It depends a lot on the government in question too. In the US very few people would trust the government to handle something like this. The certificate authority system is run by big tech companies and nonprofits, for example, not the government.
Trusting the government as a peer makes sense for government sites, but for anything else, it just makes censorship way too easy.
Even among businesses, we normally trust the middleman (the credit card issuer, and their protections and chargebacks) over the government. If a business screws over a regular consumer, the government isn't really going to do anything.
Maybe you have a more civilized society and functional government where you live. We don't.
You've just listed out a bunch of alternate trust roots which, with appropriate infrastructure, could also easily provide practically secured E2E communications which would be adequate for real world use.
The point isn't "trust the government" the point is trust is contextual and the notion of "key signing parties" always missed it (and if you actually go and read up on the concept, government ID documents were considered to be something to ground whether a signature should be issued by someone so it was already baked into the system anyway).
Well, I think that's actually the point, no? This was never a technical challenge (not for a few decades, anyway), but a question of which authority to trust.
Companies rolled their own out of a commercial need. The FOSS community didn't trust the government or big companies so never fully solved the problem. Users just don't care.
IMO those are different use cases. If that sender or Google itself were to disappear, hopefully the messages would just disappear too. It's better that they become inaccessible rather than public.
Long term archival is a different use case altogether, especially of encrypted materials. It's questionable whether any provider or medium can survive over the long term, so it's better to use an encryption system where you hold the keys and the encrypted data can be migrated to any sort of storage or provider over the years.
What topic or field are you researching? Is it something academic, programming related, or...?
It generally helps if you ask it to focus on specific kinds sources (gov sites, academic, etc.) but it really depends on the topic. Easy for some topics (the general sciences) but not so easy for other ones (popular culture stuff or current events).
I think it's going to be terrible at that :( Separating SEO spam from useful products isn't a strength of LLMs.
Probably a normal prompt without deep research would be better for that (but less recent), especially for topics that humans previously discussed a lot in the past (like on pre-AI reddit). Signal to noise ratio is only going to go down, down, down from here... :(
I don't think you'll get useful results from deep research in a case like this, trying to distinguish between all the contemporary advertisers and cut through the spam. Deep research is good at summarizing sources, and it works well if you can tell it what kind of trustworthy sources to focus on. It's not so good at judging the relative merit of each source. And in this case, there are no trustworthy sources... it's all just spam. If you manage to get good results out of it for market research, you should probably just start a business and become a billionaire selling that functionality instead of whatever you were researching :)
Isn't this how banks send secure messages too? You can't send secure emails to arbitrary clients otherwise. PGP stands no chance of being adopted by regular users.
Did this topic get resurrected and then re-timestamped somehow? The timestamps say many of the comments were posted 16 hours ago, but I definitely posted these way longer ago (like 3 days ago, I think). There's also a lot more voting activity now and possibly some green-name astroturfing.
You really shouldn't. Help him set up a Squarespace/Wix/Wordpress or similar that you don't have to maintain.
Anything you code, manually or vibe-ly, is going to become a pile of unmaintainable garbage in a year or two and either you're going to have to help him fix it then or he's going to have to pay hundreds for someone else to do it for him (if he can find anyone).
Please believe me when I say I've wasted way too many years of my youth trying to hack together things like that for clients. That way lies madness. Don't let yourself go down that path. It's not a good use of time and money for you or your client.
Well, Wix isn't really file-based (to the user's eye). They're probably just a bunch of entries in a database. It's more that Wix doesn't offer any sort of easy export to a standard format.
Editing in Wix is kinda like Dreamweaver was in the old days, a bunch of WYSIWYG widgets and building blocks you drag around on a virtual canvas.
If they wanted to, they could probably offer a static HTML export of the rendered pages, but as far as I know, they don't.
Wow, thanks for saying this. I had no idea it was even usable outside the Apple ecosystem. Seems like other IDEs support it too (https://www.swift.org/tools/).
I think for right now, you'd have to use the C interop and link against something like GTK or other GUI library. I don't think SwiftUI specifically would ever work well cross-platform, it has so many Apple-isms.
There's also Swift/Win32, but it's MVC. You could also use the interop and use QT as well.
I don't think any of those are necessarily good solutions, but they are there.
What sort of things are you referring to when you say "Apple-isms"? Not that I doubt your claim -- I just don't do much UI development so I don't have a good reference for what things might be 'platform specific' in that way.
Yes there’s nothing all in one yet. But these are promising directions. Tokamak isn’t abandoned, members are involved in core Swift changes that it depends on and have made progress recently with embedded Swift.
As with other languages, you’d need bindings to another UI framework. In that sense, I wish SwiftUI had a different name because it seems intrinsic to Swift when it’s really no different than UIKit.
There’s stuff like SwiftCrossUI that does multiple backend bindings
Like Flutter, this paints everything itself. It doesn’t need to bind to a UI framework directly. Instead, it needs the platform to provide primitives like a surface to draw into and input events.
Trusting the government as a peer makes sense for government sites, but for anything else, it just makes censorship way too easy.
Even among businesses, we normally trust the middleman (the credit card issuer, and their protections and chargebacks) over the government. If a business screws over a regular consumer, the government isn't really going to do anything.
Maybe you have a more civilized society and functional government where you live. We don't.
reply