> Turbo and view transitions go so well together because they have kind of the same philosophy: write the HTML once to describe what the current state should look like, and let the technology handle the transitioning from one state to another. This leads to writing expressive dead simple code, that is so simple to understand yet behaves like a modern SPA, I love it!
> From one point of view, for a work of art to be considered algorithmic art, its creation must include a process based on an algorithm devised by the artist. An artist may also select parameters and interact as the composition is generated. Here, an algorithm is simply a detailed recipe for the design and possibly execution of an artwork […]
Creating art by AI certainly also uses an algorithm to some extent but it cannot be said to have devised that algorithm and arguably also not to clearly define all parameters to the algorithm.
To summarize, a Jon Seager from Canonical says it’s for safety and resilience.
> Performance is a frequently cited rationale for “Rewrite it in Rust” projects. While performance is high on my list of priorities, it’s not the primary driver behind this change. These utilities are at the heart of the distribution - and it’s the enhanced resilience and safety that is more easily achieved with Rust ports that are most attractive to me.
> 2fa using an app that exists on the same device -- a second factor that secures nothing
2FA on the same device secures against your login credentials becoming known to another party, e.g. by fishing, password reuse, database leaks, etc., which are real threats. It is not meant to protect against someone being in possession or full control of your unlocked device, which is of course also a real threat, though possibly less common.
I always thought there should be a magnet to attract dust. Apparently it takes a "miniature wormhole that warps space-time around it" to pull that off:
I have to disagree somewhat. People write books for a lot of reasons, but one alluring thought in many an author's head certainly is: "Sure, it might not be commercially viable directly now, but over time…"
Writing books can be a pretty risky proposition from a financial point of view. Copyright should at least span an authors lifetime in my opinion.
Thinking that an author could profit not at all from a work if it gains popularity 20 years after it was written also seems unfair, seldom though as that case may be.
Let me applaud that! Small redundancies like these in writing lessen ambiguity and cognitive load. Although "2023" is longer than "23" it is more readily apparent as a year when e.g. looking/scanning for dates in the fridge. You might be saving your future brain some precious energy in writing full years instead of shortened ones. (Only half joking, the same could presumably be achieved by a well layed out label with ample white space and good typography.)
But of course other exploits (e.g. in your webapp) might lead to "running user code" where you didn't expect it and then the mitigations could prevent privilege escalation, couldn't they?
https://casefilepodcast.com/case-178-the-woman-without-a-fac...