All watermarks are cures that are worse than the diseases they are trying to prevent (and never achieved to even cure anything).

Watermark is a blatant violation of legitimate privacy expectations, while not preventing anything because they can be easily removed.

So all the honest usages are punished, while illegitimate ones are not caught.

I don't know about AI, but I think the main problem nowadays is that a growing number of people can only deal with binary categories, either it's godly or it's trash.

To conclude, anything that is not written with a stone tablet is garbage.

I guess it'd take one day of your life to read it, but I think it pays back a lot.

Using rsync on git is like hammering a nail with a hammer, but then use a 10 pound stone to hammer the hammer.

Tried against a 84K loc C project. ck took at least 5 minutes to index, but replies are indeed fast. semble indexing (if any) took no noticeable time (except for the first download of HF model, which took a couple seconds), and replied in a couple of seconds.

Unrelated but ck was a pain to install / compile (install instructions do not say you have to lock the build / you have to have latest libc).

Gaming and such are dedicated services. Fine if people agree to pay premium to have the required platform / console / etc.

General services such as communications / banking must be free, and must not require trusted hardware on the end point. The services must be designed to be secure even in the case of compromised end points. But that's against the current trend where all banks are trying to push all the responsibility on the end user because they want to reduce their costs. There are plenty of solutions but they don't go for it because it's not in their interest and they want to squeeze out any little penny of infrastructure cost.

Security through obscurity in cryptosystems would mean defining your own crypto algorithm (or using a secretly-defined one, secret in the sense that it is unknown to the adversaries) to protect your system.

It is NOT bad in itself. It IS bad if you only rely on that. Even if you'd use a "secret" algorithm, you MUST protect the keys as with a public algorithm. Also, being secret means you cannot benefit from the cryptanalysis of the community, which is in practice very important. BUT... if you have a lot of cryptanalysis expertise at disposal, then using a secret algorithm can be very effective.

With the same reasoning, human being are only a bunch of atoms, and the only reason they don't collide with other humans is because of the atomic force.

When your abstraction level is too low, it doesn't explain anything, because the system that is built on it is way too complex.

Your wall should be made of a small number bricks you bet your life on.

All the rest goes inside.

Assuming your code is inaccessible isn't good for security. All security reviews are done assuming code source is available. If you don't provide the source, you'll never score high in the review.

Using paper and space to organize ideas is nice, but that's a niche use-case. And in any case, you'll have to digitalize it anyway afterwards, so better start on the digital version immediately, and be good at it. Everytime I start a new project, I'm tempted to take a pencil and paper, but then I refrain and use draw.io or the like because I know it will be winning on the longer run.

For the rest, you can easily customize your phone / browser / anything to be less distracting.

As for using AI just for convenience, this looks like very expensive in terms of resource.

The point is that they don't provide the level of services required by their position, which is dominant.

When you have a legitimate problem with Google, they don't reply to you. The news here is again an example of that. The only thing you can do is abide by their rules, which often requires you to subscribe to their services or be at their mercy.