- It's so frustrating that every other comment in this thread is people giving their pet opinion about the headline and what it means about the state of the world / the inherent authoritarianism of Germany / whatever, and nobody else is commenting on the contents.
The controversial measures the article lists are things like:
> Police may now install state-developed spyware, known as trojans, on personal devices to intercept messages before or after encryption. If the software cannot be deployed remotely, the law authorizes officers to secretly enter a person’s home to gain access.
> The revised law also changes how police use body cameras. Paragraph 24c permits activation of bodycams inside private homes when officers believe there is a risk to life or limb.
Those seem like... pretty reasonable things for the police to do, presuming it has a warrant? And if the law authorizes doing these things without warrants, maybe the article should have lead with that?
Ctrl+F-ing "warrant" in the article doesn't give me any result, which makes me feel this article isn't very serious.
- > I like the term "revealed impulse" for this distinction.
I like it too! I might re-use it.
- I don't find it surprising at all. A ton of developers do optimizations based on vibes and very rarely check if they're actually getting a real benefit from it.
- Yeah, I don't see the huge improbability here.
Given that we know that:
- Fleming lived next door to an unsecure mycology lab.
- The temperature during the time period was low enough that if Fleming had left a contaminated culture unattended and non-incubated, he would have had a very high chance of getting the results he became famous for...
Well, given that the probability of discovering penicillin in those conditions is pretty high (say, if he forgot/neglected to incubate one out twenty batches, a 5% chance), and the prior probability of discovering penicillin any other way is extremely low (otherwise other scientists would have found it), bayesian calculus says the stroke of luck hypothesis is probably correct.
- You could do it like a brownout, and have a random per-user cooldown going from a day to a month.
Not enough to accumulate tech debt, enough to mitigate the potential impact of any supply-chain vulnerability.
- You mean like VorpX?
- Yeah, that's a bad example, there's a bunch of ways field order matters in Rust.
Import order would have been a better example (they're always supposed to be sorted).
- tl;dr: The government's argument is the old "if we mandate seatbelts, cars will be too expensive and nobody will make them except for luxury brands" argument.
- "PeutÊtre" => "Option" is the clearest evidence this is shitposting, because Option is also a French word.
But the best one is "merde" | "calisse" | "oups" => "panic"
- > The final design, taking inspiration from C++, would be a form of guaranteed optimization, where constructing a new value and then immediately moving it to the heap causes it to be constructed on the heap in the first place.
Note that there's some discussion about the name of that proposal, because "optimization" gives the wrong idea (that it's optional or could depend on the backend).
- > Since the talks described in this article, the work on field projection has received an update. Lossin wrote in to inform LWN that all fields of all structures are now considered structurally pinned, so projecting a Pin will now always produce a Pin<&mut Field> or similar value.
Huh, I missed that part. It's a pretty technical point, but I'm happy they made the decision, it held up a lot of discussions.
- It's a huge deal in China, though Europeans are starting to get targeted as well.
- No, I don't.
First, Israel has consistently denied journalists access to those distribution sites, so the only video evidence we should expect to find are from civilians. Civilians who are in the middle of a stampede and getting shot at do not, as a general rule, stop to bring their smartphone out and film whoever is shooting at them (usually footage of shootings is filmed by people in buildings, obviously doesn't apply here).
The best video I could find is this one, showing people cowering and shots landing between them: https://www.aljazeera.com/video/newsfeed/2025/7/15/video-sho...
That's a really tight crowd, and bullets are clearly landing very close to them. Even if we assume nobody was hit by a stray bullet (which I find very improbable), that's still an egregious breach of the Geneva Conventions. Also, it seems similar to a pattern Aguilar described: IDF soldiers shooting at sand mounds, not realizing/caring that their bullets had enough penetration to go out the other side and kill people.
As for non video evidence, we have: photos of wounded people being taken away from GHF sites, testimonies of Gazan doctors who treated people of all ages wounded/killed by 7.62mm M80 bullets, testimonies of international doctors saying the same thing, a video published by Aguilar where we hear a SRS contractor bragging about hitting someone during a distribution, whistleblower testimonies, Gaza Health Ministries statistics (which the IDF treats as reliable, according to IDF leaks), UN statistics, and a mountain of testimonies from Gazan residents.
But if the only "actual" evidence you accept is video evidence in an area where the IDF is forbidding journalists, then the best I can give you is the link above.
Also, I'm stopping this discussion here, because the bullshit asymmetry principle is at play here: it took you 10 seconds to write your "there's no evidence because I say so" comment, and it took me one hour to sift through the media reports to write this rebuttal.
(Though for what it's worth, I do wish the evidence was better collected, and not scattered across MSM reports. In particular, I wish Aguilar had published a full dump of all the photos and videos he took.)
EDIT: This site aggregates social media reports related to the Gaza war. Some of them include footage of dead people near GHF sites, though none I could find that included the moment the person got shot.
- > "shooting at air/ground to prevent advancement"
Yeah, guess what, that's still a breach of Geneva Conventions.
(Also basic common sense. The golden rule of gun safety is "Never point the gun at anything unless you intend to kill it", there isn't a "but shooting just over their heads is perfectly okay".)
- I wonder if there are other fictional emojis that can trigger the same behavior. Seems like something we'd really want to study.
- That's what the GHF claims, yes. To be clear, they haven't shown any documentation showing that he was fired, while Aguilar did show letters and messages sent by GHF hailing him as a great colleague and saying they were sad to see him go.
The only material evidence GHF has shown are small chunks of SMS conversations that are perfectly compatible with the "Aguilar was trying to convince GHF leadership to change policies" hypothesis, and WhatsApp broadcast of Aguilar telling his staff they were doing a great job.
Meanwhile, Aguilar has multiple photos and videos showing the conditions aid was distributed in which you can see right now on Youtube, testimony of seeing the GHF security contractors firing into crowds (to which the GHF replied by saying its contractors only fired above crowds, still a Geneva Convention violation), statistics that showed that people got shot during every single GHF distribution, matching testimony from Palestinian doctors and journalists and IDF whistleblowers, etc.
The evidence is overwhelming unless your curiosity cuts off as soon as you read the GHF damage control statements.
- That was an exceptional event, that was deeply unpopular within said coalition, and only possible because Netanyahu was widely hated.
From what I read, none of the Jewish parties are interested in renewing the experience.
- Yeah, that made me question my sanity for a minute.
I guess it's performance art, so, thanks, I hate it.
- Wait, so what's the difference between TDPE and Copy-and-Patch?
I thought they used the same technique (pre-generating machine code snippets in a high-level language)?
So yeah, there's always the possibility that the cops spy on someone innocent or try to dig up dirt on a journalist or something, and that's why warrants exist. If you don't think a judge's oversight is enough for the police to intrude on someone's privacy, then you're basically saying that the police should only ever have access to OSINT sources and nothing more.