> 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!
I was working in digital libraries circa 2005 and we had that bubble pop when people understood the business model was "get a $100,000 grant and spend $20,000 a year maintaining the product in perpetuity." I tried to convince management that if these were part of a system designed for maintenance in mind we could get that $20,000 to $500-$2000 a year, but it seemed the institutional response to this situation was "let go of the most productive people and keep the least."
Actually, we don't stop kids from buying cigarettes, we punish stores that sell cigarettes to kids and are caught! That's my entire point! You just made my argument for me!
And the store does not use facial recognition and/or checking id to know if the potential buyer is a kid ?
The only (huge) difference for me is the scale of the verification and how data are stored.
> And the store does not use facial recognition and/or checking id to know if the potential buyer is a kid?
They can just not serve cigarettes. In addition I think it's also insane to compare cigarettes, which are purely negative, to free internet usage which is massively net positive.
Despite the headline, does this law actually punish the children if they are caught with social media accounts? Or is the burden on the social media providers?
> 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:
Thank you! It always was astounding to me how people could argue with so much vigor and conviction that something as complicated as the immune system could not possibly be affected by something as basic as temperature changes.
> Humans may also experience lethal hyperthermia when the wet bulb temperature is sustained above 35 °C (95 °F) for six hours.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermoregulation