I think there is some value in asking these questions. Maybe a better question would be how much effort and time was put into a project.
1. Maintenance: Projects that (seem to) have the same quality and complexity but were built over months or years by hand versus built with an AI tool in a weekend will probably experience different amounts of maintenance in the future. This is, of course, not a black-and-white rule. But simply knowing that people think a project is worth spending months or years on gives me an indication that they probably want to keep it alive in the future.
2. Testing: Projects developed by hand probably underwent a lot more hidden manual testing—maybe on different hardware, maybe by more than one person. Since my personal projects have gotten significantly more complex with the availability of AI coding assistance, I spend much more time writing prompts and thinking about integration testing. But this is not the case for all projects.
I also used em-dash before LLMs, though I would not call myself a typography geek. But yesterday I wrote a birthday message to someone and replaced my em-dashes with minus signs, because I did not want them to think that my message is LLM generated..
Yup. I recommended snapdrop to everyone in my family and friends for local data sharing without a cable.
When I discovered that it now uploads stuff to Limewire I was so annoyed that I had to admit I suggested a harmful tool for sharing private data.
So much, that I will never recommend a similar website. Either I'll host it my self or suggest an installed tool through F-droid, if it exists.
I mean, it is entirely my fault. I knew the security risk, but set it aside, because I didn't think some known guy developing an open source tool would in his name try to grab your data.
Remigration [...] is a [...] political concept referring to the forced or promoted return of non-ethnically European immigrants, often including their descendants who were born in Europe, back to their place of racial origin, typically with no regard for their citizenship [^1]
Sounds pretty racist to me. Maybe you can be clearer on what you mean by non-racist remigration? The far-right groups, which are, at least in my country (Germany), the only once using the term to my knowledge, clearly mean it in a racist way.
I think a lot of these discussions get held up on what "racist" means to them.
I don't think the native people of Hawai'i or the Maori in New Zealand wanting Americans (for the former) and Anglos (for the latter) to leave is "racist."
Similarly, I don't see how Germans wanting non-Germans to leave is racist.
To me, "racist" would imply the belief one is superior to the other, and that's clearly orthogonal to the remigration question.
Wow. Comparing colonization with 20/21st century labor migration is peak far right playing victims. I guess the people of Hawai'i and the Maori were also asked and decided in a democratic process if they want their colonizers to come in and help rebuild their economy and do the jobs no one else wants to do.
> Similarly, I don't see how Germans wanting non-Germans to leave is racist.
Wanting non-Germans to leave when they are not refugees and do not participate in society is not the problem. The problem is the definition of non-German.
It would be inhuman to not give someone either citizenship or a permanent permit residency if they worked for a long time in a country. Do people really expect guest workers to come (alone?) into a foreign country, work the shittiest jobs for 15 years and then return to their home country to start a family with 35+ years?
Also, it would not work. Germany still attracts foreign workers in some fields (e.g. nurses). If you tell them, they get to work for 15 years and then have to return, no one would come. If the indigenous people of Germania advocating for no labor migration are ok with dying in their own excrement, because there are no nurses, I guess that would be one way to solve the problem.
I don’t know any modern country where people got to vote on immigration. It seems like even if you vote for the anti immigration parties you get just as much immigration.
At least in America, “less immigration” won out over “more immigration” by clear polling margins every year since 1965, except for a few years in the 2010s. Democratic processes gave them more.
I’ve seen similar results in the UK. Parties mentioning immigration restriction consistently do well and then end up doing nothing or increasing it.
Obviously colonization is only one kind of mass human migration and there are important differences between it and the migration now ongoing, but I don't think "the choice of the people already there" is really a factor in either. One could also argue that in most cases, a determined effort to repel colonizers would have prevented colonization. There was no such societal consensus, so it happened.
> Also, it would not work. Germany still attracts foreign workers in some fields (e.g. nurses). If you tell them, they get to work for 15 years and then have to return, no one would come. If the indigenous people of Germania advocating for no labor migration are ok with dying in their own excrement, because there are no nurses, I guess that would be one way to solve the problem.
Why wouldn't more young Germans just go into nursing? This seems like a rather exaggerated doomsday scenario. There would be shortages, wages would have to rise, and more Gerrmans would choose nursing over what they choose now.
Further, since birth rates are dropping everywhere, aren't you just buying yourself a few years? Eventually everywhere the immigrants are coming from will have the same problem you describe - and their home countries will be in horrific shape because you've sucked away all their talent. What happens then? This is a shortsighted policy no matter how you look at it.
> At least in America, “less immigration” won out over “more immigration” by clear polling margins every year since 1965, except for a few years in the 2010s. Democratic processes gave them more.
You are probably referring to the Gallup poll [1]. To me, it seems, they don't make a distinction between legal and illegal immigration. Some questions even dig into the illegal part. I'd say illegal immigration is a different question, and also somewhat unique to the US. Here in Germany, illegal immigration would be a no-go. If you look at polls about legal immigration in the US it is a totally different result where 46% say keep the level and 30% want to increase it. [2]
> It seems like even if you vote for the anti immigration parties you get just as much immigration.
I did not find anything supporting your argument on an international level. Although for the US you are probably right considering the recent H1B drama. On the contrary, here is an international comparison showing that in many developed countries, people think migration strengthens their country vs. being a burden [3].
> wages would have to rise, and more Gerrmans would choose nursing over what they choose now.
I think it's not an either/or. It's a big problem with no silver bullet. We'll have to do multiple things.
> Further, since birth rates are dropping everywhere, aren't you just buying yourself a few years?
No. Look at the age pyramid of Germany. We have to overcome the baby-boomer generation.
> and their home countries will be in horrific shape because you've sucked away all their talent. What happens then?
In the past, Germany had deals with the respective Governments called "Anwerbeabkommen." The other state often had a high rate of unemployment. Also, they haven't been skilled workers, mostly. But yes, I think now it is different. And I heard, they are already pissed at us today.
But it's also a totally different argument. And the Nazis on German streets definitely don't care about effects in the home countries. They just want ethnic homogeneity without the consequences.
> No. Look at the age pyramid of Germany. We have to overcome the baby-boomer
Everyone has this problem. Birth _rates_ are declining everywhere. Different countries are just in different parts of the decline. Even if this is your reason for importing immigrants and you think it’s worth any negatives, you are simply helping the boomers and doing nothing to help later generations. In addition, you are making the situation dramatically worse for migrant origin countries as their young people leave to be workers somewhere else.
I do think it’s also worth asking, if you keep this policy up, what you mean by “Germany.” If it’s an economic zone defined by arbitrary borders, all well and good, but if you think anything more of it than that, then obviously importing immigrants to create a square or non-inverted population pyramid means that at some point in the next century, German culture, norms, morals, and ethnicity will be a tiny minority in Germany the economic zone. If you’re okay with that tradeoff then alls well, but it seems worth acknowledging. I did some rough calculations with Canadian demographics for example, and in 80 years Canada will be totally unrecognizable as it will have had near-total population turnover via migration. Unless birth rates suddenly skyrocket instead of declining, or immigration comes to a screeching halt.
The future is never really predictable, but it’s looking like the future of a lot of Western countries is that they’ll end up basically satellites of countries like India, China, or Turkey. (Of course they’re facing their own declines, particularly China, but there’s a lot of quantity involved.) It’s also unclear to me that voting blocs of young voters will continue to fund entitlements. It will be pretty interesting to live through. I think the closest historical parallel is the total collapse in the Roman population during the early empire.
> In addition, you are making the situation dramatically worse for migrant origin countries as their young people leave to be workers somewhere else.
I did not disagree. But I also think this is a whole other argument.
> German culture, norms, morals, and ethnicity will be a tiny minority in Germany the economic zone.
Ethnicity I really don't care about. Why do you? I'm also fine and actually glad about people bringing along their culture as long as it doesn't get in the way of life of other people and most importantly respects everyone's human rights. The other ones are a question of integration. There is certainly a lot of room for improvement, but making it sound like they come here and will replace German culture is a big stretch. If anything is killing German culture, it is increasing cost of living and it being somewhat outdated, e.g. a lot of meat in cuisine, outdated values from Christianity and alcohol consumption. If any culture is replacing ours, it is US/consumerism.
People want temporary foreign workers--who immigrated here in unprecedented numbers in recent years--to leave the country, not anyone who has darker skin. No no brought up remigration.
Not sure how "No no" is, if it is a language barrier or if you meant to write "No one". But the parent comment to mine brought it up.
> People want temporary foreign workers--who immigrated here in unprecedented numbers in recent years--to leave the country, not anyone who has darker skin.
I'm not very familiar with Canadian immigration. But if they are temporary foreign workers, they by definition shouldn't have a citizenship and instead just a (temporary) work visa. Also, I wouldn't call that immigration, hence it also isn't remigration. The challenge should just be, to no longer extend the visas and not fuck up the economy, right?
I think I understand the disconnect. In Canada, anyone who is living here but is not a citizen is usually considered an immigrant (unless they are a refugee). Once they have their citizenship, they're just Canadian. We don't really make the migrant distinction, at least in my experience.
So when I say that we need to reduce the number of immigrants living in Canada in 2025, I only mean we need to reduce the number of temporary foreign workers. Part of the problem is that many people who came on temporary work visas don't plan to leave, they intend to exploit loopholes in the system to turn what was a temporary visa into permanent residency. So yes, in theory we just need to not extend the visas. In practice things will be messy.
I would be careful handing out legal advice as a non-legal expert, especially when it is about "bypassing legal issues". You might be doing someone a big disservice.
@readers: Obligatory notice: Don't base your business decision on random internet comments.
It's fine and good to disagree with/challenge wrong comments. But you don't need to do this meta commentary cautioning the mere act of commenting. If Sephr is wrong, just say that!
Ok. You are right. I think he is likely wrong, but I'm not a lawyer either. Just someone who researched this a lot for my own projects/company.
If that was true, all user-side aggregations would be considered as separate projects.
I think it might be possible to circumvent the GPL license, when the URL to the list would be user-configurable and the program also worked without the list.
The gist of some various laws around the world is that simply obtaining credentials does not authorize you to access the system, and accessing it without authorization is the illegal part.
This principle is clear if you apply a real world analogy. Just because you happen to have keys to a building doesn't mean you can enter without authorization from the owner. (E.g. you may have kept copies after a lease expires or a sale, it maybe you found them, etc.)
Considering it’s a API available without any authorization, the better comparison would be walking around on unfenced private land. There’s nothing to indicate they don’t want people on it but it’s also obvious it’s private land.
It doesn't matter. It's still just as illegal to get into an unlocked car or one with wide open doors without permission. The same premise applies to computers in a lot of places, access controls don't matter. If you access something on a computer not indented to be accessible, it's considered a crime.
Is it illegal, in fact? If a cop saw you, you'd be arrested and prosecuted for attempted auto theft, and your "I just wanted to see how comfy the driver's seat was" defense would ring hollow in court. But sitting in an unoccupied car without authorization isn't trespassing unless it's parked on the owner's land, and I'm not sure what other laws would apply to that specific act.
Walking around isn't usually a big deal until told to leave (verbally or by way of conspicuously posted signs), since that is a prerequisite to trespassing. Otherwise, delivery people would operate in a gray area which would be very problematic for them, since not all deliveries are requested by the recipient/owner.
However, although you are free to walk around in search of the front door, you can't start eating the fruit off the trees. Perhaps that's the better analogy: the trees are happy to serve up a delicious treat for anyone requesting something of it, but that doesn't mean the tree sets the rules. Just because fences preventing this are popular doesn't make them compulsory.
Defeating access control by using credentials that aren't yours is fraud.
Like, if you found a company badge laying around, go to that office and flash the badge to the security guard and go in. You've committed fraud by tricking the guard into thinking you're authorized to enter when you weren't.
TFA mentioned sending requests with a table number that the sender was not at. That is hardly any different from the idea of showing a badge that wasn't issued to you. The ease of spoofing doesn't matter at all, in the eyes of such laws.
The same could be said about typing any URL that wasn't knowingly supplied to you by the owner, but a "reasonableness test" in court would sort those out from nefarious activity.
Interestingly enough, the very lawsuit-happy nature of a major german party has "backfired" quite a bit recently. A security researcher was found not guilty of circumventing security measures or accessing authorized computer systems or resources without authorization, because there were no security measures or authorization on the API to circumvent.
Though note that this would not help one if one started to use or abuse the API to get free food or cause financial damage to a restaurant through fake orders. For example, ordering the corn soup through the API could really backfire if someone wants to present it as good old fraud or theft, or if the recipient of the unexpected soup got into trouble and started to look for someone to hand the damages to.
People have been convicted of hacking for merely editing URL strings, under the theory that were knowingly accessing systems in ways that they were not supposed to. This would be similar.
Whether or not that seems reasonable to us is a different matter, but basically it boils down to the fact that "they left the door unlocked" doesn't make it legal to walk in.
If any person without permission of the owner or any other person who is incharge of a computer, computer system or computer network
- (a) accesses or secures access to such computer, computer system or computer network or computer resource;
- (b) downloads, copies or extracts any data, computer data base or information from such computer, computer system or computer network including information or data held or stored in any removable storage medium;
[...]
- (e) disrupts or causes disruption of any computer, computer system or computer network;
[...]
- (g) provides any assistance to any person to facilitate access to a computer, computer system or computer network in contravention of the provisions of this Act, rules or regulations made thereunder;
If any person, dishonestly or fraudulently, does any act referred, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or with fine which may extend to five lakh rupees or with both.
====
Though, I prefer a lot the poster of the blog post than the company...
He wasn't prosecuted for logging in and looking around. He overtly did copyleft type things like finding ways to take copyrighted journal articles and release them into the public domain. Overzealous prosecution for sure regardless.
> On July 11, 2011, he was indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of wire fraud, computer fraud, unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer, and recklessly damaging a protected computer.
> On November 17, 2011, Swartz was indicted by a Middlesex County Superior Court grand jury on state charges of breaking and entering with intent, grand larceny, and unauthorized access to a computer network.
> On September 12, 2012, federal prosecutors filed a superseding indictment adding nine more felony counts, increasing Swartz's maximum criminal exposure to 50 years of imprisonment and $1 million in fines.
The only civil copyright proceedings were JSTOR settling with him out of court.
He accessed their computers to access purchase information of other people (e.g. his friend) and business data. I guess making it public, thereby damaging the companies reputation and potentially getting sued by their lawyers is one way to find out, whether he was "unauthorized" to do so.
As an owner of a Samsung Galaxy S22, which is not small but seemed to me like the only sane size - feature - price balance on the Android market back then: maybe the reason is battery life?
I'm really underwhelmed by the one of the S22. I barely get a day out of it. When I'm travelling with Google Maps, I have to carry a power bank.
Maybe current android phones are just optimized so bad in comparison to iPhones? And increasing device size allows for a proportionally larger battery size.
The Asus Zenphone 9 is basically the same size, and two years into it I still average 25-45% battery usage from rising to sleeping for the night. GSam says average per complete battery charge is 2d 16.2h, and Screen On is 11h 58m with an observed maximum of 8 hours 30m.
So battery life and a smallish phone are completely compatible with each other.
Most likely you have the Exynos CPU?
I upgraded from a S21 Ultra (Exynos) to a S23 Ultra (Snapdragon).
Battery life is so much better.
I use the 80% battery protection option and nearly always make it through the day.
Only if I constantly watch videos the battery is flat in the evening.
With power saving and 100% battery I can reach 2 1/2 to 3 days.
Loving it.
The Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 solved it by switching to a better TSMC node. The Gen 2 increased performance (on the same node) and got again somewhat less efficient.
Surely with modern processor efficiency, they could get similar or better battery life as small phones of the 2010s? Thinking lovingly of the form factor of the 2013 Moto X.
The Moto X 2013 was awesome. It already had some modern smartphone features (AMOLED, always listen phrase) And it was so comfortable in-hand. The Moto X 2014 was already a pretty big regression in that regard (then Lenovo bought Motorola from Google and updates went down the drain as well).
Yes! That first generation Moto X was the premature peak of the small Android phone. After that everything just got bigger and increasingly less beautiful.
The S22 is notorious for the poor battery life. The S23, for example, is pretty much the same size, faster, and the battery lasts significantly longer.
1. Maintenance: Projects that (seem to) have the same quality and complexity but were built over months or years by hand versus built with an AI tool in a weekend will probably experience different amounts of maintenance in the future. This is, of course, not a black-and-white rule. But simply knowing that people think a project is worth spending months or years on gives me an indication that they probably want to keep it alive in the future.
2. Testing: Projects developed by hand probably underwent a lot more hidden manual testing—maybe on different hardware, maybe by more than one person. Since my personal projects have gotten significantly more complex with the availability of AI coding assistance, I spend much more time writing prompts and thinking about integration testing. But this is not the case for all projects.