degamad

Yep! From the headline, I assumed that Norway had made its own version of https://toiletmap.gov.au/

How do they ensure that?

Reading the description, looks like a stricter chroot for purely-network applications, maybe?

Is there a good example of a private equity buyout which wasn't based on that strategy?

As an element of backwards rationalisation, my brain interprets "ENOTTY" as "E-NO-TTY" (Error: NO TeleTYpe available) which is the rough current meaning, rather than "E-NOT-TY" (Error: NOT a TYpewriter) which is the original meaning.

> everyone in the LLM space

The problem is that the language spills outside of the LLM space, so we should use terminology which is more generally understood in a way which reflects reality.

From long-lost memory, I think it's implicitly closed tags (e.g. img).

Ditto - another long-time K9mail user on Android.

Tried a couple of other clients from time to time (mostly when OAUTH logins for GMail and Outlook365 weren't implemented yet), but haven't been convinced to switch.

> You could have one "master recovery key", the public part loaded on your device (to be registered during account creation) and the private part sitting in your safe.

This is true, it's possible to have just the verification information present without the key itself.

However, a part of almost every credential enrollment process is verification that the credential is usable and controlled by the enrolling party.

For passwords it's simply "please type the password again", for TOTP it's generating the next number, for email/SMS it's entering a code sent to that address, so for adding a public key, it should include some way of verifying that you control the private key associated with that public key. It's hard to do that without having the private key available.

> ... just "put this recovery key/password in a safe and forget about it until needed"...

Surely that is also impacted by:

> Important accounts are not properly backed up until you drive to your safe. That can be many days for a bank deposit box, or even longer if you're traveling.

Exactly. There's many a page on random which explains why taking the modulus of rand is the wrong choice, but it's also the easiest one, which makes it all to common.

That's the ambiguity in the way we use some words like "server". If I say I'm going to "build a web server", you don't know if I'm developing software to compete with nginx, or building an x86 box and installing nginx on it.

In addition, while the net elevation change is bounded by the delta, given the choices might be "go up this steep section" vs "go along this gentle incline", one route can be "flatter" between the same endpoints.

> trying to debug why an email can only be sent to a recipient less than 500 miles away.

Ah, a student of the old masters....

(For the uninitiated, or those who wish to relive the memory: https://www.ibiblio.org/harris/500milemail.html )

Billing caps that Google notoriously doesn't enforce?

> the situation would have to be very particular

The situation is very particular. When the system makes an error, I make a bigger profit. If the system made fewer errors, it would approve more things that cost me money.

Why do you think I'm motivated to make fewer errors under that situation?

OpenID started its life as an attempt at a federated login standard.

From vague memory, the other stuff in OpenID Connect was layered over the original OpenID identity verification part.

I think the idea is that the stored procedures ARE an Application Programming Interface, as an alternative to a REST API.

(I agree with you that for some use cases, an API consisting of a set of stored procedures is just as good as an API layered on top of the database in another language.)

Yes, this!

The ancient wisdom which advocated for stored procedures, which modern developers find distasteful, were really advocating for microservices close to your data, which encapsulated security, business logic, and data persistence so that multiple consumers could share the same data without repeating the logic and code.

The fact that some people write those microservices in PL/SQL and some in JavaScript doesn't change the relevance of the encapsulation.

The result page has links to the source of each real photo.

While it's not exactly blackberry-alike, a hopefully soon-to-be-released option is the clicks communicator[0] phone. I just ordered their bluetooth keyboard attachment for androids/iphones with magsafe backs, but if it's any good, I may shell out for their phone as well.

I was also a backer for the Mecha Comet[1] earlier in the year, which I'm hopeful about, although that's a couple of steps away from a daily driver phone at this stage, I guess.

I never owned a blackberry, but for me, the ultimate winner would be for someone to copy or licence the layout and form of the dopod838pro[2] (a.k.a. HTC Hermes 100) and pop some newer internals in it... If I had 100 million dollars, that's what I'd be doing...

[0] https://www.clicks.tech/en

[1] https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mecha-systems/mecha-com...

[2] https://kaitech.hk/2006/10/dopod-838pro-htc-hermes/

It sounds like you might be aphantasic and were not aware of it for long time.

I remember when I first realised people had real pictures, in my 20s. I had a friend whose technique for studying involved putting notes on his wall. He claimed he had photographic memory, and could walk over to his wall in his mind and read any piece of paper on it.

We had a long conversation after that exploring each other's experiences. I cannot picture anything while awake (only sometimes when asleep or in deep meditation). He was aware that photographic memory was unusually good, but assumed that everyone had at least some visual memory/imagination.

I also remember the first time I "saw" the difference too. I was waking up from a dream, once of only 2 dreams I remembered strongly after waking up.

I was in a scene like in an action movie, running away from someone in a tall office building. I run up some stairs, burst into a room, and spot an open window across the room, with a big bunch of blue balloons outside tied together and floating up.

I dash across the room and jump out the window, grabbing onto the string under the balloons. As I float up, I start to swing around, bback towards the building. I see the shiny windows, but just before I turn far enough to see the balloons or myself in the reflection, I fade into awakeness. Up to this point everything had looked just like real life, but as soon as I woke up, I could not imagine the imaagery any more.

Since then, on a couple of occasions when I'm really tired, I'll catch myself transitioning to sleep, because after the lights are out, I'll start fading into picturing myself in a random location, but as soon as I notice it and try to interact with the world, I fade out to black again.

So I have had the experience of being able to "see" things in my head (maybe a dozen times in my life while sleeping, two of which I remember vividly, and once while doing an extended meditation session, and once during a hypnosis lesson on induction). And I can contrast those specific visual experiences with the blackness I get when I close my eyes any other time.

Have you tried this experiment yourself, or on others to see how much detail they visually imagine? [0] In my experience, most people report somewhere between a 2 or a 3. I tend to ask people to close their eyes and imagine this scene, then read out panel 4 verbatim. "A woman sits at a table. She is resting her chin upon her hands. Apples sit on the table to the right of her. A pineapple to her left.". I give them 30 seconds to notice their imagination then show them the 4 panels and ask which is closest to their imagination. The thing that's most interesting is not the number that they say, but that a significant proportion of people point out the differences from what they imagined, unprompted. Like "I saw her with shorter hair", or "I saw green apples", or "in my head, she was a brunette". Those are not things I would even think of if you read out that description to me.

[0] <https://www.reddit.com/r/CuratedTumblr/comments/1b4u0rt/what...>

Ditto! I tend to hear my internal voice beat-boxing music rather than humming it, though...

I agree, but often corporate policy overrides most people's preferences, which is why such processes exist - to ensure that travel arrangements match corporate policy rather than individual preferences.

Because some people do.

Corporate travel is an example. In many organisations, you tell someone in the travel department "I need to be in Tokyo for this conference from Tuesday to Sunday, and charge it to this cost code", and they figure out flights, accommodation, etc for you, with minimal input from you.

> What do you mean by bearing no real responsibility for its actions?

If you give an "intelligent agent" offered by one of these model providers a task of updating the content of your website, and it updates it with inappropriate adult content, who incurs the cost of the machine's error? The model provider generally does not.

It it makes a mistake and deletes your website from AWS, who is responsible?

If it targets another website because it decides that it is "part" of your website and attempts to break into it, who is responsible?

It's a CGM with added ketone sensing.

It sounds like their point is that it's not Firefox at all, inasmuch as you can't use the most popular Firefox extensions.

Surprisingly not. I have catch-all emails on several of my domains, and rarely get common name spam. I've blacklisted less than a dozen names on my domains in over 20 years.