https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Paramount_Pic....

In your case, what happens is that async code conceptually generates an `enum` with one variant per await point which contains the locals held across that point, and it's this enum that actually gets returned from the async method/block and implements the `Future` trait.

There is one other major difference behind the scenes: With passkeys, the service you’re logging into never has enough information to authenticate as you, so leaks of the server-side credential info are almost (hopefully completely) useless to an attacker.

If true, that seems like a huge oversight. I also wonder what would happen if someone finds their information in the dataset and requests it to be removed per GDPR or other privacy legislation.

Anki is set up with a long review cycle (1 day, 1 week, 1 month, then automated) and I sit down to do my reviews about once a week. In that process, I usually end up having new ideas to make notes about based on either the randomized order the notes show up in or spotting a connection between the review note and something I've been working on lately.

[1] In practice, I let many/most of these go unrecorded - I probably average about one new note per day, but in bursts.

Think about it in terms of an old-fashioned gunpowder line fuse: If you lay it out in a ring and have some kind of mechanism to continuously place down new gunpowder on the ring in front of the flame, you can keep it going until you run out of fuel.

But the cash outflow to purchase those shares makes the company less valuable at the same time. In a completely efficient market, the amount of money that the company pays to buy back a share should be exactly balanced by the ownership percentage of that share, resulting in no net change to the price of the company's other shares.

However, the order opens with the line “By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America,” and I know of no law or constitutional clause that grants the President the power to designate an official language.

I could easily be mistaken, as there are a lot of laws on the books and this isn’t my field of expertise. Usually, though, an executive order will cite the relevant authority so that everyone understands where the power comes from; this one doesn’t.

It’s also mostly symbolic, aside from rescinding a previous order— None of the executive agencies are directed to halt producing or processing non-English documents, for instance.

In particular, trait object upcasting is on beta now and will be promoted to stable in a couple of weeks. I know that there has also been active development towards enabling multiple-bound trait objects, but I don't know what the status of that effort is.

The article also makes the (quite understandable) mistake of conflating a fat pointer to a trait object with the trait object itself. In Rust, trait objects are "unsized", which means they can only exist behind some kind of pointer. And any pointer in Rust that targets an unsized type grows an additional metadata field (for trait objects, a vtable pointer). This is a slightly weird behavior with a few unexpected consequences that often catches people off-guard, but understanding it is key to understanding why you can't make a trait object for something like `Clone`, which returns an instance of itself-- Because unsized types can't appear on their own, the return type of the `clone()` method would be invalid.

For a more thorough take, I recommend "A tour of `dyn Trait`" ( https://quinedot.github.io/rust-learning/dyn-trait-overview.... )

If the Justice Department changes its mind (due to a change of administration or popular sentiment, for example) before the statute of limitations runs out, they can pursue a case for actions that happened during this non-enforcement period. Something being made criminal may[1] also open up new avenues of civil liability, which can be brought to court by anyone actually harmed.

[1] I don't really know how much civil and criminal law interact like this; that's a question for someone with a law degree.

(Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_ap... , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constituencies_of_the_Parliame... )

Unfortunately, it's people at both ends of the fitness curve that have to be careful about increased exercise frequency/intensity. On the less-fit side, the primary concern is accumulating minor injuries that reduce capacity for exercise even further leading into a downward spiral.

Now that we’ve lived in a fiat-currency world for decades, it’s possible that new processes are being used as the concerns are different— anti-counterfeiting measures are more important than anti-shaving ones now, for instance.