leni536
leni536 on Hacker News
Me too, but I don't think the resolution is good enough, even on blu-ray.
What about an untrusted local network, like public wifi?
Same goes for youtube vids
> hyperbolic marketing
More like fraudulent marketing.
I would be nervous moving borders with ~1 million dollars worth of gold.
Understandable. Still not open source.
Pdfium powers Chrome's/Chromium's PDF viewer, but maybe Chrome doesn't expose encrypting PDF documents as a feature to be affected?
Just call them telescreens.
I opened the blocklist expecting some juicy Linux ISO sites and... it's all betting sites. I'm not even mad.
Bullets are probably more economical.
Because it's a shape rotation, not a selection rotation. I was confused for a minute too.
Huh, I stand corrected. It is defined in the current draft though:
https://eel.is/c++draft/expr.shift
I thought this was part of the guaranteed two's complement change in C++20.
That is not a primary goal. There was a discussion about "assume" semantics, but that is not one of the standardized contract evaluation semantics.
To be fair, direct debit also terrifies me. But I use that one.
> Can I please have a language that actually has bitwise operators with defined semantics?
C++? It has defined semantics since C++20.
There is already a precedent for a signed integer operation to produce an implementation-defined value or to trap. It's for integer conversion:
https://open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/www/docs/n3220.pdf#subsu...
> Otherwise, the new type is signed and the value cannot be represented in it; either the result is implementation-defined or an implementation-defined signal is raised.
There is no reason that this wording strategy could not be reused for bit shifts.
In general there is no constraint that unspecified or implementation-defined behavior can't be a trap. Without further qualification "unspecified behavior" or "implementation-defined behavior" is still open-ended, and it's up to the surrounding standard text to restrict the behavior further.
https://open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/www/docs/n3220.pdf#subse...
> behavior, that results from the use of an unspecified value, or other behavior upon which this document provides two or more possibilities and imposes no further requirements on which is chosen in any instance
"Possibilities" include trap
The idea of letting an LLM anywhere near my finances (and actually initiate transactions) terrifies me. And I like using LLMs.
API tokens are usually explicitly scoped by the user when they create them. I don't recall Google (or anyone else) ever exposing that when creating an app password, but maybe it was scoped down on first use?
App passwords are not scoped, are they? When I set up an app password for my whole google account it is never asked whether it is for email, docs, youtube, etc... . The oauth token is properly scoped.
A 2-hour granularity delay start would drive me insane. Better than nothing though. And maybe the dial one works with a timer on the outlet too, as the program is mechanically selected.
> and if there was a way for my washing machine to have a 3h window overnight to run in to be done for 7:30 I'd do it in a heartbeat.
I think most of these appliances sold today have at least some sort of "delay start" function. We use that to do exactly what you describe. Not even for nght tariff, it's just convenient to time it like that.
The only winning move is not to play.
Is that really the intent of the law? From here it looks like the intent is to favor citizens to people who would require sponsorship, but a hiring process that selects the best candidate from a single set of citizen and foreign candidates doesn't do that.
Plus requiring attribution in papers.
I would probably file an issue with upstream, so that foo() calls self._foo_impl(), and it's _foo_impl() that recurses. Otherwise it feels like a fragile base.
In the meantime the TLS solution doesn't sound too bad.
It's the promises that don't make sense, although that might be obvious in hindsight.
And mostly irrelevant for online payments.