Could we just pay a fee and use the Norwegian system?
It would certainly be cheaper than asking Crapita to build one. It would also "work" "today", which is two things you couldn't say for a Crap system.
8844 publicly visible posts • joined 14 Jun 2007
"benefits payments only being able to be spent on what the government defines as necessities"
A government could already do that by paying benefits in vouchers (instead of cash) and only redeeming those vouchers if presented to a bank by (say) a food retailer. If they did, I think you'd find that other shops stopped accepting them pretty quickly, thereby achieving the desired effect.
Technically easy. Politically impossible.
But it is still at least 93,000 more extensions than I can imagine a justification for. Yes, there are probably several hundred different programming languages, but Notepad++ manages syntax highlighting for the common ones out-of-the-box, so these VS code extensions must be doing something else. Debugging? Yes, but only for languages that "run" rather than simply specify. Code refactoring? We'll, yes, if you insist (and trust the refactoring) but again probably not for the more obscure languages.
Massive duplication of function caused by not-invented-here syndrome. Ah yes! That'll account for the other 93,000.
And Shia and Sunni regard each other as heretics.
Still, I don't think that is the explanation here. The US is still a net importer of oil. Therefore, the Straits of Hormuz can't stay shut for long, but will stay shut as long as the current Iranian regime survives. Therefore it won't. So everyone in the Iranian leadership is basically a dead man walking. So they've nothing to lose and martyrdom starts to look like the rational response.
I think it is unlikely that the Pentagon has not considered the medium term impact on the global oil trade. 20% of that trade runs through the Strait of Hormuz.
So, either the US expects the Strait to re-open within a few weeks or they have a plan B. It seems absurd to imagine that the current Iranian regime would tolerate plan A so regime change would be necessary for that to happen. Plan B involves finding 20% of the world's oil requirements in a space of weeks. Of course, Venezuela is now "friendly" but it seems unlikely that it could ramp up in just a few weeks.
I conclude that the Pentagon planners are going for plan A and regime change is now an essential part of the US strategy, whatever they might be saying in public.
Today? It's because they (the repos) don't know who is doing the pull.
Tomorrow? You could insist on users signing up with an email address but we know how easy it is to acquire a new, free email address. Big Corp can simply maintain a pool of such addresses and teach their Azure pipeline to pick the next address from the pool. Hassle, but I'm sure someone will eventually write a helpful tool to automate that and put said tool on GitHub for everyone to use.
So I think we're back to some heuristics that guess whether this new connection is a returning abuser, and throttling accordingly.
Tempting, but I am not a lawyer, as the saying goes, so I'd be wondering whether plan B left me liable for damages caused by downtime or whether I could claim some kind of self-defence.
Certainly if I were on the jury that would be an easy question to answer, but not everyone on a jury is as smart as me. :)
If you just hit all the fertiliser plants, that might do it on its own. It would take a year or two, but the world's population probably isn't supportable without chemical fertiliser.
Another single-minded approach might be to knock out the electricity system. How many facilities can actually run with no electricity at all? Fewer than you might think.
That said, Putin has been trying to do that in Ukraine for several years now and it seems to be harder than you might think.
That era may soon be passing. SLBM platforms are large, slow moving and fairly easy to destroy if you know where they are. That last point has been almost impossible for over half a century but science moves on, autonomous drone subs are now a thing, and humanity has rather a lot riding on an assumption that SLBMs cannot ever be stopped.
"The system will work out their age based on account signals, including the account's age, whether a payment method is on file, what type of servers a user belongs to, and other "general patterns of account activity." And that'll be it."
Well lad, starting in late 2026, no-one was able to set up a new account without being immediately pigeon-holed as a vulnerable teenager. So no-one new joined. So eventually even the existing users got bored and the whole operation just faded into obscurity.
Not so much shooting yourself in the foot as slowly suffocating yourself, but equally effective.
"You get the thing taken down first, THEN track down the poster with the cooperation of the platform/ISP."
Or, more likely, THEN discover that the poster lives thousands of miles away and there is not a snowball's chance in hell of you ever seeing them in court.
Even the takedown action depends on the hosting site having enough of a presence in your country that it cares about your laws. I predict that eventually we'll work this out and the global internet will be replaced by several smaller ones, within which there is a reasonable chance of being able to compel compliance with local law. Until then, expect no improvement in social media and no end to politicians sounding off on the subject.
"Software development is primarily a knowledge gaining exercise and is not about managing preplanned work."
You mean it's "research" not "development"?
I'm inclined to agree. By the time you actually have a good understanding of the detailed requirements, you've probably got a working program.
There are many problems for which a decent description would require rich text, formulae, tables and diagrams. Please don't try to use ASCII art in a code comment for this. Use the proper tool for the job.
Feel free to add code comments that cross reference the proper document.
Oh look, I've just re-invented Literate Programming. Don't worry though, it'll never catch on.
In the current geopolitical climate, I think "shot down" is more likely to apply to an easily discoverable and easily hacked piece of infrastructure in a country you don't like.
So, while not disputing your many years of experience working with such systems, I'm left wondering whether this is still the case in 2026.
"nmap -sV -p 23 --script banner <my whole subnet>"
That would only pick up servers facing the LAN. That's quite different from running a telnet server that accepts connections from the WAN. (There are roughly a million times fewer people in a position to exploit it, for one thing.)
So much so that MS should just have added support for UNIX-style line breaks to the standard edit control and let Notepad inherit that.
But what they are more likely to do now is add Coprolite support to that control and revert to the original Notepad implementation. Sigh...
"And as soon as you expect an AI to think for itself, to step outside its training data, or to understand the over-arching theme of some data that's not explicitly referenced in its training... it fails to do so. Because it's simply not capable of doing anything that isn't a simple statistical return value from its training data."
This appears to be exactly the case. A friend of mine recently asked an AI for some links to research papers on several subjects. Where research actually existed, the AI was sort of able to summarise it and provide genuine links. In other words, it was able to regurgitate some of its training data. Where no such research exists, it was confidently making shit up and generating URLs to papers that don't exist. I assume all that was statistically similar to the training data, but since the actual research didn't exist, there was no training data to regurgitate, so it just made shit up.
There is absolutely no intelligence here. If you ask a question, it *will* give an answer. If you then ask for references, it *will* provide some. If the references check out then congratulations, you have just used a flaky search engine to find a previously known result. If the refs don't check out, it probably means the answer was made up and isn't true.
Is the flaky search engine a useful thing? Well maybe. Is it worth $600,000,000,000? Ummm, can I get back to you on that?
1) Um, no. The panels are the same efficiency (at least to start with) so they'll generate just as much waste heat as they would on Earth. What's different is the level of solar irradiation. Also, that irradiation is unfiltered by the atmosphere so I suspect the useful life of each panel will be significantly reduced.
2) I haven't read of any specific proposals for shedding the waste heat. Thermodynamics is a harsh mistress, but maybe Elon is exempt? (Or maybe he likes punishment?)
3) This is probably fair. If we are putting an entire data centre up there, we can probably get the surface area to volume ration down to a level where the lead shielding is proportionately low.
4) Call me skeptical, but except for satellites in exactly the same orbit, following each other around, the problem of pointing your transmitter at a 17,000mph target sounds quite challenging.
Exactly. This sounds like Amazon are just a little downstream of nVidia. They are spending squillions but as long as there is someone else downstream of them buying capacity, Amazon aren't (necessarily*) the mugs here.
(* Of course, these huge companies have divisions and it is possible, even likely, that one of the mugs is a different division of Amazon.)
I'm pretty sure that your village store has for centuries been using facial recognition tech to ban customers. All the cameras do is scale it up to supermarket scale.
Of course, having recognised someone you do have to kick out that person rather than the one following and you do have to be willing to back up your ban criteria in court if challenged. But that's true in the village store, too.
Sounds like an easy game to win. Look up the ownership at Companies House. If it's a single-use company, don't give them the contract. If they aren't even registered at CH, don't give them the contract. If it's Fujitsu, don't give them the contract.
(That third rule is just me engaging in defensive programming, btw.)