bawolff

I think its because its a membership association (like a non profit), where crown corporations are structured like for profit companies where the crown (government) owns all the stock.

I guess i dont really understand what this means for the average consumer. Isn't interac etransfer essentially instant?

> because not only did they install some deep cookie

We dont use "deep" cookies, just normal cookies. If memory serves, 7 years ago Wikipedia didn't use cookies at all in the block process, it was purely ip based back at that point.

To be clear, I am saying this is incorrect.

DMARC is primarily about "alignment" (switching SPF from caring about the envelope sender to instead using the from header). Yes, it does also tangentially address those other points, but the primary reason it was adopted was to prevent spoofing of from headers (where in original spf that was a non-goal)

Then setting up DMARC is only one record because you already had the other records.

Were you previously sending email without either DKIM or SPF?

Because i doubt that has worked at all in the last decade.

If you have no spf or dkim your emails have been getting rejected for a very long time.

(dmarc only requires one of spf or dkim, not both, but it is a good idea to use both)

> DMARC = telling receivers how to handle mail that fails authentication.

No. DMARC is about if the from address has to match the address used in dkim/spf

You accused them of arguing in bad faith, but it seems like the only issue here is that you disagree with them, not that they did anything in bad faith.

Its a reasonable view for someone to think that if a court finds a "not guilty" verdict, and there is no dispute over who the killer is, especially if one of the defenses raised is self defense or lack of intent, then the term murdered is inappropriate. It is also reasonable for someone to disagree with that position. I don't have a dog in that fight, i just object to accusing without further basis, anyone who disagrees as being in bad faith.

The person you replied to wrote "shooter was acquitted"

Wikipedia writes in the second paragraph "...but a jury acquitted him of second-degree murder and manslaughter in July 2013"

How is that framed differently than Wikipedia did?

Or do you mean the part after "i.e.", but i.e. is literally latin for "in other words". So obviously the part after i.e. was reframed, that is what i.e. means.

I feel like you are really picking apart hairs here.

There is not a huge difference between "the victim was not found to have been murdered." and "the jury did not find the evidence persuasive enough to decide guilt for the charged person for the charged crime". If you want to get really nitpicky, just because "the victim was not found to have been murdered", doesn't mean that they weren't murdered. Whether they were found to be murdered is a different statement than if they were actually murdered.

> Is there any reason apple can't give us the choice of.

Because they are in the business of making money and the business case for this doesn't make sense.

> I wonder what the boardroom meeting for this was like

I think its pretty easy to imagine. Execs dont want to be dragged in the news when the phone auto suggests something politically controversial. Companies are very risk averse when it comes to that sort of thing.

I doubt this was even controversial enough to warrant a meeting.

You are getting downvoted, but i can't help but wonder the same thing. Matrix/element is one of the worst chat clients i have ever used. Nothing works.

Forget normal people. How are you convincing techies to use this. Obviously there are other open source E2E encrypted chat programs that are half decent, but i never understand how people are convinced to use matrix of all things.

Luckily, you have the right to fork if you dont like how a FOSS project is being managed.

Don't like the corporate influence in Linux? Use FreeBSD. Make your own. Whatever you want. The price of freedom is you have to put in the effort to be the change you want to see in the world.

> than took away the means by making everything cloud,

I think its important to keep in mind, that there was a time when software like compilers were prohibitively expensive.

We dont know how lucky we are to live in a world where you can just download professional quality compilers, db engines, operating systems, etc for free.

Well we could just use the original manhattan project. Nuclear works, it is just expensive.

mere cost parity seems kind of disappointing. I thought the main selling point (other than low temp) was supposed to be that it was cheaper.

i'd say it is more a consequence of not having exceptions or other way of being explicit about error values.

Its kind of cool to see such simple to follow logic bugs instead of usual memory safety issues. Each step made sense in isolation.

Anthropic claims they have and they havn't been caught in a lie about this sort of thing yet. From a theoretical perspective, if a memory safety vulnerability in kernel network stack is exploitable, then root access would be the endgame so it fits.

hence the headline of the post.

> The post gives no details about what this vulnerability is

It is a very famous vulnerability that has been all over tech news sites. Sometimes it is ok to assume the audience has the slightest bit of background knowledge about the topic at hand.

> but this is a bug that could crash your system but is unlikely to expose your confidential system data to attackers

Given people have demonstrated getting root with it, unlikely seems questionable

> Especially given that the exploit can only be done if packets with IP options. IP options are commonly dropped or removed from packets on the open web.

It sounds like iphones use mptcp in the wild, which use tcp options, so im not sure how true this is.

Wikipedia is mostly going in the direction of just having very strict rules enforced via human review. If you get caught using LLMs and refuse to stop, you get banned. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Writing_articles_wit...

I think its working so far.

Wikipedia has always been different from other sites for leaning more on human labour instead of automated systems (so-called "soft security" https://meatballwiki.org/wiki/SoftSecurity ).

People talk about their being a market for google without the AI features, but i think the real market would be google that filters out slop results.

Bonus points for also filtering out paywalls.

I'm tired of search results being useless. The signal to noise ratio on internet search is much worse now a days.

> This is why I laugh every time somebody seriously suggests there's going to be a war with China because the West would collapse without Chinese exports. It's just not going to happen.

Sounds like all the more reason for china to start a war.

Just having one side dependent isn't going to stop war.

You can have all the resources in the world but it won't matter if you spend them on something else.

Well writer's block on one specific story. GRRM has written other stuff in the mean time.

Personally i feel for the guy, imagine the whole world insisting you only work on the project you started back in 1991.

It would be cool if you could filter by books my local library has (no idea if that info is publicly available)