• 0 Posts
  • 20 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: May 14th, 2024

help-circle
  • Not the encrypted mail, mind you, because they can’t do that

    Just want to point out for anyone new that ProtonMail does not use E2EE for email headers. That means they CAN access your subject lines, to/from fields, and other email headers. That means they CAN be forced to hand it over to the government.

    Source: https://proton.me/support/proton-mail-encryption-explained

    Subject lines and recipient/sender email addresses are encrypted but not end-to-end encrypted.

    Personally I am disappointed in a lot of Proton’s wording about this. They frequently promise they can’t access “your data” and “your messages” when they do, in fact, store potentially sensitive data in a format they CAN access.






  • All temperature scales are arbitrary, but since our environment is full of water, one tied to the phase changes of water around the atmospheric pressure the vast majority of people experience just makes more sense.

    But when it comes to weather, the boiling point of water is not a meaningful point of reference.

    I suppose I’m biased since I grew up in an area where 0-100°F was roughly the actual temperature range over the course of a year. It was newsworthy when we dropped below zero or rose above 100. It was a scale everybody understood intuitively because it aligned with our lived experience.





  • Switching to another Chromium-based browser is a half-measure. Other Chromium-based browsers are on borrowed time.

    As time goes on, it will become more difficult for them to maintain v2 support. Nobody has the resources to properly maintain a browser fork with more than minor modifications. And you can bet Google will go out of their way to make this difficult for everybody else.

    I mean, sure, use what you’re comfortable with if you really can’t use a non-Chromium-based browser for some reason. But it means you’re likely going to have to jump ship again sooner or later. Why not just jump once, to something with better long-term prospects?

    Then again, the folks behind Arc Browser have expressed interest in becoming engine-agnostic, so perhaps there will be a Chromium-free Arc version in the future. That would be very cool.







  • This doesn’t seem to be a problem with disaster recovery plans. It is perfectly reasonable for disaster recovery to take several hours, or even days. As far as DR goes, this was easy. It did not generally require rebuilding systems from backups.

    In a sane world, no single party would even have the technical capability of causing a global disaster like this. But executives have been tripping over themselves for the past decade to outsource all their shit to centralized third parties so they can lay off expensive IT staff. They have no control over their infrastructure, their data, or, by extension, their business.


  • The solution to the whitespace gripe is strictly enforced formatting standards with a git hook running a manually invokable script.

    Throwing a linter into the pipeline just hardcodes the formatting at that point in the pipeline. That doesn’t really solve the issue, which is that style is not a one-size-fits-all concept, and displaying text appropriately is really the job of a text editor. To quote PEP 8, “default wrapping in most tools disrupts the visual structure of the code”. In other words, “most tools” suck at displaying code, because they are not language-aware. That’s the real problem. Hardcoding style is a workaround, not a solution.

    That said, I wouldn’t consider intelligent editors to be a replacement for formatting standards, either. Ideally my text editor would display my Python code the way I like it, and then save to disk in accordance to PEP 8.




  • Honestly, I don’t find this very creepy. This is information you are already putting out there for everyone to see. If I post a video of myself speaking, I am not concerned about people seeing how my skin vibrates in that video.

    As video generation tools become more advanced, we will need better algorithms to validate videos. The bar for “fooling the vast majority of humans” is much, much lower than the bar for “being literally indistinguishable from a real video”. The main problem I see is that it’s going to be a cat-and-mouse game, and I don’t think any method you publish will remain valid for very long in practice. The same method will be used to improve the next version of video generators.

    Also, lots of real videos use post-processing that might wash out some of the details they are looking for. Video producers might re-record lines so they don’t perfectly match the video to begin with. It’s been a long time since I used a Samsung phone, but on my old S6, I remember that it always had a beauty filter applied to the selfie camera that made me me look like a creepy porcelain doll. I could probably make a deepfake of myself that looks more “real” than those real videos and photos.