thephyber

Your comment reminds me of a post I read on a popular police forum about J Edgar Hoover (the infamous Director of the FBI for half a century). He created a professionalized police / intelligence force, but he also abused the rights of many citizens and elected political officials with that force. Supposedly he even used it to blackmail some of the Congressmen who were legally obligated to oversee his department.

And the comments in that post were a Rorschach test of where the commenter fell on how "necessary" the abuses of the FBI were.

Generally the county Sheriff is elected, but the city police chief is usually appointed by civilian government.

I'm more interested in whether they are vulnerable to fake data being injected via a slide show of car images shown in front of the camera lens.

A picture of a known prison escapee driving the mayor's car should drive the point home after the police pull the mayor over and investigate.

The "processed foods" fears are misguided.

According to the NOVA classification method, baking bread or churning butter is sufficient to turn a food into "processed".

Generally laypeople are fearful of "ultra-processed foods" which use industrial distillation, stabilization, additives from petrochemical derivatives, synthetic sugars, etc.

My complaint is that some of these "processing" techniques are likely orders of magnitude more harmful than others, so we shouldn't blindly treat them all as equal.

At least the War on Seaweed is more real than the War on Christmas.

> Just say what they're actually going to do about it.

People don't have infinite attention. That's why headlines and slogans carry so well, even when they are lossy/misleading to the reality.

No.

It's more likely that you are overreacting to the downsides to IP.

Just because LLMs became useful and popular doesn't mean that US IP law should be jettisoned. Functionally copyright law still exists and we can't remove it without a constitutional amendment (and getting Americans to agree on that would be an immense uphill battle).

I always found that the SO search was frustratingly bad and users NEED to use search to find the authoritative question for your needs.

And even if I find the right existing question, the accepted answer might not be the one I need. Sometimes the question asked accepts the wrong question. Sometimes the current right answer didn't exist at the time of the answer acceptance.

SO was a good first approximation of a good Q&A site. It didn't evolve with the times.

I think this is the core learning of this issue: design your accounts such that if one of your accounts is banned, there is minimal blast damage.

In security / military, this concept is "resilience". Businesses call this "business continuity planning".

> Many people in Congress know that their base is overwhelmingly against this

I have learned that "overwhelmingly against" is a useless concept in politics. The important question is "do they care about it enough to sway their vote?"

There is probably overwhelming support for Ukraine to defend itself in the US (and Europe), but very few people are willing to change their vote based on Ukrainian interests over their own {financial security, culture war, pet issue (abortion, guns, Epstein List, etc)}. If it's not a top-5 issue, it's not relevant to a political campaign.

2A voters and rabid anti-choice voters are polarized enough to actually show up at the capital or threaten their representatives. Extremely few people will dot at for issues lower down the priority list.

US Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 8:

> [The Congress shall have Power] To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

"Slave labor" doesn't always refer to chattel slavery.

> any coerced or poorly remunerated work. [1]

[1] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/slave-labor

Did you read the article?

Well did you?

Your comment is irrelevant to mine. I stated what is, while you stated what ought to be.

It's trivial to make any open source repo that nobody uses. It's hard to get people to adopt your library over one supported by one of the world's largest companies.

No.

This article was about a family in the UK.

China social credit score is a government policy which comes with government punishments.

This incident is about Google enforcing contract terms on a Google account.

What we should learn from the story is that consolidation of all services into a single account with a single company means increased harm if any contract violations are enforced.

If you get banned from an airline for violating a company policy, your life isn't over. Flying is a little less easy or maybe a little more expensive / friction. But that's different from the government banning you from flying on any aircraft.

Security is a factor everywhere. And C is everywhere. There's not going to be a "rewrite everything in Rust" project until after there is some legit penalty for selling / offering software in C that could be more secure in another language.

I think Mozilla got it right when they abandoned the effort to rewrite the entire browser in Rust and instead focused on analysis of which modules needed priority rewrites. If a module has historically had zero memory-related bugs, then there are other higher priority things to spend time on.

That said, Google Project Zero should have had Brotli on their radar. Hopefully they still have people and resources.

Brotli was a library released by the Google team that developed it. There weren't lots of independent implementations; they were all from the same source code.

Gravitar was super popular for a year or two.

Quit being overly pedantic about how contrived the example is and struggle with the underlying fact that the compression type is negotiated between the client and server. If the compression happens on the HTTP request (as some of the comments here suggest), then the server must use that compression method or it fails to read the body of the request.

Why?

Python and Go are both memory-managed languages. That is perhaps the hardest part of programming (outside of getting the code to do what is intended).

Go and Rust are both compiled, but Rust requires the developer to figure out all of the memory management before compilation, which slows down development to a crawl.

Almost no company will rationally choose Rust over Go if they know how the development speed tradeoff looks like.

It's not hard to understand. It's just not rational to anyone who actually calculates how performant it is (very fast, I agree) with how long it takes to write.

Once I realized how difficult it is to write complex code that actually satisfies the borrow checker, I was perfectly happy with writing somewhat slower code in Go or Python.

I think people underestimate how much the separation of roles matters to the case and to the motivations of the people in each role.

The detectives screwed up by doing a piss poor investigation and identifying the wrong suspect (who is a victim herself in this crime).

The prosecutor cares more about whether they can sell the flawed case to an Arkansas jury or use the low plea bargain cost against the high legal defense cost.

Plea bargains used to be considered unethical by courts and the Bar in America pre-Civil War.

We have the Reconstructionist South to thank for normalizing turning judges into form stamping Vogons and allowing prosecutors to routinely use a form of blackmail as a normal course of prosecution.

CloudFlare and the hyperscalers are the reason bandwidth costs have dropped so dramatically.

I remember hearing from a CloudFlare founder not long after they raised an early round how they had to go around negotiating large peering contracts to make enough bandwidth available for their customers. And that Australia was by far the most expensive region because they had very few undersea cables and only a single company providing that access.

End users present like you can always drive up to the gas station and there will always be plenty to fill up your 10-20 gallon tank. But behind the scenes are massive distribution networks and a market making mechanism.

Also I don't buy your premise that illegal video streaming only make money on ads. I'm under the impression they also sell access to a lot of viewer's machines to companies that want to crawl the web and appear to come from lots of residential ISP nodes.

Your complaint is probably moot foot dragging. Companies aren't held liable for breaking a law that didn't exist at the time they released a product.

An ever-evolving game with properties of a SaaS would likely not exist under this new law.

Blizzard already knew how to build self-contained products with self-contained expansions even before WoW was released. StarCraft was the original game and StarCraft Broodwar was the expansion. It will affect game release cycles and properties of what you get with the game, but that's seems like part of the point of the legislation.

This administration would just say that it is in the national security interest of the US to do the thing. Judges are wary to restrict the POTUS prerogatives relating to national defense, so they won't challenge it.

It's the dumbest and most obvious weakness of our system of government and it will never be fixed.

An example of testing the things that are easy to test, not testing the things that are useful to the end user.

I don't know why you're replying to my comment. That comment was only clarifying the parent's conflation of the cost of city land and the cost of cheap arable land.

I don't think local solar is a solution in foggy / cold UK. I'm not going to defend it.

Your parent wasn't talking about prime arable land, they were talking about city land.

The point is the electric delivery problem is much cheaper if the power generation and the power delivery both happen within the same substation (eg in the same neighborhood). If the generation happens in rural Scotland but the consumption happens in London, then all of the transmission needs to be upgraded. The point of your parent's comment was to describe a trick to minimize additional transmission costs/development.

And London area land does cost, even if it is just borrowing a vacant building's rooftop.

I don't necessarily agree with your parent's comment, but I don't agree with your comment either.

Your first 2 paragraphs have a few holes before they will be adopted as easily as you pretend.

Land for solar installs isn't close to free. My condo HOA won't even consider solar for any homeowner and the HOA won't approve a giant $50k/unit special assessment (we can't even get 40% of homeowners to vote for HOA elections... which are free).

Older buildings not designed for a solar roof aren't too easy to retrofit. My office window overlooks 2 parking lot structures that were recently retrofitted with solar and it took about 6 weeks for a relatively simple install. I'm pretty sure building owners will only install if they get a cut of the solar generation revenue (so the land isn't free) or if they are able to use it to offset tax or utility costs (also not free).

EVs as batteries are neat but... (1) most owners will likely splurge only for the $500 charger station not the complex electronics which allow the EV to charge the house/grid and (2) cars are frequently driven / parked at work during the peak charging time, so they would be unavailable to absorb the majority of the peak solar generation time.

Until there is a solar EV + charging story for dense housing (apartments and condos), I think most users in my area aren't likely to be able to adopt like you seem to think. Community Solar projects seemed nearly non-existent when I searched in 2018-2020.

No, the Search API isn't claiming it is taking over a copyright of the original crawled webpage. Quit trying to strawman this thread.

The Search API is acting as a database of a collection of webpages where the collection layer is the copyrightable thing. This is analogous to Google being able to copyright its search engine without having copyrights to all of the underlying content within the search corpus.

If your quibble is about the crawling / scraping, I'm not going to argue. It's easy for mass scraping to fall into unethical / illegal territory and I think that is the original sin of the AI foundation models.

Databases are copyrightable whether their content are facts (one example of content) or other data. I used the word facts because I knew from memory that was protected in US IP law.

Citation: https://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/database.html

Cite your source.

Here's mine[1], stating that yes databases do get some copyright protection from the collection layer to the extent that some creative addition happens.

I never claimed the individual facts/data were given copyright to the collector. Let's stick to what I said if you are going to quibble with my comment.

[1] https://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/database.html