Not in those words, but the decision did give absolute immunity from criminal prosecution and civil damage suits for all core official acts and presumptive immunity for all acts "performed within the outer perimiter of his official responsibility". It also severely restricted the ability to gather evidence for acts that do not fall within this scope.
This is extremely broad, and not unreasonable to summarize as the president being able to do whatever they want without fear of criminal/civil consequences.
Suggesting that everyone should read the 120 page, highly technical decision and come to their own conclusions is not helpful.
Which OneDrive? The one in my browser, the one on my desktop, or the wackadoodle half-Sharepoint mongrel I use at work? All of which have decidedly different UIs for the same incredibly simple task, I might add.
Microsoft has been going hard in the direction of making OneDrive intrinsic to Windows, so what even is the "OneDrive experience" in contrast to the Windows 11 experience? Who writes this nonsense?
Are we going the other direction now, divorcing Windows 11 from OneDrive, thereby giving OneDrive a distinct "experience" again? Why wasn't this change in direction announced?
I swear it's like Microsoft is just 30,000 chatbots all bickering with each other in the most sanitized, gramatically faultless English imaginible.
Well there didn't used to be very many degreed Software Engineers before Microsoft itself started needing more than ever, and they weren't the only company, just one of the fastest growing early ones.
Anybody see any correlation to what can now often be considered ghastly legacy code precisely where there should have been some actual engineering when there was none? Because there were not enough engineers to begin with, so the "drastically" urgent business needs were met in other sometimes mysterious ways?
Now there's a shortage of degreed Experience Incubators and there's a long way to go before there are even enough degree programs, much less freshly credentialed graduates.
Welcome to a whole 'nother era of deficiency until professional Incubatists can finally become numerous enough to complete the trend, apparently as intended to replace engineering as the future of tech :\
Some people have such an amazing vision, it's stupefying :)
I'm guessing this doesn't capture manual restarts? I have the same experience as the commenter below: Plasma requires a restart a few times per day for me, as the panels disappear and one monitor's (of two) desktop goes black - usually after wake from sleep. This occurs on both machines that I run it on (only common component is Radeon graphics).
That said, it's a single command and not a big deal, and it's a great DE, so thanks for your work.
>Dirty' Industries: Just between you and me, shouldn't the World Bank be encouraging MORE migration of the dirty industries to the LDCs [Least Developed Countries]? I can think of three reasons...
...I think the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable and we should face up to that...
...I've always thought that under-populated countries in Africa are vastly UNDER-polluted
>Try it today in the Gemini app. Available globally on desktop and mobile
Not quite. Gemini isn't available in Hong Kong. Unfortunately instead of telling Pixel users that, they updated their phones to use Gemini instead of the functional assistant, and then whenever the assistant is accessed, it just spins forever with a "just a moment" prompt.
It's not even clear why it's disabled, since it works just fine if you pay them for workspace subscription.
The government currently tendering for providers of different systems. See here [1] and here [2]:
Tender documents released on Monday show the technical trial is slated to begin “on or around 28 October”, with the provider also expected to assess the “effectiveness, maturity, and readiness” of technologies in Australia.
Biometric age estimation, email verification processes, account confirmation processes, device or operating-level interventions are among the technologies that will be assessed for social media (13-16 years age band).
In the context of age-restricted online content (18 years or over), the Communication department has asked that double-blind tokenised attribution exchange models, as per the age verification roadmap, and hard identifiers such as credit cards be considered.
They note that existing age verification setups largely either rely on providing ID, or on a combination of manual and automated behavior profiling (face recognition, text classification, reports from other users), both of which have obvious privacy and/or accuracy issues. The "double-blind tokens" point to a summary by LINC explaining how they _could_ be implemented with zero-knowledge proofs, but I could not find an article or a practical implementation (could just be a mistake on my part, admittedly)
At _best_ you end up with a solution in the vein of Privacy Pass - https://petsymposium.org/popets/2018/popets-2018-0026.pdf - but that requires a browser extension, a functioning digital ID solution you can build on top of, and buy-in from the websites. Personally, I also suspect the strongest sign a company is going to screw up the cryptographic side of it is if they agree to implement it...
The operative part being "that you can build on top of", because the "ID token" approach means it now has to act as essentially a mini-OAuth-provider for many other websites, not just government services
Yes. But I don’t think this type of regulation should care about whether it’s technically possible to do today. You could make a New York proposal type ban e.g banning algorithmic feeds to minors, even if it’s difficult to tell who is a minor and who isn’t. Social media companies would solve the ID problem or simply stop using those algorithms outright.
It's a bit wild that instead of parents just being responsible and teaching their children properly, we'll resort to neutering privacy and freedom on the Internet.
Less than low energy antitachycardia pacing (LEAP), which is itself a lower-energy alternative to the typical 1-shock defibrillation. Their "1000 times less" means three orders of magnitude. From the abstract of the paper:
We find that, rather counter-intuitively, a single, properly timed, biphasic pulse can be more effective in defibrillating the tissue than low energy antitachycardia pacing (LEAP), which employs a sequence of such pulses, succeeding where the latter approach fails. Furthermore, we show that, with the help of adjoint optimization, it is possible to reduce the energy required for defibrillation even further, making it three orders of magnitude lower than that required by LEAP
Important to note that the study uses:
"an electrophysiological computer model of the heart's electrical circuits "
and
"a simple two-dimensional model of cardiac tissue"
It depends, but it's not uncommon to completely forget the entire character. If you sort of remember it, then the muscle memory in your hands often helps to finish the character correctly once you start, at least that's what I've found and heard from others.
https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/943...
USD millions. Legal is non-employee costs.reply