I agree. We can use ML models for identifying possible malware; there should be more than enough examples of bad coding to train an LLM on to identify injection risks, lack of input sanitation, assignment and inheritance issues, and use after free problems. And cleaning THOSE things up in a code base will fix the majority of security issues.

LLMs could also review algorithms looking for logic issues in larger code bases where a human might not be able to hold the entire system in their mind at the same time.

The problem is, once the middlemen gain power, they’re never gonna give you up. Music producers are a great example of this, as are telecoms companies.

All the current SaaS stuff is similar; the offerings LOOK similar, but they’re explicitly designed not to be a 1:1 match, so you can’t just take your business elsewhere, just like the mattress companies of old.

We’re even seeing this play out in the streaming video market, where each player has its own differentiator, moreso than we ever saw with traditional cable TV.

Standards are great, but middlemen have no incentives to not subvert them.

Remember back when climate scientists discovered the ozone layer was thinning and the world banded together and worked to repair the damage we’d done?

I’d like to live in that reality again.

I have to say… Roberts and Chickite come out of this looking like the people with their heads on straight.

All my non-signed apps still work on 15.1. Therefore, Gatekeeper seems to be involved here, and just setting the metadata from the command line should be enough to bypass the check.

I may even write a service to automate this so I can just right click an app and select “authorize app”. No going into settings needed.

That means the British Indian Ocean Territory will cease to exist, along with the .io domain and countless websites.

What will happen is that the International Standard for Organization (ISO) will remove the country code “IO.” IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority) which creates and assigns top-level domains, uses this code to determine which top-level country domains should exist. Once ‘IO’ is removed, IANA will start the process of retiring .io, which involves stopping new registrations and the expiration of existing ‘.io domains.‘

I don’t get this: shouldn’t Mauritius gain ownership of .io? Russia has .su, and it’s been over 30 years since the Soviets existed.

[edit] also, since there’s .whateveryouwant these days, why not just make .io a non-country TLD? That’s how it’s used anyway.

Nobody voting for face-eating leopards expects to have THEIR face eaten.

Discontent fuelled by narratives in the east and south.

BC Conservatives got elected partly because they share part of their name with a different political group.

I bet many of the people who voted for them would be shocked to learn that a large number of the party members used to call themselves BC Liberals.

Or, it could lower the number of frequent flyers.

My mind keeps coming up with tag lines for X….

X:

… where the fruits of piracy can be found

… - rated best for quirky images

… where you’ll find that special someone you realized you DON’T want to spend the rest of your life with.

Anyone got more?

Until the public short message service no longer exists?

This could happen in a number of ways.

While I doubt that the opposition nor the powers that want them in charge are above reproach here, the arguments as to why what they’re saying is false and based on a western agenda don’t stand up to the most basic logic seive either.

It is fully possible for the incumbent to have run a fully corrupt campaign complete with ballot stuffing and intimidation/misinformation AND for the observers to not be objective either. One doesn’t cancel out the other.

The big question is: were the elections provably legitimate and above reproach, and will the majority of Georgians respect the results?

In the rare cases where mayo is the correct answer… it’s not that difficult to just whip up a small amount and use it. No need to have a big jar of it going rancid in your fridge.

I feel your pain. I have maintainer roles for a few projects where things could be slowed down by a week or more if I didn’t have direct commit access. And I do use that access to make things run faster and smoother, and am able to step in and just get something fixed up and committed while everyone else is asleep. But. For security critical code paths, I’ve come to realize that much like Debian, sometimes slow and secure IS better, even if it doesn’t feel like it in the moment (like when you’re trying to commit and deploy a critical security patch already being exploited in the wild, and NOBODY is around to do the review, or there’s something upstream that needs to be fixed before your job can go out).

If they’re sending political messages, the number is already confirmed as matching a PA voter. Texting STOP is the way to go. If that doesn’t work, THEN mark as spam. If it gets too annoying, set up a wall of shame on Twitter. (Almost) No politician wants bad publicity.

They haven’t been removed from the community though — just the maintainers list. Now they need someone else’s review to commit code to the kernel.

Personally, I think even maintainers should be required to have that — you can be the committer for pre-reviewed code from others, but not just be able to check anything you want in, no matter your reputation (even if you’re Linus). That way a security breach is less likely to cause havoc.

When I was doing shift work, I used to just call in sick if I was sick, and the supervisor called up someone else to cover. I was generally the first responder to pick up other people’s shifts, so nobody complained.

Now I have a certain number of sick days per year, and anything over that comes off holiday pay or would go onto long term disability, which would require a doctor’s note, but is significantly more serious than a sick day.

Have I been missing out on a third option all these years where a doctor can write me a note and my work is put on hold until I’m better without accruing sick leave days?

This is a weird one to me; in my entire life, I have never been in a situation where a doctor’s note was required. Makes me feel like I’m on the advantaged side of a double standard in our society.

Has anyone else ever needed an actual doctor’s note for something?

I disagree with the disagreement; there’s a rich history of Presidents attempting to do legally unsound things. Usually it’s up to their advisors, who have traditionally been experts in their areas of executive governance, to steer the President correctly.

Trump has changed things by appointing sycophants as his advisors instead of experts. So the office is essentially a formalization of what most Presidents did as the obvious course of action.

But what do you dislike?