So I have a system Python (largely unused), a Homebrew python (pulled in as a dependency, I won't use it), and as many different mise/uv Pythons as I need for different projects. Similarly NodeJS and Java. I'd given up on nvm a while back, no longer use pyenv, and mise and uv work together really nicely.

Once you get away from running in a JS environment or away from code that's written with the intention of running in a WASM sandbox, if you don't want to have to modify the code for your environment then you're going to start having problems. This looks like a good step for anyone wanting to run arbitrary Python outside of a browser environment.

You can even use the mobile apps over direct connection, with local auth and no cloudy relay required.

Driving controls are all available on the stalks and wheel, volume is adjustable from the wheel or the centre console, all physical buttons, levers, or scroll inputs, unless you need to change a setting using the trackpad. The only thing that's missing is wheel control for skipping tracks :P.

Exposing random services to your local network is exactly what mDNS is for, I always thought it was a shame more dev tooling didn't do that.

[0]: https://github.com/andrewaylett/mod_bonjour is a fork of Apple's mod_bonjour, very much unloved of late I'm afraid.

If they can increase supply or reduce demand, the reserve will take longer to draw down.

But as much as I dislike the OSA: if you're not subject to UK law, why do you (website author) care what our government thinks of your website? It's not like they can do anything to you.

> Consent must be "freely given, specific, informed, and unambiguous."

and

> Apollo notifies them when their data is added to Apollo's database of business contact information and provides them with instructions on how to opt out.

https://knowledge.apollo.io/hc/en-us/articles/4409141087757-...

Now, their claim appears to be that they're processing business contact data under the legal basis of "Legitimate Interests". But as much as I am a big fan of not doing things that require a legal basis of "Consent", I'm unconvinced that they ensure their customers are sticking as tightly to their basis as they ought to be if they wish to claim it.

In other words: yes, if you have a CRM in then you might derive legitimate interests in sharing with Apollo. But you need to make sure you actually have the right legal basis for putting customer details into your CRM, and your support database almost certainly does not hold appropriate data!

So ultimately I think this is on both Browserstack (for connecting and sharing data other than in accordance with a legal basis) and Apollo (for making it too easy for their customers to send them data without a sound legal basis and then for sharing that data without suitably validating they had the legal basis to).

Apollo's privacy centre makes all the right claims about how they comply with GDPR, but the OP's story demonstrates that they're not as scrupulous in their verification as they claim to be. And strictly, both should be reporting the breach and taking steps to ensure it doesn't recur.

As a society (more so here in the UK than in the US, I'll grant) we have laws governing what one party may demand of the other. They don't prevent a genuine meeting of the minds, because enforcement of a contract will only be an issue if at least one party doesn't follow through. But they do limit the ability of the company to impose sanctions beyond a point.

One limitation in the UK is that penalty clauses that are "private fines", like this one, must be based on the actual damage caused.

In this case, as in the non-compete case, I would say that if a company wants to continue to influence what someone does, they should continue to pay them.

It still remains to be seen what the actual requirements are, and even if F-Droid could become "approved" that doesn't mean they want to. Time will tell.

I've only hit the compaction limit a handful of times, and my experience degraded enough that I work quite hard to not hit it again.

One thing I like about the current implementation of plan mode is that it'll clear context -- so if I complete a plan, I can use that context to write the next plan without growing context without bound.