Honestly, anyone using Github as a basis for hiring to begin with is approaching hiring with flawed thinking. Github isn't the only source for git, and git isn't the only standard for version control. Further, Github has been pushing companies AWAY from the platform thanks to high costs and other nonsense. I've seen more than one company either run a local git server or something like a local git lab instance. Using github as a metric just ensures that you eliminate anyone not using github. That includes many amazing open source devs, for example.
Tell that to the folks on the front lines, along with folks on both sides, military or not, who have had to deal with it.
Russia would never nuke Ukraine to begin with. They know that by doing so, most of the world would unite against them, and many, including Putin, would be on the chopping block.
Russian self-image is protector of the family of Slavic people and nations. Resorting openly to destruction of a Slavic people would be an incoherent tactic.
That self-perception lowered the gate for interference in Ukrainian affairs in the first place, but also set a ceiling on escalation.
Russia is not fighting Ukraine, it is fighting NATO in Ukraine. And, IIANM, it has the capability of hitting non-Ukranie NATO targets in various places around the world - with cruise missiles and such. The assumption that "oh, Russia will never do this" is actually quite reckless and dangerous; and I don't just mean dangerous to whoever would get attacked, but dangerous for people all over the world, as we may find ourselves in a nuclear exchange with multiple blasts in multiple locations with radioactive matter spread far and wide.
Regarding the drones - definitely agree with you that drones have completely reshaped the experience on the front lines of this war. I understand that in a recent exercise with NATO forces, a Ukranian unit of drone operators essentially "took out" a couple of battalions:
however, nato is fighting the full might of china, russia, iran, and north korea. the whole set. and china is fighting for both ukraine and russia at the same time. why arent you worried about nato randomly attacling china so china stops supplying russia with drone materials? or north korea so they stop providing shells and soldiers?
russia isnt going to attack nato because it knows it isnt currently fighting nato, and bringing nato into the war will be worse for russia than keeping nato as an arms supplier only.
Such nonsense. The EU may be supplying Ukraine with some munitions etc, but if NATO was actively involved, the war would have been over in a year; either conventionally or via nuclear weapons.
Seriously doubt any country on Earth is going to attack Russia and risk global thermonuclear annihilation over anything other than a direct attack on their own lands.
I think if Russia drops a nuke on Ukraine then even China will desert them.
India for sure will stop trading with Russia, lest it be seen to condone such insanity (India has a nuclear armed rival next door-India will not want Pakistan get any ideas).
I think this is the only reason Russia did not nuke Ukraine.
There are detectors for VMs, and modifications to allow VMs to evade those detectors. It's an arms race.
Example: There is (was? I don't actively follow the community) a patch set for a particular piece of VM software that made it undetectable to anti-cheat in games.
While I don't use said software (I have a casual interest in it only...would be nice to get more games working on Linux), I have to disclose that I'm against anti-cheat mechanisms. I'm a software engineer, and I've worked on a few smaller games, and know the overall structure of bigger ones, and I don't think I've ever seen a game use good practices in multiplayer. Instead, they usually rely on client side code and lean on anti-cheat software to stop cheaters.
As someone who had actual passive income (small amount, a few hundred USD/mo) prior to my life being ruined by a medical accident: I agree (I killed my site because it was the right thing to do, I could not generate content for it because I couldn't function, so I did not want to waste the time/money of my users).
One thing the author does NOT see, however, is that the local folks doing all the hard work like mowing lawns, building furniture, etc. are in absolute panic over "AI" because their niche little lawn mowing/car washing/house cleaning business has been determined to be irrelevant by ChatGPT, etc. Oh and before you ask, there are folks claiming they can solve that exact thing, and those hard working folks are buying those products, hoping it will solve their downtrend in internet leads.
> One thing the author does NOT see, however, is that the local folks doing all the hard work like mowing lawns, building furniture, etc. are in absolute panic over "AI" because their niche little lawn mowing/car washing/house cleaning business has been determined to be irrelevant by ChatGPT, etc.
How does what ChatGPT thinks about lawnmowing matter? Like, specifically, who's going to be mowing the lawns if it's not the people who are currently doing it?
Yeah, I get that, but I'm asking why that matters in the aggregate. Presumably there are still the same number of lawns that need mowing. Like, is chatgpt going to result in a significant change in who is mowing those lawns, or the frequency of lawn mowing, or the composition of yards?
The solution to this is so simple that it would blow your mind. In regulated industries in the U.S. there is a law called "Know Your Customer" (KYC). If businesses actually made an effort to know their customers, they would not have any issues at all.
The real issue is that everyone scrambles to make a sale, and nobody stops to determine if they should actually make that sale. Funny enough, I blame all of this on marketing and sales.
I wonder if this could be pitched as a money-making scheme. As you have financial products that aren't for sale but to qualified buyers...
Force businesses to only sell to qualified buyers and make it incredibly easy for businesses to qualify buyers at the lowest possible cost. The end result in my fantasy world is that a business ends up with some document, some self attestation, that they've educated the customer. The benefit that actually matters much more than the attestation no one should ever see would be the educated customer.
Clearly, this is way too much just for a little storage.
But I also would be curious to know if there's another customer qualification concept like this. (And I just thought of one. Scuba diving! Customer pays to learn, otherwise you're in deep (reputational) doodoo when they drown.)
Just because files are in bespoke folders, does NOT mean they are being backed up.
Example: I'm 1,016% over my OneDrive limit because I canceled my Microsoft 365 account due to their price hike to cover for AI costs. My laptop still pushes files there upon save thanks to Microsoft defaults (my desktop was moved to CachyOS long ago).
If I had been using Backblaze for backup, those files would not have been backed up.
Luckily, I'm a nerd and I'm way ahead of this (I moved away from OneDrive long ago and never deleted the files). Most folks aren't.
Backblaze should be alerting users when stuff isn't backed up. I've strongly considered their B2 offering for a big project. The fact that they changed this without proper notification has made me decide NOT to move forward.
I thought you said Dropbox overwrote a file, meaning that file was also being synced by Dropbox, and that Dropbox sync was working. So likely the older file version would also have been synced by Dropbox, which it then overwrote. Dropbox itself keeps old versions of files for 30 days. I think you're saying in this situation Dropbox wasn't syncing though?
My comment was pretty orthogonal to all the Backblaze stuff, which I realize now was confusing.
I think they’re saying that Dropbox didn’t have the original (old) copy of the file retained, even though the change was just 2 days ago, because the old version was ‘more than 30 days ago’. Which is bonkers.
I don't think that's how the 30 day timer works. Once a file is replaced by a new one, the old copy should persist for 30 days. So if it was overwrote 2 days ago, should have 28 days to recover it. But don't know about this situation
There is precedent that indicates otherwise, as this is a clear First Amendment violation.
Requiring commercial services to adhere to certain guidelines is constitutional, even though the Texas law is a bad one and I think a different court may have slapped down the law. Mandating speech (code is speech) is clearly not, especially for noncommercial projects.
I think the key would be getting the right person to explain how this would be like requiring all authors to include a certain sentence in their novel.
I kind of doubt that most judges are going to agree with a "code is speech" argument. I think it's more likely that the courts view code as a mechanism, and so this is more like requiring cars to have airbags.
Though this does bring to fore the issue of enforcement. Nobody can stop you from building a custom car which has no airbags. Where enforcement happens is when you try to get it registered (thus making it legal to drive on public roads). That's when the government would stop you.
Curious how such enforcement would work for operating systems. We could all just mod our OS's to remove/bypass age verification. The government doesn't (currently, yet) have a legal nor physical mechanism to prevent this.
Paxton's decision was incredibly narrow (because it specifically targeted sites that served pornography and only pornography) and it's unlikely the court is willing to grant anymore ground.
With LLMs, this has become commonplace. Most folks don't realize how far real time video/audio generation has come. You should never ever trust the sound of a voice or a video call, pictures on a screen, etc. it can all be faked.
Behind every virtual "thirst trap" is some dude in another country hoping to scam some sucker out of money.
EDIT: oh and to be clear, I've no issues with meeting folks online. I met my spouse online a couple decades ago, and we quickly moved it offline.
I also know folks (guys) who run hobbyist setups that stream on platforms and pretend to be attractive young ladies. The voice quality is very believable, and the video is approaching realistic. With a bit of doctoring, it looks completely believable...and we are talking about the widely available stuff, NOT the stuff available behind closed doors.
What I am trying to say here is don't treat a relationship as real until you meet the person in real life and build an actual connection.
I am so confused at why people are doing this. I mean, are they just doing it "for the lols" or are they raking in suckers from the gaming communities?
I keep a voice button bound to toggle on and off all comms, also known as a "clutch key", and usually in these scenarios I keep comms off quite a bit because there is a lot of non-game chatter and I tend to only talk during freeze time - since outbound voice still works for call outs. I'm just really bad at listening to people while I am trying to focus and it frustrates me to die because of lack of game sound awareness. So, I don't know if these are the same games where people are trying to beg for skins, etc.
I bring all this up to say that even if everyone boycotts sodastream, it won't do diddly to the actual folks responsible. I bet the same goes for others on that list. Boycotts also don't usually work in general. Most of the time it takes full on government intervention, lawsuits, etc. to change things.
Personally, I find it's less about the act (although financially depriving companies of my cash does make me feel good), it's about the conversation the act starts.
And I've seen it work, or help. Some among us will remember the boycott of South African goods during Apartheid.
> We must strategically focus on a relatively smaller number of carefully selected companies and products for maximum impact.
My intentionally pick companies that are large enough to be noticable but small enough that they could actually achieve something with the amount of support they have.
If you look the other two letters of "BDS", divestment and sanctions are the strategies for larger institutions and government interventions
reply