I'm a big fan of passkeys, but they are currently harder to manage/reason about than passwords (even autogenerated ones stored in a password manager).
My web browser wants to own the passkeys, my OS wants to own the passkeys, I have to deny them before I can get to my hardware key. Some providers will sync passkeys amongst devices, which at some point seemed to be against the spec.
It's all rather confusing. I wish there was a straight forward best practise that can be followed without the niggling worry that you're doing it wrong, or that you might get locked out of services.
Storing passkeys in password managers is the best option. It isn't as secure as hardware tokens, but it solves the problem of managing multiple keys and losing the tokens.
Passkeys are better passwords since not vulnerable to phishing, and it makes sense to store better passwords in password manager.
This fits the pattern of sabotage all across Europe. The obvious candidate is Russia who are using hybrid warfare against Europe/UK for a long time. Why does this post have so many... strange comments, mostly from new accounts? More hybrid warfare?
Now I wouldn’t call myself a student of European terrorism per-se, but haven’t virtually all of the countries listed had some form of domestic terror groups in the post WW2 era? Why am I not to believe this is domestic?
I mean, Italy had a big problem with this... in the 1980s. Occam's razor indicates that this is probably just Russia, and not some geriatric extremists abruptly coming out of retirement.
You can't self-fund more than very small terror groups. "Domestic" groups aren't. Note how all the Marxist groups withered away after the fall of the Soviet Union.
Disrupting arms shipments is a realistic motive. You didn't really state one, just implied the person you're responsing to is a propagandist. I'd be interested to hear your reasoning, but respectfully, in the meantime I am glad that the HN crowd tends to downvote low effort comments. My own stupid comment in this thread being one example. We both felt our reasoning was self-evident but that's not enough on this topic.
It's news to me that the UK/Europe has killed millions of people. I think you mean Russia has killed hundreds of thousands and wounded millions.
I can only assume you are talking about Ukrainians in some conspiratorial way; I think it's strange that you remove all agency from a sovereign country and a people who want to protect their way of life. Very strange.
wild, and probably incorrect, assumption. as any moderately educated italian know, it’s not like italy lacks groups that push similar events on a semi-routine basis, perhaps even inspired by the “délégation inattendue” of french anarchists who carried out a comparable action in France around the olympics.
Mostly useful idiots. Many HN posters are tech people from US. They are mainly left leaning all the way into tankie territory. And those are a prime target for russians.
> For 1. it seems to breakdown if we look more broadly at how LLMs are used. e.g. as a coding agent. We're basically starting to treat LLMs as a higher level framework now. We don't hold vendors of programming languages or frameworks responsible if someone uses them to create CSAM. Yes LLM generated the content, but the user still provided the instructions to do so.
LLMs are completely different to programming languages or even Photoshop.
You can't type a sentence and within 10 seconds get images of CSAM with Photoshop. LLMs are also built on trained material, unlike the traditional tools in Photoshop. There have been plenty CSAM found in the training data sets, but shock-horror apparently not enough information to know "where it came from". There's a non-zero chance that this CSAM Grok is vomiting out is based on "real" CSAM of people being abused.
This must be the best example of why China will overtake the US as the world's number 1 super power before 2050. I would link you to a white house press briefing from Biden https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases... but it has been taken down by Trumpists. Another irony.
It's a shame that the US is being actively sabotaged by Republicans and Trumpists and people will continue on because saying that is apparently a capital-p Politics and not an objective fact.
looking at wind as objectively as I can, it doesn't look like a good investment, and the environmental problems caused by putting these in the ocean are tragic to wildlife
GP was mocking you (not calling you names) because your comment was just a classic uninformed (some would even say stupid) opinion, and was presented as you "looking at wind as objectively as I can"
Maybe if you look at the comment context a little more objectively, you'll agree there's some thing quite funny about it.
_______________________________
Putting that aside though, lets look at your claim:
> there's serious ecological problems with these turbines, the materials cant be recycled, and their uninstallation is incredibly costly
First of all, it's only one subset of the materials (the fiberglass in the blades) that are difficult to recycle, the vast majority of the actual material is highly recyclable steel. The blades in a modern offshore turbine usually weigh around 80 metric tons at the high end.
Your typical modern offshore wind turbine has rated output of around 15 MW of power, with a yearly capacity factor of around 40% at the lower end, so an average output of around 6 MW. Multiply that by the more or less standard 25 year rated lifetime of the turbine, that means you can expect the turbine to produce around 1300 GWh of electrical energy over the course of its life.
How much energy is 1300 GWh? Well, to get 1300 GWh of electricity out of a high-efficiency (i.e. 50% efficiency) natural gas power plant, you'd need to burn around 175,000 tons of natural gas, (dumping all of the waste product into the gigantic open sewer we call our atmosphere).
That's about 3 orders of magnitude more mass in natural gas that will need to be burned (and don't forget, natural gas is non-recyclable!!1!!1) than the blades weigh.
This means that you went and tossed a thousand wind turbine blades in an incinerator for every turbine you actually install, you'll still break even on the amount of non-recyclable material
So forgive me for not taking your complaints very seriously.
There's all the same waste products being dumped into the atmosphere during the production of the entire turbine itself, it's not entirely different.
And you didn't address the environmental damage to the oceans. this case is specifically greenlighting off-shore windfarms. Iif this was on land, i wouldn't care what people do with their own money and resources. But it's got serious implications for whales, of which there's a decreasing amount of. It's not foolish to care about endangering species that are important parts of underwater ecosystems.
You should take complaints seriously in general, I'm not mocking you for your point of view, those are nice details, and I take them seriously, so why are you mocking me? Mocking people over serious topics is just a display of insincerity. you seem to care a lot about the topic, so why not represent yourself better?
> There's all the same waste products being dumped into the atmosphere during the production of the entire turbine itself, it's not entirely different.
Those are also tiny marginal percentages relative to the amount of fossil fuels that are saved, even if everything is constructed from virgin materials instead of recycled.
> But it's got serious implications for whales, of which there's a decreasing amount of. It's not foolish to care about endangering species that are important parts of underwater ecosystems.
The largest threats to whale populations currently are
1. changing ocean temperatures and PH stressing them, and disrupting their food chains
2. overfishing disrupting their food supply and stressing them out
3. getting entangled in fishing nets, and being struck by boat propellers
Wind turbine installation may be a brief stressor when piles are driven into the seabed (but there are mitigation techniques), and operating noise from wind farms might be a mild irritant for them, but it's quite minor relative, and geographically constrained compared to other more significant day to day noise sources in the ocean such as a shipping, drilling, and fishing.
The impact of wind turbines on whales is inconsequential compared to other much more acute impacts (especially net entanglement and boat strikes). There's a pretty wide literature on this.
> You should take complaints seriously in general, I'm not mocking you for your point of view, those are nice details, and I take them seriously, so why are you mocking me? Mocking people over serious topics is just a display of insincerity. you seem to care a lot about the topic, so why not represent yourself better?
I don't take your complaints seriously because your complaints (whether by accident or by design) happen to very closely coincide with deliberate misinformation spread primarily by fossil fuel companies to try and limit threats to their business model.
How many laws has the Trump administration flat out ignored? You're cheerleading the introduction of a lawless society. Perhaps you should reconsider your frame of reference.
Their underlying point is that you're actually being very selective in which laws you want enforced.
For starters, I doubt you've brayed as loudly for the prosecution of business owners who employ illegal migrants, as you are for the migrants themselves. (You certainly didn't mention illegal biz owners in this comment chain.) Likewise, the crimes ICE commits already exceed the crimes of those they're hunting, but you haven't acknowledged that.
Which means you don't actually believe in the law as an impartial force of justice, despite what you might tell yourself. You believe in it as a tool of power, to be wielded strongly against those you dislike, and lightly or not at all, against those you favor.
You believe in power and order, not justice and fairness.
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
"If you have always believed that everyone should play by the same rules and be judged by the same standards, that would have gotten you labeled a radical 50 years ago, a liberal 25 years ago and a racist today."
Ditto. It seems like the graduate wage in the US is 2x my senior salary in the UK, which sounds very similar to yours. It seems massively inflated compared to other US jobs. Tech jobs in the UK seem to be more inline with other sectors.
I can't believe there are so many boot licking fascist-lovers on hacker news. ICE are executing Americans on the streets and a bunch of people here are defending that. The US is cooked.
Maybe your understanding of things is wrong? Maybe the information you are getting on the situation is misleading?
I am a democrat who does support ICE. If there are any issues, as there are given the numbers, they should be investigated. There have been many instances where an “execution” is claimed but they, the agents, were reasonable to assume imminent harm and self defense.
Well, the larger sequence of events goes back to the group of people interfering with police work, including the woman whistling along with an officer. She got pushed which was where Alex entered. (Alex had already had a brief contact with the officers minutes before the fatal sequence of events.) Alex also had a gun with him. This eventually led him to being shot.
The researched why will surface likely soon. But as of now, carrying a gun to a protest isn't something that helps with looking harmless.
My web browser wants to own the passkeys, my OS wants to own the passkeys, I have to deny them before I can get to my hardware key. Some providers will sync passkeys amongst devices, which at some point seemed to be against the spec.
It's all rather confusing. I wish there was a straight forward best practise that can be followed without the niggling worry that you're doing it wrong, or that you might get locked out of services.
reply