Can anyone comment on the seemingly impossible transition from quantum computers on the order of ~150 qubits available today to systems with the 500,000 physical qubits required to break classical encryption?
Seems like quite the handwave, especially with a target as close as 2030.
Ofcom doesn’t really wanna block websites though, they want websites to either comply or block themselves, both of which legitimizing Ofcom’s extraterritorial enforcement.
Ads weren’t that much of a problem when they were contextual. I remember video game websites younger me used to visit having their background plastered with latest release by a AAA studio. This is contextual advertisement. It has no privacy concern.
The issue is that ads now are behavioural, privacy invasive and centralized. No matter what site you visit you’ll get unrelated, possibly scam, advertising that depends on a profile built by a large American corporation. It’s just not reasonable in this context to avoid using an ad blocker.
So yes, the problem is indeed Google (and Meta etc) who monopolized the advertising market. I would say the root cause is lack of antitrust enforcement.
I have come to the same conclusion as the OP: people like tailwind not for its API or ergonomics but for its design system.
Tailwind can actually be decent for templating systems and it’s likely why it’s shipped with Phoenix for example.
But for React components, it’s definitely a step back from CSS-in-JS, which gave you style encapsulation out of the box. Not sure what’s up with the knee-jerk reaction against it in the comments. With vanilla-extract (mentioned in the OP) or PandaCSS, there is no runtime at all.
Just components that defined their structure and style, in a readable way, with less abstraction than Tailwind.
As a native French speaker, my favourites are those words that capture concepts better than their French equivalent.
Something as simple as "mind" for example. In French, you're stuck with "esprit" which also means "spirit" or "facultés mentales" which is quite annoying to use in conversation.
That’s been my experience as well. It’s especially jarring when asking for a refactor as it will leave a bunch of WIP-style comments highlighting the difference with the previous approach.
While I get your point about Anubis excluding some users, its purpose is to protect the "commons" from those who would abuse and destroy them: big tech crawlers that do not respect robots.txt files.
The article is less about Y2K itself than it is about the absurdity of work in the corporate consulting world. It’s a good read.
I wasn’t there for the play-doh management fad but I sure experienced capital A Agile and honestly can’t tell which is more infantile.
In a sense, the corporate environment of constant indefinite emergency described in the article is the same as arbitrary deadlines and non-stop “sprints”.
I wonder if this is inspired by the Ousters from Dan Simmons' Hyperion, who're described as using a prosthetic tail to move around in zero-g environments.
President could sideline him, but his role in the senate cannot be removed except by impeachment.