jt2190

You keep asserting that “reformer” means “outsider” but they’re not synonyms.

I think there’s a chicken and egg problem here…

> To put it another way: if the problem (if there is one--see further comments below) can be solved by the people who do have skin in the game working things out among themselves, the labels "reformer" and "conservative" don't even come into play. You just have people who have to find some way of working together, doing it.

… where you’ve hand-waved away the debate within the group about whether to do something or not.

Ah I see so for you “conservative” and “reformer” are labels that have lost all meaning, they are wielded by busy-bodies who poke their nose at where it doesn’t belong. Whereas for me the words describe what people are trying to do in practice, regardless of political labels. (Canada had a “Reform” party for a while, which was conservative, so personally I don’t give the labels much credence either. Shame on me for assuming the words could be used at all without the baggage.)

You seem to be implying that no reformers have skin in the game though. Certainly this can’t be true?

Edit: Re-reading… are you saying there’s a third group?

We can use the terms “conserve”/“reform” to describe what someone does on a particular issue (e.g. does not or does “demand changes”), or we can use the terms in the very loose way we often do when describing political parties. No party is uniformly “change nothing”/“change everything” so parties aren’t particularly useful for clarifying what “conservative” or “reform” mean.

> from outside parties who have no skin in the game

Redefining the context to include a nebulous group of people “with no skin in the game”… Why should we exclude a “conservative” who has no skin in the game from this group, but include a “reformer” who also does not?

> … keep that which works, change only that which needs changing and be careful not to change it too much or too fast lest you destroy that which worked…

Where “works” is defined as “we’re seeing a lot of very obvious problems but we have faith they’ll work themselves out over time without any intervention”, and the opposite is “we’re seeing a lot of very obvious problems and we think a change is necessary”. Note that the thing under debate has problems and it is not obvious to everyone that it “works”. The conservative says “let’s wait and see” and the reformer says “we must change this now”.

Off Topic: My crackpot theory is that Zero Interest Rate Policy (ZIRP) created an environment that allowed a lot of Not-Invented-Here programming to occur. (Sarcastically: “We here at Ackman shoes have realized a significant competitive advantage from developing our own in-house logging library.”)

An egg trader is motivated to find the lowest buy price and the highest sell price, whether they’re buying/selling through an exchange or privately. The issue is collusion between buyers and sellers to manipulate the market price. Telling a trader that they’re not allowed to use an exchange price as part of their price evaluations seems like it would be very difficult.

Matt Levine wrote about this in July

> There’s a big market (egg producers selling eggs to supermarkets etc.), and there’s a small market (egg producers selling extra eggs to each other on an electronic exchange). The price in the small market determines the price in the big market. Participants in the small market are also participants in the big market. You can spend a little money in the small market to move the price, which can make you a lot of money in the big market.

“Egg LIBOR was also manipulated” (Paywalled) https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/newsletters/2026-07-01/egg...

This article is a rehash of a New York Post article that quotes Dr. Jared Horvarth who testified before Congress. His testimony [1] references PISA, PIRLS and TIMSS scores.

Edit: His testimony concludes:

> This is not a debate about rejecting technology. It is a question of aligning educational tools with how human learning actually works.

> Evidence indicates that indiscriminate digital expansion has weakened learning environments rather than strengthened them.

> Federal policy can restore balance by demanding evidence, protecting children’s developmental needs, and ensuring that innovation serves learning rather than attention capture.

> Our responsibility is not to maximize screen exposure, but to maximize the cognitive capacity and long-term flourishing of the next generation.

[1] Written Testimony, Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath, PhD, MEd, Neuroscientist and Educator Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation https://www.commerce.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/media/doc...

The GitHub page for the Junie [1] script explicitly says "MacOS/Linux": It's the same curl command for the CLI

    curl -fsSL https://junie.jetbrains.com/install.sh | bash

To automatically install the local model after the CLI is installed, you run with th --local-model flag:

    curl -fsSL https://junie.jetbrains.com/install.sh | bash -s -- --local-model

There is a note in the bash script [2] that the local model needs MacOS for some reason:

    install_local_model() {
    echo ""
    log "Junie is installed. Setting up the local model..."
    if ! curl -fsSL "$LOCAL_MODEL_URL" | bash; then
        # The local model is an optional extra on top of a finished Junie install,
        # and it is the part most likely to be refused -- it needs macOS 26 on an
        # Apple M5 or newer with 40 GB of RAM. Whatever went wrong here, Junie itself
        # is installed, so say so plainly instead of leaving the run looking failed.
        echo ""
        log_error "The local model setup did not complete."
        log "Junie itself is installed and ready to use -- run: junie"
        log "To try the local model again: curl -fsSL $LOCAL_MODEL_URL | bash"
        exit 1
    fi
    }

But the GitHub repo README for "local" [3] does have instructions for Linux though, and makes it seem like the --local flag will work. As a hardy Linux hacker, you should probably just try it and see what happens.

Edit: Interestingly, I got Junie CLI on my M4 Mac but did NOT get the local model installed, which t looks like iwas going to me Qwen3.6-27B-MLX-4bit. (Needs a M5 GPU apparently.)

I did start Junie and it prompted me to connect to a local model, successfully detected Ollama and connected to that.

[1] https://github.com/JetBrains/junie [2] https://raw.githubusercontent.com/JetBrains/junie/refs/heads... [3] https://github.com/JetBrains/junie/tree/main/local

The link lands me on Junie CLI. Here’s the link to local:

> Fully local: Nothing leaves the machine

> Offline

> Free to use: No card, no subscription, no credits. [1]

https://junie.jetbrains.com/local

I’ll definitely give this a try.

[1] Best as I can tell, the “local” version is the same as “CLI”, and “CLI” simply means using a cloud model, which you have to pay for. It also looks like JetBrains is hosting some models in their cloud which are free to use until December.

Yes this is absolutely true.

Another challenge is getting developers to stop assuming they know what the code does without reading it! Having AI “fact check” various documents against the source will help immensely.

More specifically, just over 4% of the population:

> In 2021, 591,855 Ontarians (4.2% of the population) had French as one of their mother tongues. While this number varied little from 1991 to 2006 (+11,065 people), it increased steadily from 2006 to 2021 (+58,995 people).

- In 2021, 78.2% of these residents (463,120 people) had French as their only mother tongue, while 21.8% (128,740 people) had French along with other languages.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/89-657-x/89-657-x2023017...

Generally no. Some provinces officially operate in both English and French but some do not.

For a press release from a private company operating in Ontario there is no legal requirement to publish in both languages. Some companies might do so anyway if they have operations that are regulated by the federal government and/or they just want the goodwill.

Imported products have to meet Federal packaging laws, which do require both languages.

Can you provide details on this attack?

Typically the user gives a website their public passkey, which does not need to be kept secret since it’s public. If the website is hacked the attackers only get information that is already public.

You seem to be talking about a scenario where a user’s private keychain on their computer is compromised and the attacker is able to access other systems from that same machine without the user’s knowledge. (Note that the keychain data is itself encrypted so can’t be used from a different computer.)

I assume you’re talking about a system like this:

https://www.danfoss.com/en/industries/food-and-beverage/dcs/...

Can you clarify? These workers were resident in the U.S. or abroad?

Let me deliberately hijack this tread with what I think is a more realistic question: “How much economic damage, in USD, would be inflicted on global economies if 80% of the internet was down for a week?”

I’m trying to contextualize this information. JetBrains isn’t publicly traded best as I can tell, and these numbers come from other public filings:

> Figures are the company's own (unconsolidated) statutory statements filed with the Czech business register…

Are these as reliable as the U.S. 10K or its European equivalent?

I assume that a company like JetBrains would be investing in shifting products around A.I., so it doesn’t seem too surprising that they don’t report a profit for 2025.

Headline should read “North Richland Hills TX…” Texas City TX is near Galveston. ;)

How does me getting “more comfortable with friction” reduce the likelihood of other people declining my invites because it’s easier for them to entertain themselves than it is to attend my gathering?

Wars are expensive, and the money has to come from somewhere:

> Lots of countries — including Egypt (the Nile/wider Red Sea supremacy), Eritrea (Ethiopia’s desire for access to the sea), Sudan (Ethiopian support for the RSF), Somalia (historical enmity/Ethiopian support for Somaliland), and Saudi Arabia (as benefactor of Egypt/Sudan/Eritrea axis) — have good reasons to keep Addis Ababa weak and preoccupied with unending domestic wars. These dynamics, coupled with the geography of war in Ethiopia mean that Addis Ababa will struggle to keep arms and fighters from easily moving across its borders with Sudan and Eritrea.

> On its part, the Ethiopian state will likely continue to enjoy support from the United Arab Emirates; and maintain the capacity to produce the weapons needed to keep rebels at bay. Ominously, divisions among elites in Tigray and other regions mean that the rebellion may not clear the threshold needed to incentivize a quick resolution either militarily or at the negotiating table. Therefore, slow-burning, but still catastrophically deadly conflicts may be on the cards.

> …

> Notably, a prolonged conflict will likely also be significantly civilianized. Careful to avoid being overstretched, the Ethiopian state may decide to deputize regional militias and other violence entrepreneurs in its fights against subnational armed groups. To this end, it will lean heavily on divisions across armed groups and within the regional states that have witnessed rebellions.

Part of a unifying the nation will be convincing these players that they will do better with a peaceful, stable Ethiopia.

> Meanwhile, some app developers end up knowing more about their users than they’d care to: a typical client-server exchange creates a trail of user data, like the client’s IP address or TLS fingerprint. This level of visibility can be a burden.

Can someone expand on “burden” here? Scenarios that come to mind for me are something like: “I now need to ensure my log files are stored securely but that’s a PITA.” This doesn’t feel like the best example of why I’d use this though. (Edit: Secure messaging servers for a service like Signal?)

We currently use contracts to assign which party accepts responsibility. Why is this insufficient?

There are regulations.

> You probably…

Yes, agreed but what is the point? What problem are we solving?

This is one of those silly suggestions that comes up repeatedly, and solve a non-problem: In both the U.S. and Canada there are many instances where work needs to be approved by a credentialed and legally licensed engineer. Banning the use of the job title “engineer” in the U.S. would not change anything. (It would run smack into the 1st amendment though… it’s legal for me to call myself the King of France, and the onus is on you to decide if that’s all the due diligence you need to do before engaging me in treaty negotiations.)

Technically yes, but it would be unprofitable to pivot. (Presumably whoever you bought your juice from was planning to make juice, and budgeted accordingly.)