rolfvandekrol

There is a 'hallucinations' section on the page, which suggests that the items above that section are not hallucinated. I highly doubt that.

I am, as far a I know the only person in the world with my name. So I searched for my name. I am none of many things this tool tells me I am, for example a right wing politician, a journalist,l and a researcher on solar fuels.

From the story told in the README it is clear this is a project ran by a single person. There is no wider maintenance team that can be trusted with continuing the project. So anyone who offers to take up the maintenance will be unknown to the current maintainer and cannot automatically be trusted.

The alternative to this seemingly bitter approach is handing over the trust they built to some unknown person who can do whatever they want with the data in a lot of PostgreSQL databases around the world. I think I prefer the bitterness here over blind trust.

Pixel 8a is fairly similar in size. Headphone jacks in phones are (sadly) gone forever i'm afraid.

Exactly. The author shows a few examples of commercial endeavors open source projects could pursue, and acknowledge the projects in question were already doing that. Yet somehow they don't arrive at the conclusion that those commercial offerings simply don't pay enough to be able to build and support their products.

This is a repository that accompanies a research paper. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3310337

For me the images work in Firefox, but don't in Chrome. Looks like an issue with https, but i'm not sure how and why.

Nice!

Sometimes it generates ambiguous situations, where two solutions are both equally valid.

For example

equation: 5 - _ = _ available numbers: 3 and 2

In the FAQ on https://nanofiche.com/services/ they claim that a microscope should be sufficient to retrieve the engraved information.

If I understand correctly, you need to submit the verifiable identifiers (email address and optional salt) to the party where you need to verify. That means you need to trust said party to not abuse this information to verify your domain with other services which use the same verification method.

The beauty of verifying with a changing bit of information (which is basically what is happining now) is that you only prove ownership once and the proof can't be stolen by someone who doesn't own the domain but received your proof.

Maybe I didn't understand correctly how it works. But if I understand it correctly that is actually rather dangerous. Supplying the proof to an untrustworthy party should not allow them to re-use this proof for other services.

Definitely not a bug. There is a piece of code in source that looks like this:

  function rotateLine(position) {
    if (position < halfabet) {
      context.rotate((-90 \* Math.PI) / 180);
    } else if (position > halfabet) {
      context.rotate((90 \* Math.PI) / 180);
    } else if (position === halfabet) {
      context.rotate((180 \* Math.PI) / 180);
    }
  }

It indeed ensures one a type level that this series of functions can work as a series so every subsequent function can accept the return type of the previous one.

The latest version seems to have abandoned the typing of the initial input, which makes the types a little simpler.

My point however is that the types you point our here are actually not particularly complex. They are just long, with lot's of inputs for the generics (and the syntax may be confusing). The types in the original article are much more complicated, with conditional type inference etc.

compose is a higher order function. In the first step it accepts a function that converts 3 values (V1 to V3) into a single values (T1) and a series of conversion functions that converts this single value into another value (T1 into T2, T2 into T3 and so on until T6). Using these functions it produces a new function that converts the combination of V1, V2 and V3 into a T6.

I don't know ramda, but I assume this is only part of the type definition of compose and this is just the longest part of it. I think compose is written in such a way that it can accept a many conversion functions as you want and this is just the longest variant that is encoded in the types.

The trailing slash seems to be a typing error.

It looks like the author is talking about command line tools that use env vars for things that should be arguments. In the comments on the page he admits that for example key credentials are valid usages for env vars.

Browser games, implemented in Javascript, usually depend on requestAnimationFrame, which is not executed in background tabs. See https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/window/requ... for more info.

Probably Dutch. We usually get very agitated when someone tells us we should wear bike helmets.

It seems like this is not a CLI for git, but for the Github specific stuff, such as issues and pull requests.

I love how they don't tell the full name of Marco B. and Angelo K., but do tell that they companies were called "Bos IT Holding BV" and "Kreikamp IT Holding BV".

Why are they calling this a 'Robot-Proof job' while describing how the guy is training a model?

That sounds fun. Do you have your work in progress already published somewhere?

Not for a book of 75 pages. The price and the amount of content don't seem to be in balance.

For the sound splitting, it's probably not extremely useful. You can however use this frequency analysis from video to synchronise audio with a video (for a music video where you want to use a studio audio recording with a video clip)

That voat repo is not updated since december 2017. Is this still actively worked on, but in private, or did the devs abandon the project?

Every few weeks a discussion about a deterministic password manager comes up. This is not a new idea, and already countless times proved to be a flawed idea. Lenghty explanation, better worded than I can: https://tonyarcieri.com/4-fatal-flaws-in-deterministic-passw...

A 2.4MB image is bit overkill, isn't it?

We hugged the server to death. Cached version at Google: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:upCV-mX...

This is a deterministic password manager, which is not a very good idea. https://tonyarcieri.com/4-fatal-flaws-in-deterministic-passw...

Just submitted an idea, which i think is pretty good idea, that i'm probably never going to implement myself, because i usually get lost in yak-shaving halfway (tried it three times). Let's see what ideas come out of this :)

Although the points in this article appeal to me, as a software developer who would gladly take all the time in the world to work on a problem for as long as I want, the world simply does not work that way.

The words 'money' and 'economy' are not present in the text. The writer does not seem to realise how his/her salary is paid. A problem does not exist in isolation. It exists because after the problem is solved someone is going to (or expects to) make more money than before the problem was solved. The solution to the problem is only viable if the cost of solving the problem does not exceed the economic benefit of the solution. This longflow methodology does not provide any way to manage those costs.