Based on the description, it’s because you don’t get raw SQL access; they say the game logic is embedded directly into the database and you interact with it through stored procedures. All the rules are enforced there instead of whatever API endpoint you would normally use.
I vaguely remember an old MSC or TWIM or something that described (the possibility of) a new authentication mechanism whereby I could set up either a dummy homeserver or something in .well_known that would allow me to use my own domain but without needing to use my own homeserver for the actual traffic. Sort of like an auth-only homeserver, if you will.
Is that part of MAS? Was that initiative ever fully-baked? Or am I just misremembering?
You keep saying “No it’s not” and then describing exactly what most people would call “a single point of failure” and “a national security issue” in a lot more words.
> You keep saying “No it’s not” and then describing exactly what most people would call “a single point of failure” and “a national security issue” in a lot more words.
What are you on about ?
Its not a national security issue. Full stop. There are many other airports in the London area and elesewhere in the UK. Heathrow is a civilian airport, not a military one. 99% of air cargo to the UK does NOT come to Heathrow.
Its not a single point of failure either. Sure, for those TEMPORARILY affected it might feel that way. But businesses with contingency plannign will simply invoke their DR plans and go elsewhere ... flights will divert, people will WFH instead of going the offices, people will have to travel to a supermarket a little bit further away.
Also, regarding "single point of failure", see this website[1]... 62,000 customers affected but only 4,800 without power[1]. Not quite a SPOF then is it !
Also, you want guaranteed N+1 resilience at grid level, who do you think is going to pay for that ?
Most people would be happy with the grid sorting out its capacity issues at N level, one thing at a time my friend.
"National security site" is not a synonym for "military installation."
It means "critical infrastructure whose failure causes significant adverse effects."
The UK's main airport is absolutely that.
Your quote about 99% of air cargo not coming through Heathrow is made-up nonsense. The correct figure is closer to around 50% by volume and 70% by value.
> Heathrow carries over 50% of air freight and is a major hub.
Not denying it, but it does depend on what you're sending.
For example, if you send something by DHL, it has a significantly greater chance of going through East Midlands Airport than it does Heathrow.
Same for UPS and others. The bulk of their recent investments have been away from Heathrow.
The non-Heathrow sites have better road connections, and more importantly for air cargo, the noise abatement rules at non-Heathrow sites are more relaxed.
The other problem with Heathrow is that BA have their finger in the pies and they have too many slots, so that limits any growth on the independent freight side.
Heathrow has effectively hit its capacity limit. That may or may not change if they ever build the third runway.
Heathrow undoubtedly does the most air cargo. Sure express often comes into EMA on dedicated flights, but lots of freight comes in the hold of passenger aircraft, and that’s where Heathrow is king. The lack of passenger traffic is undoubtedly a key reason why EMA only does 1/5th of Heathrow’s air cargo, as as you have noted it’s ideally located to serve a lot of the UK.
>Heathrow is a civilian airport, not a military one.
Not saying this incident is or isn't a national security issue, but this is not really pertinent to whether an incident is classified as a national security issue.
National security encompasses much more than just military-related stuff. The "security" part of "national security" is using a broad definition of security (like "food security" isn't strictly about physically protecting food from damage).
I'm out of the loop, what bashing and abuse? Every time I've seen Asahi mentioned, everyone here's falling over themselves to remark on how impressive a technical achievement it is.
I too had the impression people here love asahi Linux. But as the comment said those negative posts tend to disappear.
I’m not fully onboard (I don’t have a MacBook, supporting closed hw from a single vendor) but I see the appeal, and to me getting more people using Linux is major plus that outweighs the negatives. I’m not going to tell people who are generously donating their time to something not to do so.
Look at older posts with showdead on - there's a lot of personal attacks, claims about vtuber identity, trans hate, etc. It's been a bit more chill recently, but the history is there. (apart from the recent https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43406393 which has lots of terrible people again)
A fair assessment might be that instead of a large number of regular users leaving bad comments there is a small number, potentially even one, that spin up sock accounts to make a disproportionally larger number of bigoted comments.
"with showdead on" -- that's the point, isn't it? Personal attacks against people involved with Asahi are swiftly downvoted and killed. I guess the project members would like them to be actually deleted, but that's not really how HN works.
It generally gets flagged, but there's definitely been some bad comments.
I don't think that what I've seen, if directed at me, would get the same response -- but I obviously don't see it all, nor have it directed at me, so it's not really fair for me to say.
Exactly this. His original revelations were shocking to his audience; the Ukrainian invasion is already almost-universally condemned among the same. His “speaking out” against it would be pure virtue signalling, not a single mind would be changed or informed by it.
