These don't tend to utterly destroy an industry, but they are often successful in forever transforming it. Just ask Big Tobacco. No new laws needed: if your product hurts someone else, you're eventually going to be found liable, regardless of your arbitration clauses. Additional laws will just slow down innovation, which will itself cause harm (AI is already becoming quite good at recognizing melanomas, for example)

What you're saying is, "Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn't stop to think if they should"

while the author of the TFA was saying, in effect: "your scientists didn't even bother with the most basic duty of care"

Life finds a way, or, in this case, super-intelligent AI.

* a physical thing that can only live in one place

* not copyable

* can be 'contained'.

The whole thing reeks of bureaucratic 'best practices' that just aren't.

Even worse than that, trying to keep email restricted to the EU (or anywhere else) means that you effectively wouldn't be able to communicate with anyone in a different region, which is kinda the whole point.

Why not just make your own internet next? and then you can disconnect from everyone else who is trying to hack you. Just pull your network plug.

Email itself is hopelessly insecure by design anyway. Not just metadata when you are E2EE everything inside the envelope, but even basic vulns like downgrade attacks are simple because it's literally a violation of the RFCs (so you're not spec-compliant) to require TLS or any other encryption.. Why? because requiring modern crypto might interfere with deliverability and backwards compatibility. The real, deeper reason is that email is from a kinder, simpler time (well, at least simpler) and the design goals were never updated to keep up with the times.

Email is what we have. Just understand its flaws and then use other tools where you can. And who cares where your email lives - it's too easy to break anyway.

As a cache or ephemeral store like a throttling/rate limiting, lookup tables, or perhaps even sessions store, it's great; but it's impossible to rely on the persistence options (RDB, AOF) for production data stores.

You usually only see this tendency with junior devs, though. It might be a case where "when all you have is a hammer, all you see are nails", or when someone discovers Redis (or during the MongoDB hype cycle ten years ago), which seems like it's in perfect alignment with their language datatypes, but perhaps this is mostly because junior devs don't have as many production-ready databases (from SQL like Postgresql, CockroachDB, Yugabyte to New/NoSQL like ScyllaDB, YDB, Aerospike) to fall back on.

Redis shines as a cache for small data values (probably switch to memcache for larger values, which is simpler key-value but generally 3 to 10 times faster for that more narrow use case, although keep an eye on memory fragmentation and slab allocation)

Just think carefully before storing long-term data in it. Maybe don't store your billing database in it :)

> It seems like the thing getting backed up shouldn’t have the privilege of deleting backups in case it gets compromised.

(agreed)

> For backups, I added a nightly cron job which > exports my SQLite db to a write-only S3 bucket.

Why not only do this and use an s3 sync instead? You can safely backup SQLite databases while they're being written to, so no need to export (dump) them; just copy the files themselves.

This might mean that your entire backup/restore strategy is just to copy some files. If so, that's ideal.

(Of course, s3 sync does require reading as well as writing, so perhaps just increase your cron job to run more often so it fits within your RPO)

What's wrong with that? Of course it will work fine; SQLite, with or without WAL, has a ton of protections against corruption from writes-in-progress, which is what makes hot backups work.

That is awesome.

And, if Zelenskyy is to be believed, it was a "grant", or a gift, which makes Zelenskyy's disrespectful attitude and hubris in the White House even more outrageous.

Do actual presidents show up in sweatshirts and insult their benefactors?

Put another way, does the Linux kernel or the Python language need to be run by a company, or will foundations does these jobs ok?

There are plenty of open source projects that are enormously successful without a single lawyer or project manager in sight.

I haven't seen a single thoughtful critique of Zelenskyy or his behavior on HN; it seems very one-sided and strange.

(also interesting that the BBC mispelled his last name, even though they're obviously big fans..)