cmeacham98

Some ads (e.g. I know YT ads used to be this way, haven't looked recently) can't be blocked at the network level because they are served from the same domain/servers as the content.

While the EU and its member countries can't (or at least morally shouldn't) force people to make the product, if it was a priority they could incentivise it with funding, tax breaks, etc.

Yes actually, I know someone who did business with them many years ago (before the advent of LLMs), although for a smaller sum than the advertised top payouts (the vulnerability they had was much less important).

Why post these random unsubstantiated claims on HN?

The difference comes from the fact distro maintainers choose the software they package, while language maintainers largely don't.

For example, how do you prevent somebody from phishing/typosquatting users with a package named similarly to a popular one? For distro maintainers the answer is simple - don't package it. Debian is unlikely to add a "f1refox" package. Language maintainers don't have that luxury.

I think you also misunderstood, they are suggesting OP redirect to a telegram domain that isn't on the .me TLD, as the other .me is potentially at risk of also being taken down.

I don't have the time to audit all the code in a JavaScript runtime myself, so I am forced to make assumptions about the quality of the code based on my trust of the authors.

Additionally, even if the code is good today, I am trusting their process will produce good code tomorrow (as migrating to/from bun has a non-trivial cost). A single person approving the code of an LLM is not such a process with today's technology.

The problem is Google appears to label this as a security feature. I'm fine with the feature existing, but it should say something like "require Chrome" or "block Firefox" not "require a secure browser (wink wink we actually mean Chrome)"

The website labels it as a prompt, so probably a prompt

But you are Russian, right? I obviously have no idea to the extent GregKH has verified this, but a trivial scan of your online presence revealed to me you at minimum speak Russian and there's decent evidence you live/lived in Russia.

It actually astounds me this is getting any number of upvotes on HN at all - it's so obviously LLM written (or at minimum heavily edited) that it's written in markdown on a platform that doesn't appear to support markdown.

It literally hits almost every major identifier of AI writing. You could probably get similar output yourself with a prompt along the lines of "Write a blog post analyzing the GrapheneOS infrastructure based on public information such as GitHub repositories. Focus on contrasting the security of the phone OS with the unnecessary attack surface and similar decisions of the infrastructure repos."

Correct. Example snippet from the nytimes.com robots.txt:

    User-agent: archive.org_bot
    Disallow: /

> Linux adopted Win32 because it actually worked.

Completely untrue - Linux "adopted" Win32 because the majority of video games are written for Windows (and thus Win32).

They could not have invented a better API because the entire reason Proton exists is because developers don't build native Linux games.

So if social media removed personalization from their algorithms and only applied them broadly across large demographic groups you'd be fine with them? (Genuine question I'm curious)