tener

It is hardly better though. Aside from MCP support (with rather poor UX, just compare it with anything else out there) it really has nothing to offer.

Sure, but I meant airtight as a point on a spectrum rather than absolute thing. Meaning: you should prefer laws which are both generic and unambiguous.

So we end up in a system in which those with money to litigate will do what they want? I'd rather have airtight laws instead.

I appreciate the work you've put into this, but if someone gets into this they are likely to be looking for a next puzzle immediately. They are unlikely to become a recurring visitor; not with just a single puzzle a day. 5 or 10 might work better.

Lol and I wondered why it came back light after reload. It was really fun after you got past the UX hurdles! Pity there aren't more online.

> And you tend to remember that.

Haha, nope. Different brains work differently. One day I genuinely prefer one, a week later another.

That feels overly broad. Where is the boundary? Is it a network if you receive a USB drive after making a phone call to order something? Send a physical letter via pigeon?

Ah, thank you, this is interesting. So in a way the original IP is kind of poison which forever taints their source code, diminishing what they can do with it.

What is stopping AMD from distributing a closed source binary blob along with selling the access to proprietary source code for $1?

Browsers tag downloaded files using filesystem features.

In general case I think it might be hard to sue a company for any fixed amount of money due: it is hard to measure this, and companies are likely to low-ball the figure anyway.

Yet Meta has given a convenient, fixed number here, so perhaps such a lawsuit has a chance to succeed.

So... Meta has been fined for illegally using customer data, which they value at hundreds of euro per year. Can the customers sue for back payment?

I wish we had a LLM to BBC-ify the otherwise sensationalized reporting elsewhere. There would definitely be a market for this kind of service. For the reverse one as well, unfortunately.

I think of branches as variables pointing at immutable points in the commit tree. Git commit creates a new node in the tree and updates the pointer. You can manually move pointer around if needed.