Interesting, some effort required to keep it on track:
Claude can be very persistent when it really wants to do something. I’ve seen Claude run the contents of a
makecommand whenmakeitself is blocked, or write a Python script to edit a file it’s been told it can’t edit. But hooks at least offer better enforcement than prompting alone.
There was a moment in time where maybe it was qmail:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qmail
Ten years after the launch of qmail 1.0, and at a time when more than a million of the Internet’s SMTP servers ran either qmail or netqmail, only four known bugs had been found in the qmail 1.0 releases, and no security issues.
More on how it was accomplished:
https://blog.acolyer.org/2018/01/17/some-thoughts-on-security-after-ten-years-of-qmail-1-0/
Wow that’s bad. The original idea of standing up, I understand, was to keep the meeting short through physical discomfort and only speak of blockers to progress or ask for help. It is not meant to report status, which can make people feel like they have to continually justify themselves and their work.
Don’t encrypt the drive, encrypt the backups and put your keepassdb alongside. Use restic or similar that encrypts backups.
The contention is that Mattermost say it’s licensed under AGPL but then they add conditions which are incompatible with that license. So it seems they want to give appearance of AGPL but not give the actual rights that come with it. So therefore it’s not AGPL.
…got to have the Asian Dub Foundation track ft Stewart Lee here too:
Errors in command substitution e.g. $(cat file) are ignored by ‘set -e’, one example of its confusing nature. It does not force you to all handle errors, just some errors and which ones depends on the code you write.
Presumably that can’t handle things that the app adds like run conditions for wifi/mobile data though? I realise some may not care about that as much.
Thank you for introducing me to FairScan! Great app. I have a scanner but being able to snap stuff on the go is so much quicker.
Thing is Sainsbury have learnt nothing from this and reasserted theair faith in facial recognition, blaming human error in store for grabbing wrong person. I feel we’ll see more of this in future.
Hoping this tool lives up to its own hype:
PyInfra—where your infrastructure is actually code. Real Python. With loops that don’t require learning a DSL. With functions that are… wait for it… actual functions. With error handling that doesn’t involve praying to the YAML gods
https://fosdem.org/2026/schedule/event/VEQTLH-infrastructure-as-python/
Performance:
https://docs.pyinfra.com/en/3.x/performance.html
This is overkill but reminds me of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphic_encryption
…where operations (including search) can be carried out on data that remains encrypted throughout.
Sounds like you only need encryption at rest however. So can you keep tickets in memory for searching perhaps?
Like a still from a Bladerunner movie, nice
MarkStack looks ideal for publishing docs for family
https://github.com/KineticEnforcer/MarkStack
Fast, minimal static site generator that transforms markdown into searchable documentation sites. Built to run anywhere, even on a Raspberry Pi.
I know, I’m also highlighting what he says about how we should not rush to deny that protection to children.
Parliament itself recommends VPN use for its members:
Labour’s Lord Knight acknowledged that VPNs could “undermine the child safety gains of the Online Safety Act” but warned that age-gating the apps could be “extremely problematic”. He said:
“My phone uses a VPN, following a personal device cyber consultation offered by this Parliament. VPNs can make us more secure, and we should not rush to deprive children of that safety.”
Check the app’s own docs first, there is something here about automating backups:
https://docs.frappe.io/erpnext/user/manual/en/download-backup
The EFF have a page on this, setting out the threats:
https://www.eff.org/wp/unintended-consequences-16-years-under-dmca
…which is mostly a link to:
https://www.eff.org/files/2014/09/16/unintendedconsequences2014.pdf
…whose summary reads as follows.
The “anti-‐circumvention” provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”), codified in section 1201 of the Copyright Act, have not been used as Congress envisioned. The law was ostensibly intended to stop copyright infringers from defeating anti-‐piracy protections added to copyrighted works.[1] In practice, the anti-‐circumvention provisions have been used to stifle a wide array of legitimate activities. As a result, the DMCA has become a serious threat to several important public policy priorities:
The DMCA Chills Free Expression and Scientific Research.
Experience with section 1201 demonstrates that it is being used to stifle free speech and scientific research. The lawsuit against 2600 magazine, threats against Princeton Professor Edward Felten’s team of researchers, and prosecution of Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov have chilled the legitimate activities of journalists, publishers, scientists, students, programmers, and members of the public.
The DMCA Jeopardizes Fair Use.
By banning all acts of circumvention, and all technologies and tools that can be used for circumvention, the DMCA grants to copyright owners the power to unilaterally eliminate the public’s fair use rights. Already, the movie industry’s use of encryption on DVDs has curtailed consumers’ ability to make legitimate, personal-‐use copies of movies they have purchased.
The DMCA Impedes Competition and Innovation.
Rather than focusing on pirates, some have wielded the DMCA to hinder legitimate competitors. For example, the DMCA has been used to block aftermarket competition in laser printer toner cartridges, garage door openers, videogame console accessories, and computer maintenance1 services. Similarly, Apple has used the DMCA to tie its iPhone devices to Apple’s own software and services.
This thread adds some context but not easy to draw any conclusions yet:
https://strudel.cc/