macOS Permission Management regarding shell scripts is so bad. For example they show you a list of software thats allowed to access the full disk - but I have like 8 "sh" or "bash" in there and some random scripts with no way to open the enclosing directory in Finder making it basically impossible to see what it is and if its legit…
I was one click from downloading it and was happily surprised that the page did not talk about Pricing so I assumed it was free - went back here to check if I missed something and seems like I did...
I don't think I get foldable phones. When is the extra space necessary? I mean most of them turn from a somewhat 9:16 aspect ratio to 1:1. You don't earn anything in space to consume media content. The only real improvement might be for multitasking?
> It’s the DMA regulation that forces Apple to give the same access as they have to other AI chat apps.
But why can Tesla ship Grok to their cars in the EU without any problems? Why aren't they required to let me choose between Grok, OpenAI etc or even a custom endpoint?
What exactly is this doing? Expiry notifications are offered by pretty much every registry already? Nameserver management also confuses me. Is this centralizing DNS from all providers or just the NS records?
Looking at the setup.js it seems to be an infostealer which posts the found details to a newly created github repo (on the victims account) or a command and control server. As far as I can tell it looks for github secrets and kubernetes cluster secrets.
Also Lovable just switched to TanStack as a default project framework which uses Vite under the hood. Lovable uses Cloudflare so they’re probably deploying it via Cloudflare Workers.
I absolutely don't. I even sometimes use "curl | bash" to install new things on my machine because most of the time it's easy and I tend to trust the authors.
My point was just that I don't think moving to pre-built binaries solves this issue.
Is the Open in OpenRouter the same as in Open AI? I couldn’t find any repository or hosted code. Thought it'd be a open source, self hostable tool with a cloud offering but seems its just the latter?
Sure, backseat commenting is easier and I wouldn't wanna be in charge at github right now, but on the other side there also a reality where we'd see video essays about githubs downfall because their reliability crashed so hard that businesses could not trust them and moved to competitors / self hosted instances which then meant less paid users to subsidize the ever growing demand of the free users.
They are definitely more outages but the question is if these outages are due to the providers using LLMs to build there products and are therefore not delivering the quality they did before or have LLMs enabled a completely new user base to create projects which they deploy in the free tiers of named providers and they simply cannot keep up with the growth and the new influx of free users is skewing their mixed calculations (free vs paid) so heavily that they cannot scale without losing money. I'd probably say it's a mix of both.
Yea but thats not really an excuse, is it? They offer a service, (some) people pay for that service and should therefore expect it to work. If GitHub cannot keep up with the growth then they could disable new account registrations or start reducing free tiers so people either use the free tier more mindfully or need to pay for usage-base products like Actions which would GitHub allow to scale.
style="position: absolute; left: -9999px; top:-9999px;display: none"
maybe they try to warm up those emails to use them for other "campaigns" later on...