No, they are correct, because the deciders themselves are just a cog in the proof of the overall theorem. The specification of the deciders is not part of the TCB, so to speak.
It'll sort of die, you can't access them directly but if you take the link and paste it into discord (like one with just yourself) then it'll still work.
Tbh I am even surprised those links were a thing to begin with, at the end it is mainly to share stuff on their chat platform, they sort of allowed that, but feels weird that it was a thing to begin with.
What? Discord isn’t meant to be a media hot linking service. They’re literally doing it on purpose, to stop people from doing what this person is doing.
This isn't stopping people from sharing discord media links though. It just means that others who did not share the link and cannot do anything about that will see broken images/etc. in the future.
I'm pretty sure this is a feature that's available at least to big creators – I remember a Tom Scott video doing a bit involving scheduling an ad at a particularly fitting moment.
You might have to be a YouTube partner or something like that to make use of this stuff, though.
You need to be in the YouTube partner program, but that's not just available to big creators.
You need at least 1000 subscribers and a certain amount of video watch time per year to qualify, but even fairly small channels can meet this bar. When people talk about getting monetized on YouTube, this is what they mean.
I have heard of at least one instance of an exam a while ago, where some questions – ones that need diagrams in their statement – would be written onto the blackboard in the exam room, due to limitations of the duplication techniques used for the exam paper.
You're talking about industrial PLCs. They're programmed using a-bit-more-fancy Scratch snappy blocks. There is no version control. The firmware contained paths embedded as strings, so we know that firmware for each model and customer was developed in a separate folder on disk. I wouldn't be surprised if they also had .zip files with backups of previous versions.
The IDE for these PLCs actually has VCS integration! It's SVN, but it's still better than nothing.
Its on-disk representation of graphical 61131-3 languages (FBD / SFC) is text-based and somewhat human readable, so there's nothing technically preventing the developers from keeping all of this in any other VCS of their choice.
There is nothing wrong with SVN, it's just that Git allows for some workflows that are better suited to larger teams and more complex projects. But for your average PLC project with a team of 10 and one binary as the output it should be more than enough.
You likely won't see any 'feature branches' or frequent merges in this kind of environment.
I'm aware of repos with a few million files in it that have been going since 2003 and not a single issue.
Merging things is different than in Git but it works. I use both, and I'm not religious about either, some things are easier in Git, some are easier in SVN. Git provides more footguns. And loads and points them too.
I'm intimately familiar with PLC programming, yes, you can do it the 1980's way but there are also plenty of environments that allow for modern version control.
You'd have to be pretty daft to do this kind of development today and not take advantage of version control and even the most visual versions of these systems eventually output (text) files. You may not be able to do an easy line-by-line comparison but you will have a commit log with helpful messages.
Look for 'engage in anti-competitive behavior' in the log message ;)
Yeah.. I've just realized that while it's entertaining to watch how it unfolds or predict what can happen next, it's also sad, because pretty much everybody in the rail industry loses..
One of my business partners works for PKP it's very annoying to see this all unfold and in this particular way. Poland has so much potential, these idiots are ruining Polands image in ways that really matter.
But then again, as a Dutch person I have enough issues locally that I can't even complain...
Poland has a very strong technology and mathematics tradition that goes back decades. It's one of the reasons Poland has some strong feelings about their role in the breaking of the Enigma, for the longest time that was played down.
Working in security on the operating side (albeit not in Poland):
No, pretty much just the manufacturer loses. Short term the operator loses, but I'm sure that the courts will award damages.
For me, this incident is a welcome argument with which I can tighten the screws on manufacturers in the next round of train buying (at minimum, they will agree to heavy contractual fines for anything like this; at best I get full source code for every train).
For too long the only priority in OT was safety (fine in the 80ies, but the second you integrate an IP stack that posture doesn't work anymore). This has been changing in the industry thanks to EU-regulation; this incident will accelerate the change.
If this goes on to criminal charges, then they're about to discover what amazing things a thorough digital forensics analysis can find out from their workstations.
If it was developed anytime after 1990 (probably before) you will find plenty of programmers willing to be expert witnesses and tell the court that the company not having version control is gross incompetence, the only reason a company would do that would be so they can hide evidence of illegal actions. As such the court should impose punitary damages.
Of course before going on the stand the expert witness will work with a lawyer to word smith the above into something the court will better understand. however I think the generic idea is something everyone here will agree with.
I've used a thing that not only doesn't play nice with versioning (your local workspace is a collection of embedded db files) but doesn't play nice with multiple developers (no way to sync workspaces). I still managed to get it into version control, even if useful things like diffs didn't do anything useful.
I've seen a lot of discussion about YouTube banning adblockers, but as a user of Firefox + uBO, I have never seen it happen for me. Perhaps the Firefox extension ecosystem makes it easier to push blocklist updates or something. Or YouTube's detection is browser-specific and they bothered with the largest first.
Google will make a change to its ads to get around the adblockers, but no change they make gets deployed all at once.
Instead they spread their updates over users 0.1% at a time over an hour or so. That way if youtube stops working for that fraction of users, they can cancel and rollback the update.
Sometimes this means that you might be in that tiny fraction of users who gets a change before the devs who maintain the UBO lists, and sometimes that change is related to ads.
(It's only happened to me twice in the last 2 years)
In this case, you don't need to mess around with other extensions, you just need to wait an hour or so until those devs have seen Google's changes and they can push their own updates to reblock the new ads.
If you want it to go faster, you can go to the github issues pages for the filterlists and they have instructions for how to get uBlock Origin to generate a blob of debug info to post on github to speed up their updates.
Interesting, thanks for the insights. The next time I feel frustrated enough I'll have to do that.
Part of me was considering just self-hosting an alternative YT frontend. At this point I'm sorta happy with how YT slowly has decreased its usage in my life
They need to just give up and stop fighting the ad-blockers: they can't win, unless they try to force everyone to use a special app to watch YouTube, which obviously isn't going to fly.
There's plenty of losers out there who can't or won't use ad-blockers that they can make their ad money on; trying to harass the 20% of users who use ad-blockers is just an arms race they can't win.
Are you logged in to Youtube? People are saying that the YouTube anti-blocking measures are kicking in for logged-in users, but not for anonymous users.
Yes, there is no question about that the uBlock Origin works regardless of your YouTube session status. The question is whether YouTube's countermeasures kick in or not: nagging you to turn it off, or stop playback.
The issue isn't whether you see ads or not, but whether YouTube is nagging you to turn off your ad blocking on threat of video playback being suspended after a few videos.
