In a previous case some years ago, a French activist’s IP address was provided by Proton on court order. Proton does store IP address and does provide it when legally demanded to.
They were legally compelled to add IP logging for that specific user. After this incidence, they went on to obtain a court ruling in Switzerland, where they operate, so that this specific attack cannot happen again. In their blog post about it [1], they instruct concerned users to access their account over Tor.
Of course when Proton say they don't log, we just have to take their word for it. People who don't want that element of trust can use Tor. Personally I believe their story in this case.
It works sometimes. Usually, it requires phone number or email verification. This is important for protonmail to maintain a revenue stream as they don't allow multiple free accounts for the same person.
Note that even in those cases when additional verification is requested, the email addresses are not tied to your account - we only save a cryptographic hash of your email. Due to the hash functions being one-way, we cannot derive it back from the hash: https://proton.me/support/human-verification
Isn't that only a problem if you are only invested in the US? There exists ETFs that are invested in multiple developed countries, such as index funds that track the MSCI World.
The first page of their documentation [0] mentions this:
> Opening a database
> In your Deno program, you can get a reference to a KV database using Deno.openKv(). You may pass in an optional file system path to where you'd like to store your database, otherwise one will be created for you based on the current working directory of your script.
In fact, only the last page in the documentation speaks about KV on Deno Deploy.
Passing a path to the local filesystem for the SQLite database only applies to local development; it does not speak to how to connect to e.g. a remote-hosted FoundationDB cluster.
But, I think this section hints at how it could be done [1]. Its phrased in the context of connecting to the DenoKV-hosted database from outside Deno Deploy, but it seems like the reverse could also be accomplished with the same API.
These are people specifically coming to the Northern Territory to legally drive at high speeds on unlimited road sections ... therefore directly relevant to the assertion that unlimited speed sections don't see additional road deaths.
A more thoughtful evaluation would need to consider the unique isolation of the NT roads, the nature of actual traffic (road trains, first time tourist drivers, etc) , the nature of the road (long slow deceptive curves, dips, washouts, etc), relatively low traffic (and then suddenly a cluster).
As I recall the NT was unlimited for "ever" (well, since cars first arrived in NT) outside of towns (as a Territory and not a state), then limited, then conditionally unlimited (and now perhaps limited again).
One consequence of having unlimited roads was an increase in people driving beyond their abilities on roads they were unfamilar with (eg: Japanese dentists with no long open road experience driving super cars).
If that area is unlimited „outside of towns“, it’s rather different from unlimited-in-proper-highways.
Unlimited on a regular road is stupid. Unlimited in an isolated highway with no crossings or same level intersections is nice.
Driving culture is important too. Somehow I wasn’t tailgated on German highways and supercars were happily waiting for me to get out of the way. Meanwhile back at home with 130km/h limit it’s common to do +10 and get tailgated with flashing left turn signal by those who want to do +20. But maybe they’d wait too if they knew they could speed more in an empty section down the road?
> Unlimited in an isolated highway with no crossings or same level intersections is nice.
In reality, in Australia, in NT and Pilbarra it causes needless death.
I grew up in these areas and I have no personal issue with others of similar background driving at whatever speed they feel comfortable - I've drafted a light aircraft at 70 m/s ( 252 km/hr ) at a 3m ground clearance along such highways for extended periods of time (geophysical survey | fun) .. but they are dangerous in ways that newcomers don't account for.
These are mostly single lane either direction highways .. if you over take a loooong three trailer road train (common on nor'west and NT highways) you might be surprised by an oncoming car that was initially invisible in a road dip ahead .. and at very high speeds next to a very long truck there are very few options.
I can add further examples of the many ways people screw up on country roads but see no real need to labour that point.
Suffice to say I agree that unlimited on open roads is nice .. but it's not always safe when you factor in other drivers, mixed traffic types, and most importantly mixed experience levels, tired drivers on 12+ hour hauls, etc.
I've worked St Johns volunteer ambulance in remote areas and I'm all for fewer deaths that could have been avoided by lower speeds and better driving practices (taking breaks, not drinking on road, taking bennies, using mobiles, etc).
> These are mostly single lane either direction highways ..
It does not sound lik a highway.
Around here, highways are opposite lanes separated (and usually multiple, with very very few exceptions), banned slow traffic, no single-level intersections, usually fenced off wildlife.
Like it or not it's a highway, an Australian highway - two lanes, one in each direction, unseperated, with soft shoulders that can wash out.
Some fences now and again, mostly unfenced, kangaroos abound, emus run across, cattle will wander (although they are usually with fenced areas (albeit ones that can fall)).
Wherever "around here" might be, unless it's the Siberian expanse or very few other places, it's unlike most of Australia (outside of the handful of Capital city metro+suburban areas) which is vast, empty, and unpopulated.
Western Australia is larger than 3x the size of Texas with a population of not much over two million of which nearly all live around the main city with most of the rest in the south west corner.
Out in the rest of the state and across into the NT the pop numbers are low and the distance between towns are high.
This information might cause you to rethink the unlimited speed proposal.
On the up side police presence is generally low to non existant, on the down side police and ambulance support can be hours away in the event of accidents .. or rogue outback murderers flagging down tourists.
Then Australian highway is an entirely different thing than highways in europe and our discussion is meaningless.
I stand corrected that German highways with unlimited speed are better driving experience than eastern european counterparts with a limit. Highways in european sense.
Well, your side may have been meaningless but I've had a clear and solid understanding of both the German Autobahn and an Australian highway from the outset .. I'm glad you've caught up.
To reiterate, the highways in the NT of Australia were completely unregulated for many years as an area with no state government and no federal road laws until relatively recently.
People frequently drove at high speeds legally for many years and staged legal high speed long distance races on its roads.
In recent decades roads there have been regulated with sections at times being unlimited.
The primary issue with unlimited zones, IMHO, is people driving beyond their ability - in the sense of beyond their ability to react, to see ahead, to understand the nature of the road (ie. dips, curves, what it takes to actively straddle a hard road and soft shoulder and maintain control), beyond what the mechanics of their car might be capable of.
Yes, but Germany compensates with good traffic rules and good driver education (one of the harder to get driving licenses around the world, with 18 hours of mandatory theoretical classes, practical classes, and theoretical and practical tests that cost you around €2000 overall). Going by [1] Germany has the 15th lowest per-capita traffic-related death rate, less than one third that of the USA.
When you’re trying to run a quick script or just want a “playground” environment where you can test your code, it holds you back.
For example: I’m making a web app with Svelte in TypeScript and I’m trying to test a part of its code. To do that, I have to build the app first because TypeScript needs transpiling which in turn needs bundling etc…
They chose for a decentralised package management system whereas Node has a centralised one. A tradeoff as you mentioned is that you can't just take down malicious packages. I'm personally not too concerned with this because of the following:
1. The default permissions while running a script are stricter than Node's, you get told when your code tries to access your file system or network
2. Code I write for Deno typically uses fewer dependencies than the equivalent code for Node, simply because of how Deno has a good standard library with many web APIs
> the Deno teams stance on security is not so funny
To me, it sounds more like they have lived a European life, not a sheltered life. Outside of the UK, there aren’t any European countries I know of that use e.g. credit cards on a daily basis. We are taught to avoid taking on debt and are financially risk-averse.
Isn't that how most people use their credit cards everywhere, or at least everywhere in the developed world? I thought the 20%+ interest was just a way to take advantage of you if you mess up and rack up too big a bill, or forget to pay your bill.
Anecdata, but I know multiple people that I associate with do caray a balance on their cards and by paying minimums. I don’t understand it, but then again I’m fortunate enough to have a software job that allows me to keep up with my social lifestyle without incurring debt.
