tzmudzin
- for the economies of scale, you might develop your custom solution 20x faster now, but you're still in competition with the established provides with templates for most of the cases (who btw have the same LLM capability at their disposal)
- for the change in business -- you can ask an LLM which changes this induces, and it will give you most typical impacts. And then you're back at square deciding if it's better to roll your custom DSL and the custom system downstream, or just use off-the-shelf stuff that covers 95% of it from day one (well, maybe day two or three)
- economies of scale no longer work, and you end up doing a custom ERP for your business from scratch.
- your business changes might invalidate your model quickly. You sell through distributors, but open an online shop -- and suddenly your customer is not one of few dozen well-known businesses with a known address and tax number, but user2252 who bought something late at night last night. And you want to understand the needs and behaviors of both.
DSL presumes agreement on semantics, and that's often the most difficult part.
Well, it’s in the name already. The fact it’s not called “anti-harassment training” always makes me chuckle…
Ideology or not, exclusion does not help.
https://jalopnik.com/how-airlines-decide-to-replace-jet-engi....
Genuinely curious European here: what in your view was their purpose?
The composition of both paints is a trade secret ("closed-source formatters"). The controversy is about disallowing the use on a broad class of projects benefitting the society.
How would your method work on that?
My point being: statistics has developed arcane methods to describe a population. One should not blindly force the most common measure on every case.
Please look up "rent", "dividend" and "capital gains".
Intel probably had to disclose the existence of IME due to collaboration with mainboard vendors. Apple does not face this constraint, so it is a lot easier for them to keep such subsystems under wraps.
Of course I'm just speculating here, but a product typically mirrors its environment.
This effectively reduces the 2nd factor to the first, and indeed produces the diminishing return. It's sufficient to hack one system using one method and you compromise both defenses.
The point behind 2nd factor is to provide a second, *independent* layer of protection that would need to be compromised using an entirely different attack.
In the case of the FIDO2 dongles including the Yubikeys the secret isn't even stored on your system, but on the device itself that doesn't even disclose it to your connected system.