throw_a_grenade

No, that's steel, and not with voltage, but with temperature: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_coloring_of_metals. For aluminium, you add dye to third bath.

It's a bit of hit and miss, really. Like every big organisation, it's not a single, coherent entity, but has branches and departments filled by real, flawed people, so in practice it depends on which industry your're in. For example, digital policy bureaucrats are usually extremely competent, like, they do know how the stuff discussed here on HN works. (That they often have differen expectations from what people here want is orthogonal). Automotive industry is on the other hand squarely in bed with manufacturers (cars, but also accessories like child safety chairs). The average is suprisingly good, esp. in comparison with national bureaucracies.

I'd guess it's because of the general attitude of the project's community, specifically GNOME people and their “my way or highway” style of answering questions e.g. about CSD or other non-critical stuff, not directly related to core protocol. If they were a bit more accommodating to reasonable requests from outside, they'd get less backlash in comments. There's plenty of exemplar behaviour elsewhere in adjacent communities, they could have taken hint multiple times.

That they provide this stuff for free would be a good argument if the stuff wasn't pushed down people's throats with no working alternative and Xorg being discontinued.

Not OP, but that post clearly was alluding to Hitler coming to power democratically. That they don't need to worry was a very dark joke. Anyway, it's just history.

(2015)

I don't, I'm Polish. Can't say for sure for Ukrainians, don't know Ukrainian that well, but my reading of https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B0%D0%B... and https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%81#Ukrainian suggests that пес must be male, but собака is either male or female. I might be wrong.

More like pi+[y]es, but single syllable and no y.

EDIT: Here are three audio files to hear: https://pl.wiktionary.org/wiki/pies#pies_(j%C4%99zyk_polski)

"Pies" means "dog" in Polish an Ukrainian (пес).

> [...] it has critical economic impact on many countries, it should be regulated by them?

This was exactly the point of recent (2024) eIDAS update, which introduced EU Trusted Lists. The original draft was that the browsers were mandated to accept X.509 certs from CAs („TSP”s) accredited in EU by national bodies. Browsers were supposed not to be free to just eject CAs from their root programs for any reason or no reason at all, but in case of infractions they were supposed to report to CAB or NAB that would make the final decision.

Browesers responded by lobbying, because the proposal also contained some questionable stuff like mandatory EV UI, which the browsers rightfully deprecated, and also it wasn't clear if they can use OneCRL and similar alternative revocation schemes for mitigations of ongoing attacks. The language was diluted.

This is good point. I think it would still be discounted in favour of suggesting another CAs that users can switch to, but you're right, the promise was that cert management would be hands off, and changing CAs is not hands off in any ACME client that I know of. Best Google could do would be to shift the blame to LE/ISRG, because it was ISRG that promised this automation.

The point about antitrust lawsuits I concur, but LE is not the only free-as-in-beer ACME. For one, there's ZeroSSL, then Actalis, SSL.com. For some time BuyPass offered free certs, but it does no longer. Last but not least Google itself has Public CA that offers certs over ACME, a fact that I think would be a huge fulcrum for antitrust suit. I would also expect that all other CAs would deploy ACME endpoints to attract at least some part of the cake (note they're in business of being vultures already). So the message will be „go find another CA, here are three examples, sorted randomly like the European first boot UX, just change the URI in certbot config".

Yes, that's all right, there's already a requirement that they submit to one Google CT log and one non-Google CT log. They thought about it already. The playbook I mentioned they've been rehearsing contains specific threat against backdating certs, they say they'll distrust immediately if they detect, and they have means of detecting backdating on significant scale (esp. for LE, where they submit 100% issued certs, not just the subset that is intended for consumption with Chrome).

If they wanted, they absolutely can distrust LE. The trick is to distrust only certificates issued after specific date (technically: with „NotBefore” field after specific point in time), so the certs already issued continue to work for the duration of their validity (until „NotAfter”). That way they can phase out even the biggest CAs. Moreover, they have infrastructure in place and playbook well rehearsed on other CAs already.

TL;DR yes, tis a credible threat.

If I had such a problem with my OS, I would have changed the distribution.

> [...] but there is no european cloud operator able to offer what AWS/GCP/Azure offer.

This is FUD, 1990s Micro$oft style. I guess nothing particular changed on this front.

No, of course not. They want to also measure response in the physical aspects (like electricians thot would have to drive some time to arrive on site). They're testing end-to-end, so to say. There's no testing like testing in production.

This is third time. Two months ago a railway was sabotaged on the other side of the EU: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gknv8nxlzo

Now this is a strange coincidence, if coincidence at all.

The traditional Polish categories of sorting rubbish is „to the burner” and „to the forest”, optionally „to be burned during the day” and „to be burned during the night”.

Also you can't do self-referential strutcs.

Double-linked lists are also pain to implement, and they're are heavily used in kernel.

Well, the way my parents discouraged me from smoking was, they brought a pack of cigarettes home and let me have one. Was awful, never wanted to try it again. That was an important life lesson for me.

No, this is backwards. Fun is trying new things (I think it's evolutionary mechanism that ensure kids are learning by default), and once the thing has been tried, it's not new anymore, so won't be tried again. Best thing we can actually do is to channel that, as OP proposed.

If only we had cheap, multi-use inflatable exit ramps that deflate, fold and stow themselves after use. Which is not a thing, apparently.

EU (and preceding organisations since European Coal and Steel Community) were created so that there will be no war in Europe. How exactly this objective is achieved is of secondary importance. It is economic institution, because someone calculated that this will be best shot, but if (or when) calculation credibly shifts (for example, that it would be better for them to be a religion, a feudal system, or a federation -- whatever), it will morph into something else.

I'd say that it has 100% fulfilled its primary goal that there is no military conflict between major European states for like 80 years and counting, which is longest period ever recorded and a historical anomaly. The means of how it was executed is obviously a matter of debate, mistakes were made etc., but we over here generally make love, not war.

IIUC no, this is Council position before trilogue.

The crux is in those „risk assessments”, to be approved by authorities. IIUC those authorities will be able to designate e.g. Signal „high risk” and slap penalties unless they „mitigate” the risk. Hard to tell what will happen without seeing final regulation.

I won't be put in (public) writing, but it's a same thing as “no-one gets fired for buying IBM”. Sometimes it's part of a bigger international agreement, like, you buy food and we buy weapons or sth.

inter alia, “among others”

Maybe a bit. I just got triggered by the newspeak.

> The form of the ogonek derives from a mediaeval scribal sign, the e caudata, and in European typography it follows the conventional writing of that sign in how it attaches to various vowel letters: [pic]

> In North American indigenous use, positioning of the ogonek is informed by typewriter output, in which the backspaced sign was centered below the preceding letter. This positioning is retained in the typography of these languages [...]

“We're so blinded by hate against Europeans we're going to repeat the limitation of another settler-originated technology just to make things different than everyone else.”

The problem is, its false to insist that the manager does not have real facts. The facts have been stated by OP in the first post in the thread, and while the statement can be true or false, it's not like it's not there. The responder should have listened and evaluated this, possibly with consultation with PM of the feature, and just by this response we can assume s/he just didn't listen.

Moreover, OP chose the very thread as the venue, and attempting to switch it to a different, intransparent one is a disservice to the community. Community is very important context of this message, and the response seems to validate the proposition that it's really the end of it, per the subject of the thread.