It’ll be just like 2020: react after the damage is done and pretend they weren’t complicit.

“Incomplete paper and online applications will not be accepted,” Evans said in the statement. (Parker’s [demonstration] cancellation request would have lacked a driver’s license number.) The Secretary of State’s Office did not respond to individual questions about what testing the portal underwent before launch, the system’s security procedures, what happened to Parker’s cancellation request…

Yeah, that tells us we just don’t know if this was a problem after all. Evans’s statement basically claims it wasn’t a vulnerability. If that’s correct, then the worst thing might be if someone’s browser tripped on the validation JS and allowed them down a blind alley execution path. If the claim is correct and if the page’s JS never shits the bed, then in that case the only negative outcome would be someone dicking with the in-browser source could lead themselves down the blind alley, in which case who cares. The only terrible outcome seems like it would be if the claim is incorrect–i.e. if an incomplete application submission would be processed, thus allowing exploit.

Short of an internal audit, there’s no smoking gun here.

Source code escrow is a thing, too. I’ve only seen it in the context of (as I understood it) protection against going out of business, but perhaps it could apply to discontinued products, as well?

the product

If it’s free, we’re the product.

I think you’re going to lose a few people with that first number being off by a decimal place, but the substance of what you said is still relevant and gives insight about the Lemmy experience right now.

Am I understanding this correctly? NOLA was arguing that, since they tax satellite radio for listeners in their city, they should be able to tax internet streams for the same listeners? If so, I feel like the two things should be comparably applicable (if it weren’t for the ITFA), but also fuck all the way off, NOLA government. Get fucked, seriously.

What would give them standing? They’d have to be an entity protected by the constitution to claim that protection was harmed. Is it this (Wikipedia)?

TikTok Ltd was incorporated in the Cayman Islands and is based in both Singapore and Los Angeles. source

I guess I’ve never thought about what makes an entity have rights here. Buckingham Palace couldn’t just open shop here and start suing our government, right?

haaaands

I want:

• Zoom’s…
  • …annotation
  • …richer reactions
• Teams’s…
  • sensible screen layout
  • richer chat content
  • chat continuity before/during/after meetings
  • very granularly customizable avatars
• Some other tool’s composition interface for chat text

Yeah, I remember learning about it in a CS class and, specifically, the claim that it’s an ideal standard candle kind of image. I always wondered if we couldn’t have found a better reference shot of a smooth flower growing in front of a rough stone or something.

And the thing about regulation like this is that it just resets the bar height for everyone. It’s not like this doesn’t apply to all competitors.

Unless we mean non-cable competition, i.e. streaming. Maybe that’s not under the jurisdiction of FCC? If not, though, then I have to wonder why this has to be an FCC thing in the first place. This is about truth in advertising, in general.

I’ve felt like Tidal has behaved exactly like Spotify in my use so far (which has only been a couple of months). I was doing side-by-side comparison of playing, adding to the queue, inserting next in queue, etc., and it all seemed to behave exactly the same.

edit: Oh, yeah, I only compared Windows, Mac, and Android.

Macs are basically BSD, and Windows has WSL.

Sounds like the foundation of the kind of thrilling story you can’t just makeup.

Ah, I see. I was focused on the 80% limiter for that “Maximum” setting, which I think is not an option on Pixel. But I see now that “Adaptive Charging” sounds like it does what that middle setting “Adaptive” does.

You have an older Pixel or just rooted, maybe? My 7 on the latest vanilla Android doesn’t seem to have it, and this thread seems to say it’s not available in the stock os.

That’s what I thought of, at first. Interestingly, the judge went with the angle of the chatbot being part of their web site, and they’re responsible for that info. When they tried to argue that the bot mentioned a link to a page with contradicting info, the judge said users can’t be expected to check one part of the site against another part to determine which part is more accurate. Still works in favor of the common person, just a different approach than how I thought about it.

Sounds like yt-dlp supports BBC iPlayer downloads.

Good point in general, but, what they’re specifically talking about here (rolling codes), perhaps what they should have said is that no one can (feasibly) do it, not just that their hardware isn’t capable.

Edit: Oh, for the blocking signal, that part might be functionality that could be added, I see what I think you’re saying there. Still, that would be a step towards it, but it would still require serious hardware to crack a private key, as I understand.