Thanks!

The code in question wasn't ever under MPL, it was added by Hashicorp after the license change. Which doesn't matter much, if you compare that code to OpenTofu's code the structural and cosmetic differences are obvious. Note that the articles only link to the code and don't actually show it side-by-side, probably in the hope that people will take the claims at face value and not investigate whether they're correct or not.

I compared the two sets of code mentioned. IMO the OpenTofu code is not copied from the Hashicorp code. There are structural differences that point to the OpenTofu code being independently written, along with the obvious differences in variable names and such. The claims seem to me to be a case of someone trying to smear a successful fork to keep it from gaining traction.

Then my questions stands: why do teams of scientists chase lunar eclipses around the world at great expense? What's the added value of a real eclipse.

Not really, because I didn't in fact read the article :) My question about the value of eclipses for solar observation is tangentially related to the satellite thing, which doesn't really interest me at all.

I understand that, by sheer coincidence, the moon has the right size and is currently at the right distance to mask the just enough of the sun and let only photons from the sun's upper atmosphere and corona through, making their observation easier.

But why is the moon needed? Why are even clever sun-blocking satellites needed? Do sun-blocking things need to be placed far away to observe the corona? Couldn't a beer coaster placed a few feet away from the telescope serve the same purpose?

I'm oversimplifying of course, but you get the idea.

The only reason I can think of is that the farther the sun-blocking object, the less fuzzy its boundary is when the observed through a telescope focused at infinity, making the moon truly useful when observing the thin boundary layer between the sun and the corona. Other than that, I don't see why a beer coaster - or perhaps a larger round object placed a bit farther out - wouldn't do the job.

Perhaps a reader who is better versed in solar observations can shed some light (pun not intended :)

(I'm going to start posting this now every time I see anything about facial recognition software, because people need to understand how dangerous this software is to implement and trust on a large scale.)

Let's pretend for a moment that facial recognition software is 99.9% accurate. It's not, but for sake of argument, let's go with it.

Now, pretend you walk into a store, the software flags you as a criminal who shoplifted from the store earlier, and you get arrested. If that store received 5,000 visitors that day, what are the odds you were a false positive, i.e. you were flagged as a criminal but weren't actually the one who committed the crime?

Answer: 80%.

Why? The average Joe wrongly assumes a 99.9% accuracy rate means 99.9% of the time it will identify a criminal correctly. But it does not mean this. What it means is that the system will correctly identify -anybody- 99.9% of the time; flagging a face as "not the criminal" counts to this accuracy score as equally as "is the criminal". So, out of 5,000 people, 0.1%, or five people, will be identified by the system as the criminal. This means that, if you are flagged as the criminal, and you are one out of 5,000 visitors, then there's a 4/5 chance, or 80%, that you are not the criminal.

But here's the kicker: Facial recognition software is being used to convict people. This is the real crime. This technology is an emperor wearing no clothes, but everyone from prosecutors to juries, pretends that it is authoritative. This technology is not 99.9% accurate; at best, it's about 99% accurate, as long as the individual is Caucasian and male. At worst, it's about 65% accurate. We would endanger the stability of society to take something this inaccurate and use it to convict people of crimes.

It's not because it's inconvenient that it doesn't exist. If you want to reuse a photograph you found somewhere for example, you're supposed to research who owns the rights to it and figure out if and how you can use it.

The problem AI companies have is, they hoover up billions of copyrighted works to train their AIs, but of course they don't have the time or resources to do due diligence on each and every one of those works.

So with typical big tech hubris, instead of taking the time to figure out this particular conundrum legally and cleanly, the tech bros just said "fuck this" and pushed ahead with their massively copyright-infringing products, arguing that you can't stop progress, this outdated copyright stuff is in the way and their bright future can't wait - and nevermind all the people whose work they essentially stole without compensation.

More like thirty or forty huge corporation submitting their list and waiting forever for approval, legally unable to release their AI products.

To each his own. Personally I don't really like clicky keyboards. The feeling annoys me. I much prefer linear keys.

A Wooting Two HE and I love it.

I'm not even a gamer: I'm a bit of an old school terminal kind of guy and I bought it to see if I could type faster with it. And I sure can!

It is a bit light for my taste, but it's nice to define different actuation depths for it. For example, I set the spacebar to work only at the very bottom, so I can rest my thumbs on it while I type (bad habit, I know). And HJKL are set to trigger higher for faster navigation in VI.

The absolute lack of friction feels nice too. And while it's noisy, it's not overwhelming like a Model M.

I'm also hoping the contactless action will make it last a long time. But I've had it for 8 months now and I can see it's getting clogged up with lint, what with the switches being exposed and all. That's a bit concerning.

Lastly, it's eye-wateringly expensive. But I reckon it's worth it if you're a heavy keyboard user like me. And I want to support them for making a configuration utility that works well in Linux. So I guess it's money well spent.

I meant active computing.

As long as those robots keep thinking with their tiny sixties electronic brains, they're as close to humanity's living children outside of the solar system.

When they stop thinking, sure, they'll carry data for aeons for someone or something to discover one day maybe, but no differently than a dead body would carry information in a side pocket. It's useful but it's not alive anymore.

I might very well stop thinking before they do. I'm a few years away from retirement and I smoked for 25 years. So it's certainly not impossible.

Who needs Doom when we have Duke Nukem...

Need to be celebrated loudly and publicly - those who are still alive.

The engineers who keep this thing going too.

The Voyager probes are literally part of my life. I've always known them. For me, they're a fixture of the sky like the Sun and the Moon. They're precious little bits of living humanity far out there. If they die, something inside would die too, and I sure hope I kick the bucket before they do.

Cry harder, nutjob.

https://apnews.com/article/job...

Best Buy honestly isn't that bad for a fair number of consumer electronics -- you can get decent deals on TVs for example.