinion is that someone arrives, sees a problem in their own eyes, and try to make changes and impose their views on everyone. Because a lot of that is personal preference, taste, habits, ability, and so on. You can't have a one size fits all solution. If you try you end up discovering that there are many dimensions and that people are scattered around in the space. And either you try to remove dimensions, and yay suddenly you have a one-size-fits-all solution but only because you removed choice (Google is a big offender in that regard), or you realize that you have no right to impose your views, get more humble, and propose a new solution, expanding the choice of others (but that is rare).
I don't know what the parent was thinking about, but the examples where the USA intervenes militarily in some country under the guise of justice while refusing any accountability for itself are many. The latest example to date is capturing Maduro because he's supposedly the leader of a drug gang to have him tried in a US court. So the concept of supranational justice and "assault on state sovereignty" is fine when it is in the interest of the USA.
Glossing over that too long article, the main proposition seems to be :
> The registries should charge companies, and pay maintainers
They already centralize packages, centralizing money flows is bound to cause more issues. By the way, npm is owned by GitHub, and GitHub is owned by Microsoft. "Your payment for your leftpad package has been transferred to your Microsoft Wallet". No thanks.
I just think there's a fundamental disconnect between the goals here. If I write free software, I don't write it to get paid, I write it to benefit others. If someone takes my work without also contributing back, I will get upset. The solution is not to give me money, that's not the spirit. We should not force people to pay for OSS but we should force them to give back to the community.
That's why copyleft licences like GPL are superior. People licence their work under BSD-style licences that are the equivalent of putting a box of stuff on the side of the road with a "free, help yourself" sign and then get upset when people do. BSD-style licences take away as many rights from users and authors as they can. GPL-style licences give as many rights to the users as they can. That's basically completely opposite philosophies. Use the right licence folks.
Memory factories cost billions to tens of billions, "investors" aren't going to spend that kind of money if they are not reasonably certain that they are going to make a profit, and the market is very uncertain right now with everybody bracing for a bubble burst at any moment. It's not the first time there has been such a shortage in the computer parts market, and the oligopoly, be it RAM or hard drives manufacturers, has always managed to keep prices high and production low enough to avoid a price crash after recovery.
Here's a plan to build a reactor that generates unlimited energy, at the human scale anyway : take a lot of hydrogen. Put it together until there is enough mass to spontaneously start thermonuclear reactions. Then it will start generating lots of energy for a long time. Having a plan does not mean 9 billion people on Earth are going to be able to build the thing. Then it does not mean either that they are going to be able to use that energy to do something. You need also physical things on which that energy can act, and that's not going to appear magically.
> we should not allow everyone access to unlimited intelligence
Who's we ? Who's going to decides who has access to "unlimited intelligence" ? An AI ? Why would the AI be better than a human ?
> One with no off switch.
Whe're not living in the Matrix, such a thing is not possible. If it were it would be a likelier candidate for the Fermi paradox than what you're proposing.
They explicitly say that they use your "content" to improve their models. Considering they practically have infinite compute at their disposal, why is it surprising that they would look for juicy data in there to make them look good ? When they ingested basically the entirety of human knowledge without regard to the rights of others, when they burn books by the thousands, when their relentless barrage of bots have rendered the Web borderline unusable, why would they stop at that line ?
The exact scenario from TFA is listed just before the diagram you're referencing :
"If a farmer packs a few apples in a container (sales packaging) and sells it under its own name or trademark to a retailer or consumer in the same Member State, the farmer is a producer [for the purpose of EPR obligations]"
And :
"If the farmer sells the packed apples under its own name or trademark in another Member State, the farmer is only the producer if the recipient is the end user of the apples."
And :
"If the farmer is a micro-enterprise, which is often the case, and the supplier of the apple container is established in the same Member State, such supplier becomes the producer"
That last exemption is quite restrictive, it can be a problem. I can attest that a French manufacturer of antistatic packaging refused to sell to me as a micro enterprise when I was selling electronics kits a long time ago and I had to buy them from China. Some states might not even have packaging manufacturers. So the concerns from the article are founded.
Maybe they wouldn't care about the ads but the residential proxy is another story. I'm sure lots of problematic stuff goes through that and you take the risk of being associated with it.
Not to pile up on the negativity, but looking at the SDK, first reaction is it's fucking C++ ? Can't wait for my watch to crash in the middle of something. And second reaction, when I see signatures like this :
littered everywhere, it makes my heart sink a little. Can't we have some data types and data modeling in 2026 please ? And leave unit conversion at the front end where it should be and not have to worry about it in every single core API ?
I feel like this whole discussion boils down to one question (as commonly when considering political issues) : do we want a framework that favors progress globally for everyone, or do we want to ensure superiority of some above the others ?
Sure that's simplistic, but human behavior is not that complex, there are a few basic needs and wants that drive everything. In that specific case, those currently in a dominating position (Anthropic, the US) want to put hurdles (regulations) to make it more difficult for others to catch up, and everyone else want to join forces to overtake them.
Latest venture of the ilk behind all that : device attestation for Linux (Amutable). Yes, they clearly have an agenda and are being quite successful at pushing it.
It's called cut and paste (2 actions), not "move" or otherwise. Being consistent with decades of software usage is more important that whatever you think is "broken" or not, because that's not actually the case, just another model of how to do things. The Excel example is particularly interesting, Excel does something similar, so when you "cut" ("ghost" version) and paste in a cell that overlaps with the range being cut, it breaks completely, which it wouldn't if it did the simple "remove cells, put them somewhere in memory, paste them to new location".
12k is obviously a large number of preventable deaths, especially, and it's a huge difference with diseases, when you consider that some of those deaths are people getting killed by drunk drivers. I don't think there is any acceptable number of people that did absolutely nothing wrong getting killed by a drunk or inattentive driver.
This is part of a large movement to end personal computing as we know it, and give all control over our digital lives to the mega corporations. It is already impossible to use some national ID or banking apps on non-Apple and non-Google phones. (say GrapheneOS), giving them an immense edge in the market, and they're using that domination to add more restrictions like installing non-play store apps on Android. This goes bit by bit, try to add a restriction, go back enough to quiet the backlash, try again. This new law is a foot in the door to achieve the same restrictions on PCs. PCs are the last open computing platform and bastions of personal digital freedom and thus they must be destroyed by capitalists and governments. Once the technical means have been put in place to restrict access to some services, the system can be hardened : impose that the age checks can't be tampered with by using a TPU module, impose a link to the individual's identity so that all online activity can be traced to anyone. Pretenses are easy to find : protect children, block sex offenders from accessing dating sites, and so on. At this point I'm pretty convinced we're geared towards a global totalitarian regime, and there's a lot of evidence.
It definitely feels like there's a dedicated core of people insisting on removing choice from the Linux ecosystem. RedHat, Gnome, fredesktop.org ... they have an ideology and a strategy to make it dominant in the Linux world and it does not feel nice to many people.
This article is using "fake" for click-bait purposes, implying some kind of scam, in fact it's just a filler RGB stick to make pretty lights inside your case, nothing nefarious about it and it's clear when you buy, but probably wouldn't be featured on HN without it.
"I'd like 32G but I can't afford 2x16G right now so I'll buy a single stick and keep a slot open for later when prices are better or I get more available money". Seems pretty easy to understand.
I'm amazed by the lengths Americans will go to try to convince themselves they're the good guys. America never has and never will go to war to liberate a people from oppression and spread democracy or other fairy tale. America goes to war for one thing and that is defend the interests of America and its proxy in the middle East, Israel.
So the interests of the US are the continuation of its imperialist control over the world through oil and the dollar, and those of Israel the expansion of its hegemonic domination over the middle East.
However this time, while Israel does indeed extend its hegemonic ambitions over the region by invading and bombing Lebanon, the US seem not to be in total control of what's happening in oil markets, the strait of Hormuz, and the toppling of the Iranian regime. There are many factors why, among which the fact that the regime has prepared for years for such a scenario and can not easily be killed by decapitation, and that it actually has partisans and the Iranian people is not going to simply revolt as one.
This war is also a highly assymetrical one, and that's why the comparison with Vietnam is valid.
Interestingly the original author ported the code from the Mozilla C++ version which is licensed as "MPL 1.1 or LGPL" (it's a bit unclear as the readme says that but the license file mentions only MPL). So the author did already relicence the project in a way by licensing the port as LGPL only.
That's a non sequitur. Creating long-term professional politicians is not going to create legislators competent in the various domains they legislate on. It's going to create politicians competent at being elected long term, whatever the means.