vollbrecht

Sorry i am a web noob, but does this work recursively? E.g can you have html-in-canvas in a html-in-canvas ? :D

Totally. Using Windows Vista Ultimate just for using Windows DreamScene ( e.g playing a video as a desktop background). Totally dumb, totally destroyed performance, totally cool :D

Isn't bun also written in rust, so can you clarify what your point is here?

step 1) create a Dockerfile with claude-code / pi.dev + acp_agents + whatever dev env you need. step 2) use microsandbox to create a fs image from that Dockerfile image. ( All secrets you need inside the vm live only on the host and are injected in the tcp stream on egress) step 3) microsandbox by default speak ssh without you needing to have a ssh server in the vm. You can proxy forward everything through it if you need. In my case i use zed and connect into the vm. Bonus points all zed "agent" stuff now runs inside the vm. E.g zed threads via acp calls and all agent stuff live only in the vm.

I don't think its a lag of attraction. If you interested in it, you quickly will realize how much of a behemoth that task really is.

First you have to limit yourself to a specific radio variant, because the actual radio hardware is different on different esp32 variants.

Then you have a massive amount of things this "blobs" actually contain.

And last there is also a lot of continues movement integrating newer radio features. E.g newer BLE version standard implementation and so forth. So you play catch with actual new development.

A standard where you have to pay to play. Cheapest option is 3000$ per product and 500$ annual.

The pressing question is, how much £ per £ lost need to be invested in grid infrastructure to reduce this number?

Nice gimmick that many elements inside that explainer image directly links you to the respective source code, its referring to.

You also now who misses the point? Qualcomm. Why? Well just read the headline qualcomm itself provides.

Thanks for trying to explain this to us.

You are insisting here on talking about the "handle" part, though isn't the crucial part of the complete chain weather we use either did:web or did:plc?

So as you outlined yourself in the article. If you a) use did:web b) ever loose access to that domain you are cooked. No amount of handle changes can help here. If one looses a handle domain one can loose a did:web domain also, so that just moved the problem to a more opaque place.

So your identity is always either a) attached to a domain you might loose b) to some plc provider that might stop work for you.

Please correct me if i get anything wrong here, as that is just how i understand it.

What would in practice happen in a two user scenario where user A replied to user B, and later user B's repository gets completely deleted.

We have this cache thing via wss connections. Do they invalidate this messages from user B? Is user's A worldview now completely dead?

Owning a thing in the internet is a complicated topic i guess.

Preserving past information via copying what a user said so that it does not get lost maybe also in the interest of some users (equivalent to the webarchive). I understand that this contradict the whole "owning your data" premise, but fundamentally since it was open in the first place the thing always can be copied right?

Whatever content is produced in this "open social" network, some of it may have long lasting "value" to an individual. Is there anything to make sure that what they interacted with can not completely broken by the other site of the party?

Ah that make sense. Thanks for clarifying.

Hmm i just tested out the claim that the following rust code would be rejected ( Example 4 in the paper).

And it seams to not be the case on the stable compiler version?

  fn write(x: &mut i32) {*x = 10}
  
  fn main() {
      let x = &mut 0;
      let y = x as *mut i32;
      //write(x); // this should use the mention implicit twophase borrow
      *x = 10; // this should not and therefore be rejected by the compiler
      unsafe {*y = 15 };
  }

You are probably right that this is not the case right now. 25 years ago you could say the same about google employees. Incentives change with time, and once infrastructure is in place it's nearly impossible to get rid of it again.

So one better makes sure that it has not the potential to further introduce gatekeepers, where later such gatekeepers will realize that, in order to continue to live, they need to make a profit over everything else, and then everything is out of the window.