As long as AI can't make the code optimized and secure by itself, and these day it still can't, those people won't be replaced. And when they do get replaced there is no guarantee that the more "entrepreneur" population won't get replaced as well.
Barak and bibi are political enemies (or at least we're when Barack was a relevant political figure) and besides that I haven't seen anything suggesting that his connection with bibi is more than the one meeting that was publicized.
They find them useful as a performance optimization, not as a design tool. This optimization is not relevant to Python code because it relies on the optimization passes the compiler makes.
It might be slightly off topic but I have a hard time understanding the layout of the website on mobile, it's not clear what is clickable and what's not.
Comelete rewrite are not always bad, they are _just_ very costly. You just need to do cost benefit analsys and compare it with the cost and benefit of other actions.
It’s important to remember that safety is the whole purpose of the thing. If Tor is slow, it’s annoying. If Tor is compromised, people get imprisoned or killed.
completely agree but it could be added that a new language can sometimes help explore new ideas faster, in which case maybe the routing layer and protocol can see new optimizations
This is not correct. Tor is generally not bottlenecked by the quantity of available nodes, the usual bottleneck is the quality of nodes picked by your client rather than the quantity of nodes available.
Of course, technically, this problem is related to the quantity of high quality nodes :)
Yes, but let's not forget it's voluntary based. There are lots of high quality nodes, although less which are basically burning money and getting nothing in return. We all believe in a censorship-resistant and free web but only few are willing to take action. My two small guard/middle relays are rented at 10$/m each and is only 100Mbit/s non-metered up/down because it gets expensive.
Nothing is "really anonymouse", it's all a game of information sharing and hiding. I think I now understand the difference in our definitions, for you anonymouse means that at the protocol level no one can link the transaction to "you" (defined by a set of identifiers). My defenition is just "not publicly linked to your real world identity", so for example, sending a message under a pseudu name in a public forum would be anonymous under my defenition but not anonymouse under yours. What do you think?
Necroing this, but my general opinion is that anonymousity is more of a question of extent and the shape of anonymousity sets than a binary condition of anonymouse/public. But you are correct that we can never satisfy the binary condition.
Given enough foresnsics, it's possible to link pseudoanonymouse identities to real identities. See chainalysis. I'm sure if you apply stylometry to either of our posts, you could uncover our identities. I think there was a post here doing just that.
So my real problem with the pseudoanonymouse model is that when if fails, it generally favors centralized institutions in who are capable of the surveilance needed for correlation. It is asymmetric. People say that bitcoin's transparency is a feature, but the feature is only accessible to those with the metadata, like arkham or chainalysis. Reputation systems can be very useful though.
You make it sound like it's ubiquitous and constant. Just to clarify what access means:
From Wikipedia:
> By December 2023 200,000 people living in Gaza (around 10% of the population) had received internet access through an eSIM.
> As of August 2024, according to a Palestinian source, over 70% of telecommunications have been rendered inoperable. As of June 2025, Paltel is still providing some internet and landline telephone services in southern Gaza. There have been at least 10 outages since the conflict began. The lack of reliable telecommunications has hampered efforts by first responders and humanitarian groups.
From the above it sounds like maybe 3% of the population have access (as of a year ago), and there are regular outages. It also says that access has been insufficient.
reply