lightdot

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal_(microarchitecture)

I guess many would like to use stock vLLM to run inference on affordable P100...

What metric did Microsoft use to assess that VS Code users "expect" their commits to have unsolicited messages added to them?

> Obviously, it should not be on when disableAIFeatures is on and it should not be reporting changes that were not done by AI.

Did you discuss adding these messages with your legal department?

What is Microsoft's position on adding such authorship statements to the code Microsoft did not author?

Or is Microsoft stating that using LLM assistants makes Microsoft a co-author of the code?

Does Microsoft have copyright claims on the code if LLM assistants are used at any time during its creation?

"Tor Browser is based on Mozilla Firefox ESR (Extended Support Release) but has been heavily modified for use with the Tor network."

Those are direct quotes from their respective web pages. Neither of them has anything to do with Chromium.

Even if we skip a step ahead and consider that this script then installs a binary blob... the situation doesn't get any better, does it?

If you find any of this as something normal and acceptable, I can only strongly disagree. Such bad practices should be discouraged.

On the other hand, using a distro's package manager and a set of community approved packages is a far better choice when installing software, security vise. I really don't see how you could compare the two without plainly seeing the difference, from a security perspective.

As an alternative, if the software is not available through a distro's package manager, one should inspect and compile the code. This project provides the instructions to do so, they are just not promoted as a first choice.

I can't help coming to a conclusion, that you've largely made my point about bad practices and having a wrong mindset when it comes to software security.

Enticing users to blindly run remote 3rd party code on their machines is IMHO not a proper thing to do.

This approach creates a dangerous mindset when it comes to security and good practices in general.

Perhaps the reason it gets mentioned often is simply because it's a good piece of software. Then again, perhaps not!

In any case, I'd be careful about using 3rd party DNS (and other) services, but that's for the user to decide, depending on the situation one is in.

Using one's own resolver is always a good practice, even in countries where ISPs are not selling customer's private data to anyone that comes along and where governments don't monitor and repress their citizens on every step...

We live in strange times where even EU countries misuse resolvers to censor certain web pages, while, for example, independent Balkan countries do not. Go figure...

Yes, GNU/Linux distributions provide exactly that.

In this case, its painfully obvious.

Then assumptions such as "it's Signal's mission to provide private messaging in the face of government overreach" suddenly become very dubious.

"I was up at two this morning" has several implied meanings. One of them equals to "I was up until two last night", others do not.

If you were up until two last night, you might legitimately express that with "I was up at two this morning". But if you were up at two this morning, saying "I was up until two last night" might or might not convey the truth. For example, you might have just gotten up.

Many if not all languages have nuances like this. I don't find them particularly odd at all, or specific to English, for that matter...

Is there a credible source for this statement?

Čuda = miracles, wonders, in Serbian (and several other languages).

And odd conglomerate of words from different languages perhaps, one even anglicized (ASCIIzed?) at that... Well, it does get the people talking, I suppose.

It's basically a heads up for all the vehicles far behind you that haven't yet noticed a sudden change in the flow of the traffic. Gives them more time to reduce speed without haste.

In other words:

- if you don't publish the modified software, you don't need to give the changed code to anyone

- if you distribute the modified software to a single entity, you only need to give the changed code to that single entity (and they absolutely do not need to publish it)

- etc.

I know people mostly view this through the eyes of large public projects, forks, etc., but there more to it then that.

That being said, according to their blog, browser users aren't tracked or profiled by Vivaldi.

They claim to make money from search engine partner deals and from bookmark partner deals. And to be honest, I have no reason to think that the statement isn't true.

There is nothing anyone can do to decrypt the content, even if given access to mail servers.

The similarity of the names often causes confusion, but SFTP has nothing to do with the venerable FTP.

SFTP stands for "SSH file transfer protocol" and it's a completely different beast. IMHO, a somewhat unfortunate naming choice, but that's water under the bridge.

(...while FTPS stands for "FTP over SSL", and that actually uses plain old FTP with an additional SSL/TLS layer...)

Right. "Virtualized hardware", as in, you know, software. In other words, QEMU is software that runs on actual nonvirtualized hardware, in this laptop's example produced by Apple.

If you think differently, I invite you to virtualize a sailboat and than sail with it out to sea.

I suspect that somewhere along the way, the difference between virtaulized sailboats and actual sailboats will become more readily apparent... :)

Terminal and emacs aren't there out of the box, but can be added.

A really nice and quite hackable writing/reading device...

They can hardly be marginally entertaining to someone 30 years ago if the person in question wasn't even born then! :)

But they can most certainly be marginally entertaining to this person today!

They are made from an available and suitable plant into a shape of a bridge, but not with a specific intention of being suitable for a couple of hundred villagers only.

They might as well be suitable for a good deal more, we weren't even given any measurements, crossections etc. in the article to even begin to guess.

...but for a much higher price.

I really don't appreciate how Seiko is upselling certain segments of their products. I feel the customers are being milked without getting the once excellent value in return anymore.

How very true, having such a fine GS and observe it do +9s or +10s per day would be disappointing.

This is completely individual of course, but I'd really want such a watch to be regulated to be somewhere in between 0 and +4s, taking owners wearing habits into account...

A bit silly how a few seconds can make a difference in one's perception of such an object! Even knowing that the precision is there, still...

Luckily I can properly regulate my watches but not everybody can easily do so these days. In view of this, pushing the 9s65 spec to +10s when cased really seems a bit excessive...

The truth is, 7s26 is a proper workhorse, but not particularly precise even when compared to others from the same category.

The 7s26 comes unregulated from the factory and its officail accuracy spec is an abysmal range of -35 to +45 seconds per day.

In reality, with 7s26 one can expect a daily deviation in the range of 20s between the 6 positions and the actual accuracy depends quite a bit on your luck, but is often resonably OK.

They are easily regulated, though... Basic regulation, I mean, nothing fancy. That still won't make the mechanism precise, but it can make it reasonably accurate if needed be, in the sub 10s area. Naturally, it will still fluctuate a bit, day to day, unlike a more precise mechanism would...

Compare that to a Grand Seiko that achieves -3s to +5s daily even under demanding conditions. These, especially if regulated a bit more, can achieve sub 1s daily even during longer periods of time... Now that's precise.

BTW, many people confuse the actual precision of a mechanism with the daily accuracy. Don't. Those are two very different things. :)

Just to mention, older Seiko 5 with 63xx calibres were, in practice, a bit better then the ones with 7s26, IMHO, especially those sporting a 6319 with 21 jewels. The 6309 were nice too but had a weak spot in their design.

The modern variants of 7s26, the 4r36 and 6r15 (don't let the designations fool you, it's the same calibre family) are a bit better but still nothing special. The factory spec for a 4r36 is still the abysmal -35s to +45s daily, the 6r15 is a bit better but still inadequate, IMHO.

Don't get me wrong, I quite like Seikos and also own a few :)

This particular Cortebert's calibre is indeed somewhat famous for being used by Rolex in 1940's (as cal. 618).

It's a fine movement in itself and Molnijas are not bad at all, both in their original 15 jewel variant (from 1947 to early 1960's) or as a later 18 jewel one. I would just avoid the specimens from 1990's or later.

I especially like the 18 jewel Molnijas from early 1960's that were still decorated with Geneva stripes and had a microadjuster. Molnijas became more utilitarian later on.