e_y_

But also that willingness to face the risks goes with the expectation that the people on the ground did everything they could to minimize the risks. If that trust is broken, because someone cut corners to save on costs and schedule, it's less likely that astronauts would want to sign up for such a job in the future.

Third-party libraries? TLS has definitely had its fair share of implementation and protocol vulnerabilities.

Although in mailhog's case it looks like STARTTLS was never implemented. Hence the forks.

The classic Escape Velocity Nova used ResEdit as it's official modding support

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10504182

This has nothing to do with the App Store. The API access is being gated by the user granting permission, rather than some reviewer looking at the app and deciding it violates a policy.

Letting users lock and unlock doors is completely different from a walled garden.

Social media was already becoming soulless even before AI generated content. Most common: reposting other people's content. Sometimes with attribution, sometimes without, either way the original creator doesn't get any of the likes or revenue share.

Then we get into staged content. Usually it's harmless; acting out a made-up scenario for a comedy bit. But sometimes it gets more insidious, particularly the ones where people pretend to do good deeds but are just inventing a sob story about strangers who didn't ask for help and didn't actually need it.

And people eat this up. You'll find some skeptical comments but it's absolutely drowned out by the volume of people who think it's real and share. And it's unlikely that all tens of thousands of those people are bots. I'm lead to believe that this kind of low-quality, questionably-real, feel-good content is just legitimately popular. Not hugely popular but enough to make me groan that people are engaging with it at all.

To tie things back to AI, the latest groan-worthy trend is people sharing pictures of things made out of bread or fruit that are obviously made by AI but the comments are "incredible" "wow how did you make this?" which makes me fear for when somebody uses AI image generation for misinformation instead of just stupid stuff.

Cell phone carriers can set up their own RCS servers. All the major US carriers (AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile US) outsourced their RCS to Google's Jibe platform, though.

Messaging apps haven't been pure SMS for a long time. If you've sent photos/images, it's using MMS, which basically uploads the picture to a HTTP server hosted by your carrier and sends the URL in a SMS message that the receiving app knows to automatically download and display the image, provided you have a data connection.

iMessage is proprietary to Apple, so of course it goes through Apple's servers. When you set up your iPhone, it registers your phone number with Apple's iMessage server so that whenever someone tries to send a message to your number, it sends it to the iMessage cloud instead of SMS. This can actually cause problems when you switch from an iPhone to Android because other Apple users trying to send you text messages might still get routed to iMessage instead of SMS, and there's no iMessage available for Android. You may have to use a website that Apple provides to manually deregister the phone number from iMessage in that case.

I'm not all that familiar with how RCS works but presumably there's a similar registration process so that other phones know that your phone is RCS capable, except decentralized since it's not controlled by a single company.

Wouldn't you rather not lose $1+ million? It costs something like $400/year per $1M coverage which is hardly breaking the bank.

SLS is the rocket. Artemis is the project that uses SLS, Orion, and Starship to land humans on the moon.

There's also the dubious Lunar Gateway concept although that will likely get dropped as reality sets in. Maybe the same will happen to SLS. Wishful thinking.

Racism probably played a part in that, considering that many Roman slaves were Greek or Italian, while Southern slaves were black and blacks continue to face discrimination a century and a half after the end of slavery.

It's a reference to Monty Python's Life of Brian ("What have the Romans ever done for us?" asks one character)

I would say that it makes the interview process more consistent and documented, and less subject to individual bias. However there's definitely going to be some bias at the institutional level considering that some people are just not good at certain types of interview questions. Algorithm and data structures questions favor people who recently graduated or are good at studying. Behavioral interviews favor people who are good at telling stories. Etc.

If engineers are doing fake work, it's because managers are doing fake managing.

Engineers generally like to work on meaningful projects. Sometimes we do get sidetracked on pet projects like building a better database design or whatnot, but the time spent on things like that pales in comparison to the scale of pet projects imposed from above.

Or projects, or entire product divisions, that were just badly researched, badly planned, and never should have been signed off in the first place.

Qualified dividends are taxed at the same rate as long term capital gains, although the rules for what qualifies can be tricky (special one-time dividends in particular).

Just give me radiant floor heating

Security through obscurity is only a problem if obscurity is the main defense mechanism. It's perfectly fine as a defense-in-depth. This would only be an issue if someone did something stupid like set up a passwordless rlogin or database server expecting port knocking alone to handle security.

Also as pointed out elsewhere, modern port knocking uses Single Packet Authorization which allows for more bits. It's also simpler and uses a different mechanism than ssh (which due to its age, has historically supported a bunch of different login and cryptography techniques), which reduces the chance that an attacker would be able to break both.

I haven't been able to find a detailed explanation of how it works. Somehow it emits a magnetic pulse that simulates the card being swiped, without having to physically swipe the card. Best guess is that it uses some kind of magnetic induction to induce a current in the reader the same way that a swipe would.

I never had a Samsung phone so I can't comment on how it worked in practice or the reliability. Can't find any mention of having to hold your phone a particular way so presumably it's direction-independent, although apparently sometimes it might not be possible to hold your phone close enough for the reader to pick it up.

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

It was standards based, but the way Apple ran the launch and marketing (kind of genius, actually), they gave the impression that Apple Pay was the only phone-based tap-to-pay around. Merchants would have signs saying "Apple Pay accepted" but not mention Google, leading to confusion over whether non-Apple payments would work.

Part of that is definitely the confusing state of payments on Android. Samsung Pay could refer to either NFC or magstripe-emulation. Google, of course, is terrible at branding stuff, and between Wallet and the many iterations of Google Pay it's still difficult to figure out what's what.

It survived for quite a few centuries so maybe that says something about projects that live on despite severe flaws.

San Francisco has its own leaning tower that's costing hundreds of millions in repairs and continues to discover new problems despite being only a little over a decade old, so it's a reminder that even today we sometimes screw things up.

Coincidentally I'm taking a train to Pisa a few hours from now so it'll be nice to see it for myself.

Back in the C days, it was common to not use generic data structures like lists; instead you'd have a next_item pointer as a field in the struct. For linked lists, this would save you from needing another memory allocation or wrapper struct, and since C doesn't have templates you'd either have to blindly cast the type or use macros or write a type-specific iterator anyways.

Lists eventually became a standard language feature in C++ and other languages, but it's trickier for trees and graphs. Taking the DOM example, you might be searching through child elements (div, span, etc) or nodes (text nodes, comment nodes) and different operations might only work with a specific subset of the "edges". There might be pointers to other objects, like from a DOM node to accessibility tree node. You might even have multiple parent node pointers, such as a pointer that takes you to the nearest shadow root or something.

Since there are multiple ways to traverse the same data structure, generic functions don't work on it. You could create a separate tree/graph for each thing you want to use it for, but that takes additional memory and has to be updated when the original struct changes. Or you could create some kind of adapter that has a get_edges() function, but this might not be very well optimized or might be clunky for many other reasons. So it usually just ends up being simpler rolling your own functions instead of using a library.

Time-of-day pricing is a bit different from unpredictable dynamic pricing. If the customer can reasonably anticipate the expected pricing, that's different from being suddenly surprised at a price hike -- like with Uber-style surge pricing, which sometimes lines up with rush hour but sometimes at completely non-obvious times.

Also, in terms of customer psychology it would be better to display the maximum price at lunch time (or whenever the peak is) and the lower prices as a discount. Fees are bad, discounts are good, even if it works out to exactly the same prices.

With a 7 day expiration, max of 3 apps. It's more of a "developer account lite" testing tool than a bona fide sideloading mechanism.

My understanding is that Google does not sell user data to 3rd parties. It's much more profitable for Google to sell targeted ads that indirectly use that data (without giving the data away), and also avoids the potential legal and PR ramifications of selling user data, especially since users trust Google with a lot of their personal data.

They might use your viewing history to target ads in other places. And they definitely use aggregate/anonymized viewing patterns to suggest similar videos people might like, but I don't see an issue with that.

I think YouTube is an example of where Google would rather sell you a service (YouTube Premium) than an ever-increasing number of ads (including ads for YouTube Premium). Google makes more money from Premium users. Creators get paid more for Premium views. The experience is better for everyone but your wallet's a bit lighter.

Google and Facebook make most of its money off ads because the reality is that users don't like paying for stuff directly.

Even today, there's good and bad uses of CG, usually coming down to schedule and creative direction. The average quality has gone up substantially, though. As you pointed out, there's all kinds of ways to use CGI and VFX more subtly that most people would never realize. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clnozSXyF4k is a great example of green screen set replacement being used for things as ordinary as a city street, 15 years ago on a TV series budget.

I expect the use of AI will be similarly varied in the beginning. It could be used just for background details. It could be used in a hybrid fashion where artists design the characters with reference poses, a storyboard, and maybe even some keyframes, and the AI fills in the gaps. And of course some studios will just be sloppy and use AI to generate larger pieces without fixing the glitches and inconsistencies.

People are sometimes dismissive of AI based on the "fire and forget" prompting modes but don't consider AI-assisted tools or human-assisted AI like inpainting.

I think the distribution requirement is specifically for private foundations, not public charities.

That's exactly what I predicted for NFC when Apple announced Apple Pay. Apple kept developers from using any of the NFC APIs until they were ready to roll out Apple Pay, and then only allowed non-payment NFC after that. It gave them 10 years to establish Apple Pay.

Being the system default was obviously very convenient for customers and there would be a very high bar for any other payment app to compete, but Apple wanted to make absolutely sure there was no possible competition.

I'm on board with paying taxes in an abstract conceptual sense. It's generally how it's spent and how it's collected (who pays how much) that are problematic.

Also worth noting that Google originally aimed to create less intrusive ads. Relevant, text-only ads with no Javascript, clearly distinguished from the search results by being on the side instead of above the search results. Those days have long since passed.

In general, using semantic tags like <meter> and <progress> instead of a div has to be done carefully because browsers and screen readers often have bugs and inconsistencies especially for less commonly used tags (and even for widely used tags)

It's definitely the phrasing.

Apple charges a premium on its hardware. Firefox is free and Mozilla makes most of its money from the default browser agreement, which is potentially now in jeopardy.