Do you have a solution to ever reenabling package adoptions? It's pretty much a must have feature for this to exist long term, at least in the AUR's current state where its a repo your not supposed to auto install from but pretty much all users do.

Really disabling adoptions is probably step 1 to just EOLing the whole thing.

The AUR by definition isn't to be trusted. That's what the official repos are for, you're supposed to read what the package install scripts are doing.

Surprisingly, claude failed to find a good one.

Also, part of destination dispatch (I'm guessing based on experience) removes the 'stopping on every floor problem', so the real test would be total time including wait at that point I think.

>Experts said the legal approach is unusual and may be the first time the law has been aimed at an operating system. "It's concerning – and sends the message that [GrapheneOS] is criminal by default," said Christophe Boutry, a cybersecurity and surveillance expert. Boutry and Bill Buddington, senior staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, both said they had not seen a similar case.

Is the actual case about banning the OS? Because it seems pretty clear the case is about the result (the phone being wiped with a special passcode).

The better defense imo would be one of those 'wipe the phone if you get the password wrong x times' and try and claim you forgot under pressure. At least if you wanted to wipe the phone without being accused of destroying evidence during a search.

Any future law in regards to this will likely just lead to the companies that already got consent (companies you already have accounts with) becoming even deeper entrenched.

Non targeted ads pay a small percentage of targeted ads.

People act shocked when it leads to unintended side effects, but companies legal teams are just telling them they have no idea how a judge will interpret these broad wordings in regards to their business.

People say this fixes "future loopholes" but as you see with the cookie banner, it just leads to every company assuming the worst case scenario.

Going back years of conversation on cookie banners you'll see a constant argument on when they're required or not precisely because it's not defined explicitly.

Acting dense like this isn't productive... And literally this information would be stores as anonymous user 12345, but that still would require consent (probably, or at least arguably).

We're borderline already there today when the cost of switching is typing a different url at the top of the screen. You add some mandatory 20 minute wait and you'll never see a new site again.

Google and Facebook would love it though.

You simply will have to go out of business.

This is also why you see many large companies fighting for more regulation. It's harder for a competitor to emerge if they have to navigate mountains of red tape.

The CEO is in large part responsible for picking what products have hope to grow the company. The iphone was far from a slam dunk, many thought it would fail. Now it's responsible for over half their revenue and they're one of the largest companies in the world.

>Then he became CEO and the company and was, finally, phenomenally successful.

I'm totally confused by your post, so you admit he became a good CEO then?

That's the risk of tools like Mythos/Fable/any LLM. While a human's eyes would glaze over what looks like a standard memcpy, an LLM with the right context might instantly realize the payload length was never actually verified.

And since Heartbleed existed for years, despite the full bug existing in pretty much one file, in one of the most important libraries out there, it's right to be afraid of what other obvious bugs exist and are just waiting to be found.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/world/iran-war-live-us-says-iranian-...

Probably the biggest learning from the Ukraine war alone is the effectiveness of cheap drones. It was suspected for years but hadn't been put to the test yet.

This way of thinking is so depressing to read about. If we ignore the strawman argument and just look at what 'point' you're making, you're basically making fun of people for having high aspirations. A bit of a 'look at this guy, he thinks he can run his own business! Dummy' energy.

>I'm sure many of them are reaching for the downvote as they read this.

In a perfect world enough people would have hit flag by now where I wouldn't have had to read this at all.

Is this a joke? There's a major outage effecting flights at least yearly. The Delta one is from May...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Southwest_Airlines_schedu... [2] https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/airline-news/2026/05/0...

It's also cool that it's chip is just an ESP32.

>If the AI had recommended Black and Asian candidates at the same rate as it recommended the most-favored group (typically white applicants), 40,000 more of their applications would have advanced to the next stage of hiring.

I don't think this is the right benchmark here, or at least, it would be very interesting if the actual outcome, offer or rejected, was considered at the end.

Am I crazy? The article itself points out that only 10% of the increase would have been 'saved' if cars had remained the same size. This goes directly against the title no?

There's certainly more than one reason, my gut would point to more smart phone use both by drivers and even by pedestrians themselves.

I wonder if one day using a smart phone while driving will have the same stigma as a DUI (and similar punishment). I struggle to argue it shouldn't, its sometimes a little crazy to think about that if the person in the other lane gets distracted on their phone, I might be involved in a head on collision at 60+mph.

My physics teacher had a 2.2.

But even still, these teachers have 20+ students. If you struggle with a topic it can pay dividends to have it explained for you.