The article at the end talks about how is very easy for arbitrary apps from app stores can install a residential proxy on your phone.
10 years ago, apps had to explicitly state if they needed network access. And then the powers that be decided that really all apps need network access no matter what. And both ios and android make it hard to deny apps network access.
But really, this finally explains the hordes of really basic boring games that just advertise other boring games. Idle games and the like that really just want you to keep your phone unlocked and open. Millions of downloads on the app stores for entirely offline content (and ads) and no way to block the network access.
These are not the worst graphs in the world... Sure the bottom left axis is not labeled, but it still conveys the point correctly. The growth between 2023->2024->2025->2026 is growing quickly. And that in the end/beginning of 2026 they say more growth than the three years before, combined!
You don't need to know the bottom left axis number. We do have to assume the graph is linear, and not some kind of negative exponent log graph. But given the rest of the content, I think that is safe to assume.
Any company that experiences significantly more growth than they were planning for will have capacity issues.
The priorities are most inline with that. The are way beyond the point that they can just add more hardware. They need to make the backend more efficient, and all the stated goals are about helping there.
The thread here doesn't explain why GPL might be better. So I'll try.
You're correct, with MIT there are a lot less restrictions. I can make GPL or pretty much any other license. Including one that I sell and never have to release the source of.
The latter option means if you make a product off of it, you have no obligation to share or even fund upstream development. This kind of situation has strangled other products.
Consider if Linux was released under MIT. Then companies like Oracle and RedHat (now owned by IBM) who have strong incentives to keep improvements to themselves and fund a lot of development would never share those improvements. Linux is the most used operating system in the world because of _everyone_ contributing back. But a MBA would want to privitize the profits.
If you care about the long term openness of a product, then GPL is hard to beat.
You don't understand the argument of why people might want to install their own OS on a device they own. And then say you won't buy another iPhone because you don't like their software... It sounds like you _do_ understand the argument.
I greatly dislike Apple software, but I think their hardware is quite nice. I would buy apple hardware if it wasn't handy-caped by their OS.
It used to be said that Apple was a hardware company that happens to make an OS. This argument never made sense to me, because while they make good hardware they very clearly don't want people to use it.
If I'm reading any of this correctly, this doesn't apply to hardware attestation.
It seems apple has a service, with an easily rotated key and an agreement with providers. If the key _Apple_ uses is compromised, they can rotate it.
BUT, apple knows _EXACTLY_ who I am. I attest to them using my hardware, they know _EXACTLY_ which hardware I'm using. They can ban me or my hardware. They then their centralized service gives me a blind token. But apple, may, still know exactly who owns which blind tokens.
However, I cannot generate blind tokens on my own. I _MUST_ talk to some centralized service that can I identify me. If that is not the case, then any single compromised device can generate infinite blind tokens rending all the tokens useless.
Maybe not so doable. The whole point of io_uring is to reduce syscalls. So you end up just three. io_uring_setup, io_uring_register, io_uring_enter
There is now a memory buffer that the user space and the kernel is reading, and with that buffer you can _always_ do any syscall that io_uring supports. And things like strace, eBPF, and seccomp cannot see the actual syscalls that are being called in that memory buffer.
And, having something like seccomp or eBPF inspect the stream might slow it down enough to eat the performance gain.
In 2007 several people and I started NYC Resistor, a hacker space in Brooklyn, completely unaware of this resistors in New Jersey.
It was over 10 years later that any of us heard of this much older resistor. It's kinda it funny how similar we are to them, nearly shared a name, and completely unaware of each other.
The world needs more places where people can explore their curiosity of how things work.
I don't think you understood the comments above, but I definitely don't understand your point...
Compilers introduce bugs, yes. Compilers are code, and code can have bugs and regressions.
But the comments above make no mention of bugs are regressions. They said compiling php into machine code is "impossible."
Going form high level interfaces to lower level is the easy part. It's what all interprets and compilers do already.
Having different intermediate forms is also a very common practice. There is nothing special about php here. Except for maybe it's underserved reputation of being an obtuse language.
Which federal government? The whole point is that these are assets that are not tied to any country.
The country you reside in may tax you non-state-currency assets, like selling a painting. But if a painting is stolen around the world at the same time, many governments may have collected taxes on part of that painting. Which government should be the government to persue the theft?
In a different way, if 600 million USD was stolen in cash in France. The US would work closely with the French government to close that case. The US would not be the one to foot the entire bill of solving the case.
Here no government has any real stake or harm to reputation to close the case.
aspe:keyoxide.org:2N3RKJGUHNKZBNZDIOIBJBMM54
https://shamm.as