I don’t agree. On an encrypted volume all space unallocated by the filesystem should have random data in it and should be indistinguishable from the portion representing in-use filesystem data. Deleting data securely involves overwriting all the previously allocated filesystem blocks with random data. No one should be able to discern that now-empty space had data in it as of some specific recent datetime.
There may be more OS design decisions you have to make to cleanly wipe all references to particular app or process names but to me it all seems doable.
> Deleting data securely involves overwriting all the previously allocated filesystem blocks with random data. No one should be able to discern that now-empty space had data in it as of some specific recent datetime.
If it was like a HDD maybe that could work, but most modern solid state storage doesn't work like that any more.
You can't reliably overwrite any data, because the default is to write any new data in an empty sector (sort of, it has to do with how flash storage works, because of "wear leveling"), which is managed at the hardware level of the storage itself, so you also can't really tell the OS to do something else.
A random website breach can't disclose your password either, assuming you use random high-entropy passwords and the website only stores a hash of it. I haven't really seen the benefit to passkeys over passwords. Pretty much everyone is using a password management service that securely syncs both passwords and passkeys across devices. In that context I don't see the difference.
> Pretty much everyone is using a password management service
In the US, only about 34 to 36% of adults use a password manager. Of the ~64% that don't, an alarming 20% reuse the same password across almost every service, and a ton just rely on browser autofill.
If you use a password manager, you are in the minority. Hell, even if you don't use a PW manager and you at least use a different password for different services, you are ahead of most people.
The general population is largely computer illiterate, and have a staggering lack of basic security hygiene.
If the fees are raised, individuals will be less willing to pay out of their own pocket. Even if they aren't raised people are less willing to pay out of pocket compared to an NGO or journalism org that had revenue and budget allotments specifically for that purpose. Assuming NGOs will also not be allowed to directly pay for request fees made by their members/collaborators.
The problem is that there isn't really this clean discrete sense of 'a law'. There is the federal code, and the federal register, and bills or rules enacted over time which amend those things. Often times those bills are collections of amendments which do things like add a phrase or swap out a word or add a bullet point to a list. They're like diffs. You can't just have those things sunset individually or you end up with a incoherent code and you end up creating a state of the code which is not what was intended by anyone, at any point along the way. And these can be significant things, like a substantial bill which makes a significant change to federal law may be just like adding a bullet point to a couple lists, or adding a parenthetical to a paragraph.
If you make it so all of the federal code and register has to be voted on every 1-10 years, then you'll just make it so everyone always votes to pass all of it, because no one is sitting down and reading all of it, because almost no one even sits down to read all the bills proposed in a year, which are much smaller in text volume.
The real underlying problem is that legislators are not responsive to the demands of their constituents. Ideas which have supermajority support among the public are not valued or prioritized. And none of the legislators suffer for it, because the elections are not generally competitive among candidates who understand policymaking, and there is a strong incumbency bias where people just vote for the person they recognize as long as they don't have major complaints and as long as they can't explicitly identify a reason that another candidate is clearly better across all measures.
Yes, exactly what the problem is. Every Linux fanboi has a lot of problem solving CLI incantations. While Windows users just use the default and working copy-paste (and don't need root/Administrator rights for that too).
That's just federal permission saying they're allowed to even proceed with the process. Nuclear projects cannot begin at all unless they get federal permission. Now that they have permission to do a project related to nuclear energy, I think they will still need to go through all the normal design, planning, permitting processes at federal/state/local levels. Unless they're building on federal land that is exempt from state/local oversight.
> It has gotten to a point that all code I generate with Opus or Codex if there as iterator or reference in the argument, I start a fresh context, with a sort of `remove unnecessary clones, collections, and copies from the following code: {{code}}`
What does it do if you put "Avoid unnecessary clones, collections, and copies" in your CLAUDE.md/AGENTS.md?
There may be more OS design decisions you have to make to cleanly wipe all references to particular app or process names but to me it all seems doable.