pglpm

The current security philosophy almost seems to be: "In order to make it secure, make it difficult to use". This is why I propose to go a step further: "In order to make it secure, just don't make it". The safest account is the one that doesn't exist or that can't be accessed by anyone, including its owner.

Just wanted to applaud the fact that you've come here asking people, rather than asking some large language model.

We aren't supposed to accept that. We can simply not use their software. And as users that's the only power we have on devs. But it's a power that only works on devs who are interested in having many users.

Nobel prize in computer science. Looks like the Nobel Prize committee has forgotten what Physics is.

Well done! 💪🚀

This reminds me: what kind of Youtube replacement or quasi-replacement in the Fediverse? I've heard that Peertube may be difficult to maintain long term, which makes sense...

This is a fascinating phenomenon – but fully within current theory. And there's no "inversion of the arrow of time", despite what the sensationalistic, misleading title seems to imply. From the recent paper (my emphasis):

Our results, over a range of pulse durations and optical depths, are consistent with the recent theoretical prediction that the mean atomic excitation time caused by a transmitted photon (as measured via the time integral of the observed phase shift) equals the group delay experienced by the light.

The theoretical explanation is given in this paper:

We examine this problem using the weak-value formalism and show that the time a transmitted photon spends as an atomic excitation is equal to the group delay, which can take on positive or negative values.

It is essentially related to the difference between phase and group velocity of waves.

One more example of how nature – as we currently understand it – offers amazing, fascinating, unexpected phenomena. It doesn't need misleading sensationalism.

Fully agree.

It's worth posting the blog post you linked.

Personally I disagree on value of sex/nude scenes – but it's a subjective matter of course. Your final argument is absolutely fair and logical, and very general too. Extremely well put – I subscribe 110% to it!

It's utter bullshit from the very start. First, it isn't true that the Ricci curvature can be written as they do in eqn (1). Second, in eqn (2) the Einstein tensor (middle term) cannot be replaced by the Ricci tensor (right-hand term), unless the Ricci scalar ("R") is zero, which only happens when there's no energy. They nonchalantly do that replacement without even a hint of explanation.

Elsevier and ScienceDirect should feel ashamed. They can go f**k themselves.

It seems to me these scenes are introduced in films to sexualize them. Most often than not they don't add anything to the story. But blood & sex get more viewers. So I find the whole thing hypocritical.

Brings me to mind an episode of the hilarious series "Coupling", where Jeff says that the actress in the film "The Piano" (?) was naked in the whole film. His friends say she wasn't, it was only a scene in the film. And Jeff replies "it depends on how you watch it" 🤣

Agree 110%! It's sad because it pushes back those people who were curious about alternatives and were willing to try. Hopefully things will improve with time...