not all airports have that. and even when they do I have had to fight to stay online or get online requiring entering email and clicking the link in the email before being granted online access.
It’s more complicated because it has to include logic about which network to connect to and how to tunnel back to the original provider (or partner) while roaming.
So it’s more like: which network to connect to, keys, fallback network selection logic and tunnel logic to get authorisation on a non-home network
That's a good point. That is what I meant by "and config" in my first sentence.
IIUC if the keypair was a certificate with a few other fields foreign networks could give you some basic communication with your provider and decided if you should be allowed to use this network and if/how to tunnel you back to the home network.
But the main point is that it should just be data that the user can port around to different devices as they see fit and that they can trust not to do malicious things.
It’s not just config though (unless you consider logic to be config). When you’re roaming, the sim applet has to generate a path back to its home network based on request/responses with the networks it can see and their partners (and their partners’ partners etc.)
It’s effectively multi-hop peer discovery and I don’t think you can encode the general case logic for it as just config.
Edit: as a (rather niche) example, FirstNet sims run a different applet to AT&T sims despite nominal running on the same network because they have special logic to use more networks if they are in an emergency area.
No, it's really not that good a feature and turning it off improves my experience so I don't care if they're the only ones with it. That said, if it's part of the open source, when better. And even if it was, I can't complain that a business made a program has a unique feature to attract users.
Delusional rockstar engineers might really have this kind of opinion of their LLMs and their colleagues.
With less sarcasm, how bad is Microsoft as a workplace? The source of this kind of naively arrogant proclamation can be anything from a single rotten apple, to a critical mass of unchecked idiots in the same business unit, to normal for the company culture, to a top-down mandate.
Their announcement does not reveal much, perhaps signing up will reveal more. But I am hesitant to do that since I don't even know if I want this feature.
On the other hand, are they even listening to their users or are they just adding AI to everything?
> No one (yes, yes, I'm sure like 3 people) want a list of all results, unordered or ordered by something useless like name
That's not what the author was suggesting (or indeed, what they built). They were trying to untangle the positive feedback bias showing up first in the rankings gives.
I think there's probably a lot more to untangle, but as a first pass it's super cool!
It's the feigned surprise and sort of attitude that google is doing something malicious or it's a subterfuge. Starting with a bolded "Google Maps Is Not a Directory. It’s a Market Maker." and inishing with eg
> the most important result isn’t which neighbourhood tops the rankings - it’s the realisation that platforms now quietly structure survival in everyday urban markets.
For any service like this, _of course_ ranking is at the core of it. A more honest article could have started there, eg "since you can't display all results, and doing so is useless to everyone, the heart of these products is their ranking algorithm and choices. Let's examine Google's."
A tone of breathless wonder is now the coin of the realm. Quality research and interesting analysis gets the same treatment as everything else, because that's what gets clicks and responses. Dinging an individual article for this is arbitrary and capricious.
Don't hate the player, hate the game. I hate the game too, fwiw.
Still a lie though. If you don't know / aren't familiar with a ranker, the author is priming you through the entire article to believe google is doing something wrong or malicious by ranking the results. Rather than the same thing search engines have been doing for 30 years. Whether their ranker is good or bad (and for whom) is separate.
Including, of course, the way many popular chain restaurants got there is they make food a lot of people like.
That’s what lesuorac is saying. The SEC found he violated the rules for a publicly traded company... And then could do absolutely nothing about it to enforce the rules.
> Well it turns out there is one customer who really really hates hybrids, and only wants to use ML-KEM1024 for all their systems. And that customer happens to be the NSA. And honestly, I do not see a problem with that.
Isn’t the problem (having only read a little about the controversy) that the non-hybrid appears to be strictly worse, except for the (~10%) decrease in transmission size; and that no one has articulated why that’s a desirable tradeoff?
On the face of it, I don’t see a problem with the tradeoff (both ways, that is) choice existing. I expect smarter people than me to have reasons one way or the other but I haven’t seen a reason for saving bandwidth that could articulate the concrete use case that it makes a difference.
> There is no backdoor in ML-KEM, and I can prove it. For something to be a backdoor, specifically a “Nobody but us backdoor” (NOBUS), you need some way to ensure that nobody else can exploit it, otherwise it is not a backdoor, but a broken algorithm
Isn’t a broken algorithm also a valid thing for NSA/whoever to want?
Them saying they want to use it themselves doesn’t actually mean much?
Actually, thinking about this a bit more - saying that there's no "Nobody but us backdoor" to prove there's no backdoor is a poor argument.
As an example - if there's a weakness that affects 50% of keys (replace with whatever hypothetical number), NSA can make sure it doesn't use those affected keys but still retain the ability to decrypt 50% of everyone else's communications. And using the entropy analysis from this post, that would require 1 bit hidden in the parameters which is clearly within the entropy budget.
reply