Genuine question here.

It might be useful for your own memory since you can decide that you trust what was written. IE you trust that when it was written, you agreed at the time that it was an accurate summary, and later you only have to trust your earlier self.

But "My ai said that the site said ~essentially~ this on this date." is useless for anything else.

But it suggests an interesting idea. Maybe if we had some ai equivalent of trusted vetted accountable court reporters who write down notes and draw sketches in rooms where cameras aren't allowed.

That is purely second-hand reporting that we more or less trust, partly because there is usually more than one of them from competing venues reporting on the same event, partly because they are people with something to lose if they are unfaithful or even merely inept, partly because the facts are ultimately vettable with some effort for those who really need to.

There's no such ai yet. Even if one exists that could do the job, there is no consensus or basis for it, for everyone to recognize it as a trustworthy source of second hand reporting. But maybe if there were more than one and operated by different camps, they could grow to become recognized as a valid source of info.

https://archive.ph/HcOq2 (This is a link to the post for this article)

(If one’s ISP can’t access archive.today, I find that Firefox’s built in free VPN can usually access them)

Or, you can use on of the various Reddit scrapers, e.g:

https://redlib.catsarch.com/r/Seattle/comments/1xhf6qp/archi...

Here’s a list of Reddit scrapers:

https://github.com/redlib-org/redlib-instances/blob/main/ins...

Personally, as scummy as archive.today is at times, I can generally trust them to have an honest archive about, say, someone’s drunk post before said drunk deletes the post.

But even aside from opinions on their UX, they're aggressively experimenting with the login more... Even on the new UI I now semi-regularly see that I can read the initial post and one or two comments but as soon as I scroll past or try to expand a comment thread get a login prompt.

I wish Lua 5.1 could become part of POSIX; there are a lot of implementations of it out there.

The upthread comment was about an idea for "inline Cython", which was then hijacked because that's largely what numba is. These are technologies aimed at optimized native code running over native types to do stuff like numerics and ML and other HPC tasks. Lua isn't any more responsive to this domain than Javascript has been, it's not really the subject under discussion.

Lua 5.1’s edge over Javascript and Python is that it’s a lot smaller and simpler.

[1] It’s possible to recompile Lua 5.1 to have the numeric data type be an int, but the standard compiles of Lua5.1 only have double precision floats for numbers. Bitwise operators are technically not part of Lua 5.1, but a library to add support is easy and is usually done: Most Lua5.1 forks including LuaJIT and MediaWiki’s version of Lua5.1 have such a library available. Later versions of Lua have both int and float support.

Yeah, but again you don't reach for C when you have a string or hash-based logic problem, which is the reason that other platforms are favored. You reach for Python[1] to solve those problems, and it works fine.

You reach for C when you care about cache footprint or memory layout. You reach for C when you need SIMD parallelism. You reach for C when you care about doing the math in single precision or 32 bit integers and will handle the precision worries yourself.

You emphatically don't reach for python (or Lua) in those situations. But notably you can reach for numba, and implement your small core of performance code in python next to the other logic you already have. And there's value there.

Screaming about using Lua instead is just nonresponsive. Lua is arguably better at performance code than Python. Lua is absolutely not faster than numba, nor will it ever be (absent a numba-like translation layer) and repeatedly trying to argue so is very much missing the point.

[1] Or fine, Lua or JS or whatever. But I'm trying deeply not to let this turn into a frothing language flame, and this is after all a python discussion.

When OP wrote "inline Cython" they didn't seem focused on numerics, they talked about "proper C speed", and they mentioned modifying the language. I don't think it's getting off-topic to suggest a deeper integration that lets the JIT be very intimate with the interpreter and truly inline things in a way that bypasses language-crossing and type-dispatching overhead. As long as you're in the hot path, let it look up object fields in a couple instructions.

Isn't that basically what I said? Lua isn't "proper C speed", nor is PyPy, the cancelled Python JIT in question, nor even V8. That's a different problem area with different technologies. The fact that you like coding backend stuff in Lua or whatever isn't really saying much about whether numba is great.

But it is. Numba is great.

Lua5.1 is much more stable by the virtue that the only updates it code gets are very minor changes to fix any lingering security issues it has (the last Lua5.1 CVE is from 2014).

[1] I guess these days a LLM can do the grunt work of converting a Python2 script to Python3.

[2] There is a project which converts Lua in to native code: https://github.com/samyeyo/clx

Numba is great at its niche. But OP directly said Numba is "not really" what they were looking for because it's so narrow.

The only way to work around this is to have two sets of chess pieces in the font, one with a white background for pieces on light squares, and one with a colored background for pieces on dark squares.

Printing web pages is rare enough I just assume someone doing that will also click on “print backgrounds”.

(The reason to not use images for the chessboard diagrams is because they use more bandwidth and can’t have usable “dark mode” colors)

  background: #eee;
  print-color-adjust: exact;
  -webkit-print-color-adjust: exact;

It's not the end of the world.

But as it goes, not everyone has the motor control to _only_ scroll a phone view vertically; unexpected horizontal scroll can be frustrating, especially when one very wide element leaves the screen otherwise confusingly blank elsewhere on the page.

(I've actually witnessed this frustration from an older user in real life)

The way to handle elements wide enough to induce horizontal scrolling is to put them in a <div> (or make CSS for the tag in question) and make CSS with overflow-x: scroll; for just that element. An example from one of my webpages:

  pre {max-width: 90vw; overflow-x: scroll;}

For you :-) Now imagine you have to use a mobile device but have limited control over your hands, and it's difficult for you to do a vertical scrolling gesture without some horizontal drift.

I've seen this in real life. Why not make things easier for that person when you can? Accessibility is for everyone. (General accessibility rule I like — if it's a persistent minor annoyance for me, it's possibly a dealbreaker for someone with an accessibility requirement I've not thought of)

Your suggestion for constraining horizontal scroll to unavoidably overflowing elements is good, though — I do that too, and I've ended up figuring out how to add affordances so it's clear that scroll is possible (shadows that appear and disappear)

https://xxcancel.com/freddier/status/2114042326758867453

To wit: There was a lawsuit where Susan Clements-Jeffrey sued Absolute Software (Lojack) for a stolen laptop she acquired; Lojack used surveillance to track down the stolen laptop and Susan successfully sued for invasion of privacy (Lojack settled instead of trying to fight it).

A couple of days ago I set up a samsung smart, ai, yadda yadda tv for a family member whose technical expertise boils down to "I unplug the computer to turn it off".

It refused to let me set it up for cable without granting it internet access (as in the bundled remote control didn't work):

First I ended up on a bunch of websites that hallucinated non-existent physical buttons on the tv

I then tried to scan scan the modal qr code which didn't work because the phone I used didn't have google play services.

I had to get another samsung phone (which immediately picked the tv up and asked me if I want to set it up without scanning any code) and after I agreed to share the data with some 450 partners, I got an error saying "setup did not complete, please try again"

Though at that point the builtin remote started working beyond on/off and mute and I was able to finish setup that way.

In the end, I can't even change the wifi password because the phone will share it over bluetooth with the fucking spybox.

Fuck samsung. You were shit in the galaxy S1 days, you're even worse now.

Very different from a single-player video game, or a website with a login form.

A lot of these bug reports are incorrectly filed. Let’s look at one issue, which I am sure was found with AI assistance:

CVE-2026-40719

Here’s the issue: An IP authorized to perform recursive queries can cause the DNS server to be non-responsive if it sends hundreds of specially crafted packets a minute (this can be changed to millions of packets a minute if one sets a parameter in the configuration file). Normal service is restored within a minute of the attack being stopped. The workaround would require me to essentially rewrite the recursive part of the DNS server.

Since the DNS server, like any server in a LAN, is already vulnerable to a flooding attack, this is just a flooding attack with extra steps.

I told the guy that was interesting, I’m not being paid enough to rewrite the DNS server to be immune to the attack, and people shouldn’t be using its recursion (it has very limited IPv6 support, for starters), and if they do use its recursion, only authorized IPs (e.g. 127.0.0.1 or 192.168.1.0/24) should be allowed to perform recursion.

It wasn’t a serious enough attack to merit a patch, and anyway the guy reporting the bug didn’t even have the decent courtesy to give me a patch.

The guy responded by filing for a CVE report, incorrectly calling it a “high impact” bug, and I had to make a “patch” which simply disables recursion: https://samboy.github.io/MaraDNS/patches/MaraDNS-CVE-2026-40...

Point being, a lot of these CVE reports out there which supposedly are high impact bugs are trivial things like “someone can overload a server for about one minute if they send hundreds to thousands of specially crafted DOS packets”.

(Today, I got an issue which, as far as I can tell, looks to be a Linux kernel issue and not an issue with my code. I told him to show me how he would patch my code to “fix” the issue, but so far have gotten nothing but crickets)

Does the fact I have written this resolver make me liable should it not block the domains they listed which may contain copyright infringing content? Am I now required to add these domains, and make them part of a mandatory block list? Will I still be held liable if people can still access these allegedly copyright infringing domains by modifying the source to my program?

Keep in mind that when Quad9 had a similar lawsuit in Germany, they blocked queries from German IPs, but the idiots said Quad9 was still liable because people could use VPNs in Germany to bypass their geoIP blocking.

Quad9 being forced to block these domains will achieve nothing. Will these copyright enforcers now go after Google for 8.8.8.8? Cloudflare for 1.1.1.1? Level3 for 4.2.2.1? Will they go after ISC for BIND? NLnet Labs for Unbound? CZ.NIC for KnotDNS? Me for MaraDNS? Even if they enjoin me from making a recursive resolver which can resolve these domains, that won’t stop anyone and everyone from forking my code (see also: Twitter trying to take down Nitter).

I use unbound and have a similar question. Shouldn't we just encourage everyone to run their own resolvers (it's turnkey for the most part!)? Will Sony/beIn start going after the root servers and enforce a global block?

they already have.