I think your understanding is that the Act must be the content. But the Act isn't the content, the Criminal Code, Civil Code etc are the content. The Act itself is more like a patch file, with some surrounding metadata (and its own meta version history as proposed legislation gets marked up throughout the process). It could add a new file, but it could also be an edit. But in neither case is it the effective content, it's a description of changes to said content. (The line does get blurred on the initial commit though, because typically the name of the resulting law is the name of the Act that established it).
So you've called out precisely why version control systems present such a useful analog.
When you have a President that fires, deports, sues, and calls for the impeachment of anyone who challenges him, why on Earth (pun intended) would you take the word of someone whose life is in his hands at face value?
Get on the ground, then tell the truth. The moment Trump politicized those astronauts they became political hostages.
> They liked the "Artemis Program" created by the Trump administration well enough that they simply kept it.
This cannot be overstated. Prior to Biden there was a long history of new administrations of both parties coming in and wanting to make their mark on NASA. Everyone wanted to be what JFK was to the moon race, which meant that whatever the previous guy came up with obviously had to be canned and replaced, so that the new thing would be their thing. NASA was jerked around for decades. You can't do 15 year projects if they're always cancelled after 8 years.
Biden coming in and simply continuing Trump's plan broke the trend. And yet Trump still needed to find a bone to pick to advance his cult of personality.
Sometimes I wonder if he's a secret genius that leverages his own stupidity.
E.g. he might be solely responsible for getting the Liberals reelected in Canada, something that a year ago you would have thought was absolutely impossible. But Trump is so deeply hated in Canada now that every time he mocks Trudeau it makes the Liberals more popular. Liberal support, which before Trump was elected was so low as to make a Conservative election win seem inevitable, has skyrocketed since Trump took office. It's now pretty much a dead heat, and that's before the Liberals have elected their new leader.
So I don't know, maybe he just really, really wanted the Liberals to get reelected and he pulled off the only way to make it happen. Maybe he felt sorry that Canadians seemed so internally divided, so he threatened to annex Canada to unite us.
Or maybe he's a moron that can't even understand cause and effect.
I heard that a lot about pretty much every country politics that "there's something more going on, some conspiracy". But again and again I see that there's nothing hidden, it's all pretty simple and dumb. We just want to overcomplicate things to feel smarter.
Trump reminds me of someone trying to finish the last side of a rubiks cube by undoing every other side in that pursuit by not paying attention to them.
I think he'll continue to be the main cause of constraints to realizing his visions maximally.
For this reason, once we can look back on this time in retrospect, there's a way this plays out where he may just be a horse that ran away. [0]
Quotes appropriate, because I don't believe this is about safety, usability, or even aesthetics. It's about reducing the number of parts on the vehicle, i.e. lowering cost. It's car manufacturers deliberately making driving less safe to save a few bucks.
No quotes, just my observation - that the buttons are more optimized for the good look (symmetrical, sleek) vs usable. Building a plastic molding form with some shape/tactile difference shouldn't be significantly more expensive.
Re Touch screen, I agree - that's pure cost cutting. But that's just crazy. I'm surprised regulators are not preventing it.
Thank you. I think lots of people assume touch controls are for design, or to be cool, or maybe just "modern". It's just cheaper, though. That's why you see them on all generic Chinese made electronics (even stuff that could have no electronic component at all, like a fan).
There are a couple easy possibilities depending on server config.
1. Not using SNI, and all https requests just respond with the same cert. (Example, go to https://209.216.230.207/ and you'll get a certificate error. Go to the cert details and you'll see the common name is news.ycombinator.com).
It's rather hilarious that nobody mentioned this in 7 hours. What am I missing?
~5 billion scans in a few hours is nothing for a company with decent resources. OP: in case you didn't follow, they're literally trying every possible IPv4 address and seeing if something exists on standard ports at that address.
I believe it would be harder to find out your domain that way if you were using SNI and only forwarded/served requests that used the correct host. But if you aren't using SNI, your server is probably just responding to any TLS connect request with your subdomain's cert, which will reveal your hostname.
I was referring more to the fact that the user agent explicitly contained the answer, rather than suggestions that it was IP scanning. But you're right I do see one comment that mentions that. And many more likely assumed the OP already figured that part out.
The user agent contains a partial answer. IP scanning doesn't give you the actual subdomain, so the question is slightly wrong or there are missing pieces.
Judging by the logs (user agents really) right now in the submission, it's hard to tell if the requests were actually for the domain (since the request headers aren't included) or just for the IP.
It's very common for people to read only up to the point they feel they can comment, then skip immediately to the comment. So, basically, noone read it.
Just the default hostname. It won't reveal all of them or any of the IP addresses of that box. secret-freedom-fighter.ice-cream-shop.example.com could have the same IP as example.com and you'd only know example.com
If you've got one cert with a subject alt name for each host, they'd see them all. If you use SNI and they have different certificates, the domains might still be in Certificate Transparency logs. If a wildcard cert is used, that could help to conceal the exact subdomain.
Is there any kind of alternative to uMatrix in the ManifestV3 world? I'm assuming no. It's just a shame that my browsing experience went to complete trash overnight. I'll obviously be moving away from Chrome where I can, but not sure what to do with my Chromebook.
You can replace the ChromeOS bootloader with upstream Coreboot and use SeaBIOS or edk2 payloads to turn it into a generic x86 laptop and install Linux.
uMatrix[0] (discontinued/archived in 2021)[1] and uBlock Origin (UBO)[2] are both by Raymond Hill/@gorhill.. he said he can only afford the time to continue with one and chose the latter. I'm guessing GP meant UBO. (UBOlite is also by @gorhill, but it's constrained by the browser)
No I meant uMatrix. It might not have been updated since 2021 but it didn't need any active development, it was perfect in my eyes. It was still available as an extension.
> Every American service -- Netflix, Disney, Prime, Apple services -- need to have enormous tariffs applied. We can handle without them, and every enabler of this insanity needs to suffer.
No need to wait for tariffs. I started cancelling all American services today. Netflix and Prime were first. I will not send money to a country that has declared an unwarranted trade war on my country.
And it truly is unwarranted. The current trade agreements were negotiated by Trump in his last term, and are well balanced. The only reason for any current surplus is that oil prices are currently high. In general, Canadian raw resources go to the U.S. to be manufactured by skilled labour into end goods that are then imported back into Canada at a large markup. Trump has cited fentanyl and immigration as sticking points while providing no specific demands or suggestions. Less than 1% of illegal immigration to the U.S. comes via the Canadian border. It's incredibly frustrating to be utterly betrayed by a friend in this way.
Please get your government to work with Mexico and China to put tariffs on specific red states. You can absolutely devastate the economy of a few states, especially poorer red states and other states Senators would then think twice before voting in favor of things that could turn those tariffs to their state.
Given that all this (and there's a whole lotta other extra this) is coming straight out of the White House without any legislative votes, the future vote that is going to matter involves impeachment and removal from office.
That should guide how other countries' decide to structure their retaliation.
Impeachment is unlikely because the GOP has to kowtow to Trump to survive him and his base. The path is to beat down red states and their electorates with tariffs. The direct economic harm is the only lever to pull, and therefore a coalition of nation states is needed to specifically target red states collectively.
> What do you think would be the actual result of such actions in the real world?
In regards to the potential impact of retaliatory tariffs, I’d expect to see layoffs and business closures in red states, where voters are already economically disadvantaged; auto industry, agriculture (potash), etc. Increased grocery and basic food pricing. Farmer suicides are already 3.5x the general population, I’d expect to see the suicide and deaths of despair rate tick up from this economic impairment. These states already primarily rely on the federal government for financial assistance, financial assistance the new admin has said needs to be cut.
Canada specifically stated they are targeting red states. That’s not copium, it’s just smart policy. That’s where the voters are who voted for this. So, you impair jobs and economic opportunity in those states with tariffs and other cross border policy.
> The U.S. auto industry could shut down within a week, by some estimates, thanks to these tariffs. Even if it doesn't, there is no automaker that's set up to operate in a world of high-friction North American border duties.
…
> “Farm Bureau members support the goals of security and ensuring fair trade with our North American neighbors and China, but, unfortunately, we know from experience that farmers and rural communities will bear the brunt of retaliation. Harmful effects of retaliation to farmers ripple through the rest of the rural economy.
> “In addition, over 80% of the United States’ supply of a key fertilizer ingredient — potash — comes from Canada. Tariffs that increase fertilizer prices threaten to deliver another blow to the finances of farm families already grappling with inflation and high supply costs.
> “Farm and ranch families answer the call to feed America’s families and the world, and these tariffs and the promised retaliation will put further stress on their livelihoods. More than 20% of U.S. farm income comes from exports, which are dominated by these three markets. Just last year the U.S. exported over $30 billion in agricultural products to Mexico, $29 billion to Canada and $26 billion to China – our top three markets and nearly half of all exports by value combined.
> The current trade agreements were negotiated by Trump in his last term, and are well balanced.
I'd contend that they were already unbalanced in favour of the US. Canada gets some supply management, while the US gets to maintain softwood lumber tariffs and greatly extends copyright protection.
So you've called out precisely why version control systems present such a useful analog.