A large company is guaranteed to have been analyzed very carefully by skilled analysts. If you have a small sum to invest, a big risk appetite and you are willing to do your homework then you are better off trying your luck with understudied companies in inefficient markets.
It follows from the theory of comparative advantage. The big players can extract a lot more than you can from big companies but only a little more from the small ones.
If mastodon had a security hole they could all be owned at the same time. Fediverse servers on different software would be unaffected unless the hole is in a library used by both.
To be fair, the article is just part of a challenge to write 100 blog posts in 100 days. Nothing wrong with writing whatever you want, although the title of the post is still terrible. The question is, why did anyone think this article was worth submitting to HN?
Yes I'm aware. An inside job against mastodon would be harder. A few people may be able to deliberately insert malicious code but that goes for any open source project.
Are vacation apartments included? And if they are not how can officials know whether someone visits a few weeks a year? Or will this target company owned apt complexes?
> For the properties to be eligible for forced purchase, they must have no tenant contract for two years and no record of recent power or utilities use, meaning that occasionally-used second homes do not appear on the list.
It's like the halting problem. It's hard to decide whether a given switch works in the general case. But it's possible to design an obviously correct breaker.
Edit: the gnarly thing might be ensuring it doesn't harvest power through data wires or store power in covert capacitors or batteries.
I thought more of being able to do bit manipulation or hashing etc on your keys. Those things don't necessarily require a fixed key length. (And in some languages, even integers don't have a fixed length.)
You are right in some sense, but you'd still have trouble implementing something like bucket sort in your setting, if all you have are comparisons.
It follows from the theory of comparative advantage. The big players can extract a lot more than you can from big companies but only a little more from the small ones.