Smartly, I got firstnamemiddleinitiallastname@gmail.com. I never get anybody else' details.
On the other hand... Occasionally someone gets my info because some careless person entered my email address into their system incorrectly. You'd think this problem would be solved by moving to a custom domain, but I still once in a while find someone completely ignore what I put into the form and sign me up as firstnamelastname@gmail.com.
All of my kids devices are identified, at device level, as children's devices. They could've trivially exposed this as metadata to allow sites to enforce "no under 18" use. However, I'd disagree that my bigger concern for my kids isn't that they'd see a boob or a penis, but that they'd see an influencer who'd try to radicalize them to some extremist cause, and that's usually not considered 18+ content.
And either way, none of that requires de-anonymizing literally everyone on the internet. I'd be more than happy to see governments provide cryptographically secure digital ID and so that sites can self-select to start requiring this digital ID to make moderation easier.
The problem with that is that sites/apps will retain the identifier, either to use the Digital ID for login (not just one-time age verification), because they want to retain as much information as possible for later usage or sale, or because a government told them they have to retain it so all their social media activity can be easily linked to them.
That's what we have now, but mandatorily, and without the anti-sockpuppet protection a true ID would provide.
I have conspiracy theories about the conspiracy theories about digital ID. The people who benefit the most from fake people posting are spambots, sockpuppets, disinfo peddlers, and astroturfers.
And either way, I firmly believe that a site should be free allow you to log in without a digital ID... I just would like to be able to know who doesn't have one so I can know who's a real human being and who is an appendage.
The president doing horribly fascist things with ICE like obliterating habeas corpus? Using the military to murder people in the ocean without trial? That's fine.
Screwing with the money? Not okay.
See also how the prez is allowed to screw with any congressional appointees except the federal reserve.
If a lawsuit tackles this problem in the EU, will we finally also see somebody go after MS for their obnoxious code signing certificates?
While MS code signing certs are more circumventable for power-users than Android's new approved developer program, their pricing is far more prohibitive for independent OSS developers and hobbyists, costing hundreds of USD per year.
I have a galaxy watch 4 which I'd hoped was old-enough to be supported but I can see that it is not. I get it, hardware is hard.
I'm curious, is the challenge with newer hardware lack of chipset drivers for modern watches, or is there a fundamental difference between the new devices and the old ones that make them completely incompatible with asteroidOS?
With the latest devices its usually a problem that manufacturers choose to omit the usb pin outs in favor of water resistance and wireless charging. Making them a challenge to flash and still wear afterwards.
Another issue is that we currently need to rely on libhybris for quick porting process that employs the android drivers. And the new devices run android versions that libhybris can not handle yet. Its just a slow process on all fronts but we are actually releasing this 2.0 publicly to possibly interest more developers.
Ghostty turned on Discussions and made it the first place for users to go report bugs, make feature requests, etc., then promotes those to issues once it's detailed enough for the maintainers to accept: https://github.com/ghostty-org/ghostty/issues/3558
MS' Sql Server Data Tools is such an abominable garbage fire that I have no interest in these kind of tools. Besides being a buggy mess, it's very often insufficient - you end up having to maintain migrations anyways because often you have to inject data into new tables or columns, or rename columns, etc.
> often you have to inject data into new tables or columns
No tool can help you with that, simply because this kind of data migration depends on your particular business logic that the tool has no way of knowing about.
While SQL Server Data Tools has its warts, it has been immensely useful for us in making sure every little detail gets handled during migration. That doesn't usually mean that it can do the entire migration itself - we do the manual adjustments to the base tables that SSDT cannot do on its own, and then let it handle the rest, which in our case is mostly about indexes, views, functions and stored procedures.
After all that, SSDT can compare the resulting database with the "desired" database, and reliably flag any differences, preventing schema drift.
> No other country that went through a phase like this has ever recovered. Not even in a century.
Oh I can think of a couple in the '40s that bounced back after a while.
reply