Does it actually tell you the results? I’m curious how they score your driving, and how effective it is. The scariest things I see on the road are things like:

• distracted driving
• tailgating
• lack of awareness

I don’t see how they’d measure how safe a driver you are.

Perhaps it’s just that people are more careful when they know they’re being monitored, and safe drivers are more likely to opt in?

Oh yeah, that was pretty much the point I was trying to make too.

There’s actually not that much autotools jank, really. There’s configure.ac and a few Makefile.am. The CMakeLists.txt in the root is bigger than any of those files.

There’s also some stuff from autotools archive in m4/. IMO that’s a bad practice and we should instead be referencing them as a build dependencies.

I’m not convinced this backdoor would have been significantly more difficult to hide in the cmake code.

Emacs I assume.

cmake compiles to makefiles as well (it just also supports some other backends). I’m not sure why that matters though. In both cases the makefile is generated.

I feel like AGI might be the furthest away of all those things.

According to the Journal, plaintiff attorneys usually get one-third of a verdict or settlement amount.

This isn’t a an amount awarded in a verdict though, is it?

Plaintiff’s Counsel have not been paid for their work, nor have any of their costs or expenses been reimbursed, and litigating this Action required the allocation of a substantial amount of Plaintiff’s Counsel’s time and resources over six years, including considerable out-of-pocket expenses,

So that’s roughly 100 lawyers working full time for 6 years at $5k per hour. Seems legit.

In any case this is hilarious and exactly the kind of thing Elon would try.

Just regular Gilead shit.

This is some late 90s web forum admin tyrant drama. Wait until he finds out he can use phpmyadmin to edit other peoples posts.

That would be awesome, but who’s going to push for it?

It’s easy for the opponents to use safety as a case for why users shouldn’t have control of the software in their car.

The manufacturers already want to get rid of ODB because they’d rather control that data themselves.

At least android auto has been reverse engineered, and doesn’t currently require any sort of difficult-to-bypass hardware attestation.

I’m more experienced with graphics than ML, but wouldn’t that cause a significant increase in computation time, since those aren’t native types for arithmetic? Maybe that’s not a big problem?

If you have a link for the paper I’d like to check it out.

You could probably do it with bubblewrap or something equivalent. Here’s someone asking about this exact thing:

https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/651788/redirect-single-file-or-directory-using-bubblewrap

And when they figure out how to serve ads on IMAP, you can take thunderbird to another provider.

I don’t think it’ll actually come to that, due to popularity, but I can see them blocking IMAP access on new accounts due to ‘security’.

They’re talking about Spirit AeroSystems, which I believe is an unrelated company that just coincidentally also happens to be terrible at what they do.

My non-expert take on this:

Haier claims these plugins cause the firm significant financial damage

Don’t care. Competition is not damage.

violate copyright laws

Prove it.

plug-ins developed by you […] that are in violation of our terms of service

The plug-ins never agreed to your ToS. Better sue your customers instead.

I’m very curious about the vulnerability, but there doesn’t seem to be much info (only what MS posted).

How could you possibly bypass bitlocker, unless they write the key to the recovery environment?

I wonder how this will work where apple controls the OS and sort of controls the Dev tools.

The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking proportionate measures to ensure that third party software applications or software application stores do not endanger the integrity of the hardware or operating system provided by the gatekeeper;

To me that sounds like they won’t have to offer root access to users, which is no suprise, but will they be able to continue to require certification of apps, even if they’re sold on other stores?

I’ve only just skimmed the legislation so far.

(3) is by far the most important, but I can’t see how it will get attention from legislators or regulators.

Also, even if it happens, how could we ensure that service providers (say a bank) don’t start enforcing hardware based attestation?

We’d either need non-attested devices to be common enough for them not to bother blocking them (we are here now), or explicitly protect the right to software freedom. Maybe as part of a more general right-to-repair?

Congratulations. If you weren’t a Haskell programmer before, you are now.

I’m kind of feeling like my xmonad days are numbered unfortunately, as Wayland makes progress.

I feel like there will be a backlash to this. As a recipient, what do I get out of reading your routine confirmation email that I wouldn’t get out of reading whatever (presumably more concise) prompt you used to generate it?

Maybe people will find better ways to use these systems, but so far most of what I’ve seen is text that is bloated without any useful information being added. I think we’ll get to a point pretty quickly where that is considered less polite and less professional.