throwaway7679

Finally, the racist and anti-africa map projection conspiracy of 1569 has come to an end. /s

Absurdly, that was the actual motivation behind the resolution. How embarrassing for all involved.

Choosing maps for political reasons is nothing new, of course. The UN's own emblem features a azimuthal equidistant projection, which is meant to present a balanced depiction of all the nations. It is strange to see them now pick one in order to promote a nakedly africa-centric message.

The evolution for Old School RuneScape was to just make cheating a built-in feature. It only takes a couple clicks every ten minutes to "play" the game.

Such licenses are not actually used. Their existence is anti-nuclear performance art.

They should stop pretending they aren't shills, and link directly to "nytimes.com/subscription".

I see electron in the repo but there is no mention of it on the main page. Providing desktop builds is essential, as Discord communities based around desktop activities may have little interest otherwise.

Fluxer is another discord clone that is AGPL, self-hostalbe, etc. How does that compare with Armada?

Maybe you could do a post on... remote attestation.

That is, the thing that people are actually talking about when they use that term: The means for companies and governments to usurp the ownership of consumer devices.

Sibling comments are right. Refusing to hurt people is a crime against money.

Grieving parents clamor for laws that will allow surveillance companies to surveil even harder, and for laws that force all people to be subject to their schemes.

Apparently companies can just kill kids to turn parents into their biggest advocates.

The incentives here should probably go in the other direction.

The ideal is the owner being able to use TPM/SecureBoot/etc to ensure that the device is in the configuration they want. That means resisting tampering, and making any successful tampering become obvious.

The problem is third parties using TPM/SecureBoot/etc as a weapon against the owner via remote attestation, by preventing them from configuring their own device, with the threat of being cut off from critical services.

Having the upside without the downside would be nice, but how could it work? Is a technical solution feasible, or would it need a law/regulation?

Let's not hand-wave field of view. Glasses cannot display anything outside the bounds of their frames, and therefore cannot have a field of view as large as a headset. No amount of miniaturization will overcome that limitation.

Contact lenses having the capability of a headset? That's just magical thinking.

There are several gaps in capability between headsets and glasses, which cannot be filled by any existing technology.

For example, consider field of view, which is a critical measurement of these displays. Typical specs are 120 degrees for headsets, 40 for glasses.

Headsets also perform very high performance rendering compared to glasses. The tiny <1Wh batteries in glasses are insufficient for that amount of work.

Glasses can't be expected to compete with headsets, much less eliminate them from the market entirely within a few years. It makes more sense to think of VR headsets and AR glasses as completely unrelated product categories.

To get AI to fix a specific issue, simply have a human fix it first.

If that doesn't sound very useful, well...