If the image is accurate I think "motion led" would also be in scope for initial collection. There is a filtering process after the search term net that determines whether it is in scope for the warrant. Given the dubious framing of these search terms and past examples like the NSA watching every Linux Journal visitor I'm disinclined to trust such a process. RIP to work schedule of the poor intern who has to weed out all the results for suburban parents setting up Halloween decorations with glowing eyes.
While the FBI's behavior in many cases is extremely suspect in this case there seems to have been legitimate contact between these suspects and real foreign agents in early 2020, prior to any FBI involvement.
Wikipedia is good for general knowlege. Legal charges are made with respect to a specific statute. In the U.S. treason will only ever be charged when we are at war.
That would have been more possible a decade ago when the web browsers were less compatible and sites relied on the lowest common denominator feature set. With the increase in compatibility sites now rely on libraries that each depend on a different 90% of the feature set. Breaking interactions between those dependencies has a cascade effect that leads to really, really, really frustrating experiences today. e.g. a UI that looks perfect and has interaction effects working but a background interaction fails silently. A decade ago compatibility issues were more common but IME they were less frustrating because there was usually a rendering artifact or foreground error that made it clear the author just didn't support your browser.
It is being likened to bubblesort in various places but your description (which I quite like) makes it seem like quicksort with an intentionally bad (worst possible?) bifurcation.
It is pretty obvious if you search for any old topic that is also covered incessantly by the news. "royal family" is a good example. There's no way those news stories published an hour ago are listed first due to a high PageRank score (which necessarily depends on time to accumulate inbound links).
You're focusing on the overweight side of the ledger, causing your character judgement to kick into gear. Controlling your weight can be difficult without moral failure. When I was 14 I was desperate to gain weight (5'10" 128lbs) so I was eating nearly 3,000+ calories per day. I was lifting weights a few times per week for maybe 20-30 minutes but not much other exercise. Over the course of 5 years I gained a grand total of 19lbs. Weight gain is definitely not a simple calorie intake vs calories burned formula.
While I don't advocate for mass applying, I have always believed that most top candidates for a position will only hit approximately 5/8 desired experience/skills points. As Carmack says in the thread, the labor force simply has a perpetually non-optimal distribution of skills.
After seeing it from the hiring side for the past 7 years, I can also say that there's usually a few extra unlisted criteria that would more than substitute for the skills you don't match on. The content of job listings is largely true to the desires of the hiring manager but also incorporates some organizational inertia. It takes a while to get new technologies incorporated into the practices of recruiting offices. Many managers are usually informally hiring for skills that have not yet achieved enough of a foothold to be a screening criteria.
Likewise, I've never found any correlation between those degrees and security improvements delivered by consultants. Honestly, the best security consultants I know of are essentially con men (and women!) who have devoted their amateur psychological instincts to good. You can apply all the best tech but without organizational change it won't last. On the flip side if you bring organizational change to adopt security in depth as a value then even substandard tech can serve the purpose. In that vain, the best security consultants (meaning someone hired temporarily for their expertise – not a long term employee hired by renewable contract) are those who can imbue leadership with the vision of their organization as one that benefits financially from security as a cultural value. I'm not sure who did this for Apple but they are a good example of a company that has benefited from a reputation earned by truly valuing security instead of trying to merely make sure everything is secure.
I agree that people often don't treat the exit code the way they should when using the backticks. However there's better options in the ruby stdlib too, like `system` and `spawn` and `popen`. Using the other methods allows you to also sidestep the shell if you know the arguments you want to pass.
Their evidence consisted of more than web server logs. I personally don't think their claims matched their evidence but they did provide details about the exploits found, corroborated by the FBI. The primary implant found on the DNC network had been linked by multiple other security companies to other hacks that were almost definitely carried out by Russia-affiliated hackers. These links have been well-documented and have supporting links in the Wikipedia article.
This summary of the common disingenuousness of Apple defenders is decent IMO but the associations this post makes to other socially controversial debates is not helpful. The COVID precautions mentioned are designed to protect the entire population of the world and all of our tools in that fight depend on massive social cooperation. The proportion of the population who need an exemption from COVID measures is very small. With CSAM the situation is reversed. The entire population of iPhone users is now subject to a precaution that is needed only for a very small proportion of the population. To my mind, the test if whether someone is debating in good faith on this topic is whether they are willing and able to provide a limiting principle to the new invasive capability. If there is no limit to an invasion of privacy it shouldn't be allowed. From what I've read, Apple's tech seems promising but all such tech will have false hits. There will be human processes required to safeguard against those spiraling out of control in the life of their users. I wish they would disclose more details about those processes.
Game developers end up using the distro tooling when they port the game to SteamOS. One of the tensions with Ubuntu was that developers felt familiar with it (good) but the system libraries lagged what was needed by new games (bad) so developers would need to run their game in a SteamOS Ubuntu-esque chroot instead of their Ubuntu host system despite them being very similar. Arch does provide the promise of easier native porting because testing the game during active development (on an Arch host system) will be closer to the SteamOS Arch-esque system. It's small but meaningful for those who try to support SteamOS to the maximum extent, which is important when you're trying to seed a new ecosystem.
Considering MacOS share of developers is around ~30%, most developers can't cmd-click :) Seriously though, there's whole camps of developers who don't use an IDE. Some people are just more productive keeping a model in their head and relying on other tools (test, linters, repl experiments) to safeguard against their own misunderstandings.
One reason the SSR mess is so easy to walk into is that everyone knows it's a reasonable amount of refactoring to get out of later. The cleanup of an SSR app lacks the deployment headaches of SPAs (doubly so with the service worker layer).
Multiple news orgs have stated in public that they don't care about paywalls bypassers because they put up the paywall to convert only the most amenable readers. This is very similar to the paper distribution model where an extreme minority of subscribers represented the majority of revenue, due to extreme discounts and other subsidies given to most readers.
It's far from clear that draw-on-top paywalls qualify for the protection offered by either the DMCA or the CFAA. Even if they did, the mechanisms by which this specific extension works are indistinguishable actions users take for many other reasons. The legal notice is a gamble that the extension author doesn't want to spend the money to find out the hard way.
They would negotiate different licensing terms that require the licensee to risk their own capital on a bet that the consumer wants android devices with all of the associated Google services. That would be different from their current position of essentially paying for Google services with an in-kind payment of non-competition.
Sounds like you have tests that need to read (probably cached) data files while the parent poster has tests that need to write to disks (probably in a database transaction). Those are different enough that run times won't ever be comparable.
AI and ML have different goals, which sometimes overlap. The goal of ML is to discover relationships in data that can only be (easily) observed by a machine. That usually serves as decision support data for a human decision maker or another more conventional algorithm. This is usually based on an entire data set at once. Accuracy and precision are valued over quickness and robustness.
AI is about substituting human decision makers or other conventional computer decision algorithms. AI is used for situational decision making. It needs to be quick (like the conventional algorithms) while also recognizing the nuance and multi-dimemaional nature of a lot of decisions. Robustness and quickness are often valued more than precision.
IOW the GP is only using ML for everything because it is a buzzword.
You've added something that was not in the article. The IP address was not necessarily in the GRU HQ. The IP was in Moscow. The IP allowed the agent to be identified. That might mean the IP was in the GRU HQ but not necessarily. Once the agent was identified, they knew (possibly based on other intel collection) that he works out of (has as a "home" office) the GRU HQ.
I usually write something small that I've written multiple times before. I try to write it exactly like I would in whichever my currently most-used language is. It gets really painful in parts because languages differ. Sometimes the writing is the difficult part. Sometimes writing it in the same way is easy but the runtime performance is bad. Sometimes the tooling just doesn't support what I am trying. Finding these pain points helps me develop an intuitive sense for which of my habits I should steer clear of with the new language. After I consider how the new language would allow or encourage me to write it differently, I re-write it. Then I diff my original and final implementations.
Which of their actions are so obviously pro-Russia? I can think of some that are pro-Russia in the sense that they are attacking Russia's opponents but those targets are opposed by others as well, making the conclusion less clear. The most well-known example: is helping Snowden seek asylum pro-Russia or anti-USA? The fact that they were seeking asylum in more than Russia, it seems more anti-USA.
It's also worth noting that he didn't have to succeed for it to be illegal. Therefore, arguments regarding the magnitude of the effect he had or could have are mostly irrelevant.
The point is that the editorial board's denunciation of Snowden is empty, dishonest, and to be ignored unless it comes with an equally contemptuous charge against the WaPo news dept.