Wikipedia does a fantastic job of curating recent events, thank you for posting this. While it's difficult to access on mobile, I can also recommend reading the Talk page to better understand how the page is developing as news comes in.
195 karma · joined January 16, 2014
I can be reached via email at adp<at>prgmr.com and IRC (Freenode or OFTC) as alynpost.
EDIT: I realize after posting that you may be asking about the syntax of VirtualHost in Apache, and not about how TLS works in this use case.
My observation is that it is coming from the whois record for the domain.
Running a mail system involves a lot of moving parts, each of them requiring study and practice to competently operate. It can be difficult to deal with every piece all at once if you're just starting. The store and forward and relay services let me build out mail infrastructure without having to expose it directly to the internet, which let me deal with deployment in a much more controlled manner.
Why do you want to run your own mail server? It's hard to avoid potential pitfalls without knowing what you need to accomplish.
Q: How do I use email accounts other than Gmail?
A: We understand that this is very important to our users, and we have been working very hard to make this happen as soon as possible. The next round of support will be iCloud and Yahoo Mails. Please stay tuned!
What is it going to take to make this product work with IMAP? That's how I access my email.
He then outlines the mechanism for all of these progress-(non?-)deaths[1] to occur, which he calls superintelligence. I find that explanation as either the cause or solution to all these DPUs very unsatisfying compared to the historically supported causes of death on that scale: disease, natural disaster, famine, war. I may be the "stubborn old man" called out in the article, but I don't on the face of it believe superintelligence will eliminate most deaths in all four of those categories at the same time. It's positing a mechanism seemingly immune to the selection pressure that got us here.
But even if I put aside my doubts about superintelligence, I would find it significantly more helpful to see a hypothesis as to why increasing computational power is a general mechanism whereby there will be fewer deaths from disease, natural disasters, famine, and war. I suspect it is more fruitful to focus on how computational power will help solve problems with critical infrastructure (shelter, supply, safety, communication, transport, resource control, &c) rather that puzzling over how it may create a new cause of death exceeding the magnitude of disease.
1: The author seems to switch signs here and imply these will be non-deaths, which is supported by actual population growth, so let's proceed with that assumption.
To be perfectly pedantic, the essence of make is that it is an expert system for traversing a directed acyclic graph (DAG).
It works by constructing a graph of “filenames” (vertices) and the commands required to create those files (directed edges). Using that as it’s knowledge base, make performs a reverse topological sort on the target filename to determine the graph traversal necessary to create it’s target file, and runs each command in the traversal so as to arrive at that target. Since it has a list of all intermediate vertices that must exist before it’s target can exist, make is further able to determine whether it needs to run a command or whether it can use the cached result.
I don’t think the author is doing us any favors by trying to fit make’s behavior in to a constructive logic system. It’s missing operators for doing that, as the author states: “Note that the form of compound propositions allowed is extremely restricted, even by the standards of logic programming.”
I find the author’s conclusions then a mixed bag. They would be good conclusions if make was a constructive logic system, but it’s not, it’s an expert system for traversing a DAG. I think of make as a “workstate” system: do what you need to do to put my build in a particular state, whereas most of the author’s conclusions center around “workflow:” move this unit of work through it’s lifecycle.[1] Make only performs that work incidentally to putting your build in a particular state.
1: The workflow/workstate distinction is not my idea. It’s explored in “Adaptive Software Development” by James A. Highsmith III.
[I originally made this comment at https://lobste.rs/s/rqf3f5/propositions_as_filenames_builds_...]
"The OpenSSL group do not tell the LibreSSL group about vulnerabilities that they are fixing in upcoming releases."