The problem is that this is a client side javascript-based attack - meaning your browser sends these malicious requests. So a DDOS, not "just" a regular (centralized) DOS. Anyone opening the page with javascript turned on (which is 99% of real users, however for Lemmy the statistic's surely a bit better) is an "attacker".

You can - once you know of the nature of the attack (this one's relatively simplistic), just react to any realistic-looking request and block ignore the malicious ones - in this case garbled rng output.

Rate limiting would only lead to what the attacker wants - legit users (who are unknowingly sending these malicious requests) being blocked from accessing the site.

So now Elon's shitty platform is seen as a valid archival and verification mechanism. Got it.

From what I see, 0 = 10 on this scale.

From what I gather (someone correct me if I'm wrong), carriage return and line feed do different things.

Think of a typewriter. It has two things. A large lever you spam which lets you move the writing position towards the start of the page (that's carriage return), and a small wheel you spin which adjusts the vertical positioning of the paper (that's the line feed).

Computers were modeled after typewriters. And in typewriter logic, to start writing in a new line, first you need to return the horizontal position to the start of the current line (CR), then feed a new line in (LF).

If you just CR, you'll start to type over the text already present on thal line, and if you just do a LF, you'll start typing in a new line from the same horizontal position, leaving a large gap of unused space to the left.

Newer models of typewriters made the large lever used for CR automatically do a LF as well as a quality of life improvement, as it was hard to nail down a consistent line spacing manually.

As computer programs atopped thinking in terms of being a 1:1 logical replica of typewriters (simulating ink being stamped on the page with a mechanical arm and supporting stamping over existibg text), but ratger in terms of layers and text boxes, selecting and editing), editors lost the ability to destruxtively atamp over existing text, so CR doesn't do anything anymore.

Some systems only use LF (CR implicit) or verbosely say CRLF (what a typewriter would do).

Well... I'm quite on the fence about AI, after being against it for a while.

Your point stands. Current AI use is terrible: both the ecological disaster and mass theft they present are not small issues.

Yet these aren't a fault of the tech itself. They're the fault of the companies doing said theft, and the governments either silently or openly ebracing said theft. And economic bubble fueling the theft and the unprecedented rate of datacenters popping up.

I like to compare AI to photography. Both are/were revolutionary. Both killed jobs. Both raised copyright issues. Yet photography today is an integral part of life. And I'm afraid LLM chatbots will be as well in ad few as 15 years.

There's no stopping technological progress, even when it's actively blocked - let alone when governments feed billions into it and take a blind eye to all its issues.

So the case isn't as clear cut. You can admit defeat now, or you can wait a bit. You can be the sole hermit not using it in a world which does. Which is a personal choice for everyone. The only thing to ask is: is it the right one for an open source project?

Rejecting "known unethical" tools does seem like a sensible approach though. Either make your own, use a known-good one or do things the old fashioned way. No leaded gas in our vicinity allowed.

Because a certain group of certain countries made the main comparison axis "capitalism - communism" instead of "totalitarianism - freedom". I wonder why.

The loophole is obviously the amendment mechanism - it always is. You can try to close the loophole, but it's an impossible ask.

And besides, there's no perfect constitution. Most countries change them pretty often. The US is an outlier in that regard with its 200+ year old constitution.

Times change and so do circumstances. Any constitution that wants to stay relevant long-term needs a way to change things to match the times and stay current.

What's important is the entire system and bureaucracy around that sole document: it can turn the most totalitarian core democratic, or the other way around. Laws, rules of conduct, procedures... They all make a stable and coherent system. It's not all in the constitution.

But if he wants to spy on you in your home, suddenly there's a perfectly valid reason (in hsi book) why your house is special and doesn't get the right.

Academia calls these heuristics, not statistics.

Firstly: I'm not the downvoter.

Secondly: you didn't have to - you chose to.

And as most chatbots list sources, you can always check them out yourself and cut out the middleman. Most of academia - some 45% do that. Another 45% don't even bother. A lone 10% still do things the old fashioned way. In any case, you're not alone in relying on AI to find obscure information.

With search engines becoming increasingly infested with low-quality and obvious-slop sites, relying on the same methods as the slopmasters isn't even a big stain on your morality. Because of it was, the slopmasters would be drowning in the ink required, and billionaires would already have caused another biblical flood of it.

Objective and simple. And having some baggage. That's what metric is.

And celsius is fully objective and simple, with none of the baggage the meter, kilogram or h:m:s have.

No one said metric was perfect, because it's not. It's the dumb dumb standard we have. But it works well enough for the vast majority of things.

Yes. Just as feet and inches are for height. And miles are for distance. And pints and quarts for liquids. And ounces and fluid ounces.

We can make as many of these exceptions as we want, and the only clear winner of the "most ubiquitous use of imperial" has to be inches on porn sites.

But what objectively is the truth is: the rest of the world, save for Liberia and the other place use metric for everything, with the UK being another strange holdout, use metric. International communication is less and less America-centric, and Fahrenheit is American hieroglyphs for us Europeans, because metric is very nice a system as well:

10°C is cold and 20°C warm. 0°C is very cold, 30°C very hot. 20+ is T-shirt territory, <10 is for a winter jacket. Two sentences to catch 80% of the nuance, tops.

To become an expert in Celsius you only need to know 0-40. For Fahrenheit? 0-200 from what I gather. Celsius is very coarse, so every degree means something 15 is noticeably less cold than 14. Everyone has their t-shirt temperature. Mine's 17-18, someone else's 14-15.

Also, when dealing with the weather, you never use decimals. Not needed. A gimmick. As with most other things. The only time you use them is when you look for a fever. 35-37 is normal body temp, 37+ a fever, when measured under the armpit (which seems most common).