LPThinker

The number of times I've seen people link to this thread while completely misunderstanding the context of it drives me nuts. The issue isn't being able to export keys, it's that KeepassXC was making it trivial to export keys in plaintext with no user warning/verification, which fundamentally undermines the biggest security advantage of passkeys - phishing resistance. In other words, if users can be easily talked through exporting their keys via a simple in-app flow that gives them no warning about the danger of what they're doing, then they will do that and be scammed horribly by it.

The person who raised the issue was asking KeepasXC to come up with a better solution for exporting keys - originally he asked them to wait for the now standardized process that every passkey provider uses, but then they settled on showing the user an explicit warning about the danger of plaintext exports in the meantime.

If you choose to read the most hostile and uncharitable subtext into every word a person writes in public, you can misunderstand what he's saying. Otherwise, this is a pretty cut-and-dry example of a person genuinely trying to support the interests of end users.

Hell yeah nushell! Truly a life-changing upgrade.

How long has it been since you used Teams? I'm no apologist, I have plenty of gripes with that piece of crap software, but this seems like a crazy stretch. Teams makes it almost trivial to embed code blocks with syntax highlighting for a wide array of languages, which can be easily copied out of Teams or opened in a separate viewer for easier reading.

Thank god Temporal is finally in Stage 3, and already rolled out in Firefox. I can't wait to be done with JS's Date forever.

I agree, except that we are legally not allowed to control the software on our phones in lots of cases. Notifications, ads, upgrades, etc. are all controlled by the manufacturer and it's illegal to override their software on the device you own.

Add to that that specific pieces of software are becoming increasingly necessary to function in society, and you start to see that it's not really a matter of individual choice, anymore than people shopping at walmart can be blamed for buying processed, sugary foods when that's 90% of what walmart stocks (And all they promote), and walmart is the only affordable option in their community.

Cities are centuries older than cars though. Cars are the new thing. And yet it's true that cars are an obvious QoL improvement for anyone in a rural area, and no reasonable person is suggesting that people in rural areas shouldn't drive cars.

The real issue is that Americans (among others) have decided they want all the convenience and amenities of living in a city (sewer, water, energy, convenient access to most goods and services, etc.), but they want to pretend they live in a rural area, with no density whatsoever. This has resulted in the suburban sprawl that is financially ruinous and requires cars to be able to go anywhere and do anything, which creates traffic, which we solve by building bigger roads and pushing things farther apart, creating more traffic.

Thus, the answer really is that if you want city amenities, you need to live in a city. It doesn't have to be as dense as New York. Not Just Bikes just posted a great video about the smallish town of Bergen in Norway that is not a super dense urban hellscape, it is medium density with human-centric development.

Congratulations, you've illustrated the difference between syntax and semantics. But any competent compiler also handles semantics (just in a separate phase of compilation), because that's necessary for any useful conversion to machine code, not to mention optimizations.

I'm a bit confused, it sounds like Yale will no longer offer CS50, but unless I'm misunderstanding, won't Harvard still be producing the course?

I broadly agree.

However, "Existing maintainers have every right to push back where they see fit" is tenuous when the Linux project as a whole has already (exhaustively) discussed and debated this exact question alongside all the other questions about adding Rust, and the explicit declared direction is that Rust should become an increasingly large part of the Linux kernel.

This is valid if your city doesn't have dedicated bike infrastructure that gets plowed. Snow can be hardly an inconvenience at all if bike infrastructure is treated with equal importance as car infrastructure.

Oh the Urbanity! on Youtube has a really realistic take on this in Montreal: https://youtu.be/sokHu9bhpn8

In what sense are they "siding" with the corporations? If anything, this seems like a step in the right direction, to add some modicum of open governance to the Chromium project in a fashion that is clearly not corpo-dominated.

Also, it's not like this is the Linux Foundation saying "we only support Chromium", after all they also run the Servo project.

Source? Like obviously none of us on this platform appreciate manifest v3, but it's obvious that's a corporate push, and exactly the thing this new organization might help mitigate.

On the other hand, the Chromium team has been pumping out all kinds of day-to-day platform improvements for the last 5 years at least. I'm thinking of CSS ergonomics and more robust HTML that make web devs less JS-dependent. The kinds of down-in-the-weeds work that gave us CSS grid, all the useful new CSS pseudoselectors, the command attribute for buttons, etc. etc.

I'm not a web maximalist, and I would love to see a simpler web/browser prosper, but I just don't think it's realistic.