I mean certbot handles the just issue me a cert via DNS-01 and I'll do the rest flow just fine. Massive overkill of a program for just that use-case but it's been humming along for me for years at this point. What's the selling point for uACME?

Do you see yourself taking over httpcore as well as it's likely to have the same maintainership problem? It would certainly instill more confidence that this is a serious fork.

This certainly wouldn't be the first time an author of a popular library got a little too distracted on the sequel to their library that the current users are left to languish a bit.

Well, the reason for all the fragmentation is because the Python stdlib doesn't have the core building blocks for an async http or http2 client in the way requests could build on urllib.

The h11, h2, httpcore stack is probably the closest thing to what the Python stdlib should look like to end the fragmentation but it would be a huge undertaking for the core devs.

> but it would be a huge undertaking for the core devs.

More importantly, it would be massively breaking to remove the existing functionality (and everyone would ignore a deprecation), and confusing not to (much like it was when 2.x had both "urllib" and "urllib2").

It'd be nice to have something high level in the standard library based on urllib primitives. Offering competition to those, not so much.

I think Flock is just a symptom of the underlying tech becoming so cheap that "just blanket the city in cameras" starts to sound like a viable solution when police rely so heavily on camera footage.

I don't think it's a good thing but it seems the limiting factor has been technological feasibility instead of any kind of principle against it.

I don't think Sotomayor's dissent is particularly convincing because you need a new law that hasn't been yet been invalidated for each instance of retaliation against journalists or general 1A violations. And plugging this loophole with QI would put police in a weird situation where they're having to best guess based on some legal test if a law is constitutional or else open themselves to a lawsuit. I would be happy if this loophole could be plugged cleanly but I think the harm is theoretical enough that the 5th circuit's ruling is acceptable. I would rather a streamlined system to strike these laws down without needing to have them be enforced first rather than messing with QI. Then the ACLU and the likes can file a bunch of lawsuits making the QI issue moot as they'll already be declared unconstitutional before they're ever used.

I would agree with you if the state took up the responsibility of driving people with suspended licenses around or making public transportation reliable enough for employment. But they don't and so we're stuck with this as the compromise.

I agree with public transport but that's basic. I don't see why the government should babysit you and drive you around because you drank and drove. Driving is a privilege not a right.

I consider it to be the same as the state having to provide for your food, shelter, clothing, and healthcare while you're imprisoned. The state took away your ability to provide those things for yourself and so now it's their job to do it. In cities with shit public transportation that isn't going to be invested in any time soon the state took away your ability to provide for your own transportation and I think it's on them to shoulder the cost.

Things like house arrest and the breathalyzer interlock are ways to punish that still let people provide for themselves. So I agree I don't think the state should be babysitting adults which is why I don't like punishments that turn adults into babies.

The punishment for drinking and driving would be losing the ability to drive, not losing the ability to work or buy groceries, which are generally tied to being able to drive in the US. Public transport is a long-term solution but nothing exists in the meantime. So you end up creating a whole host of downstream problems

I think your expected outcome is actually the desired one, to kill shrinkflation in favor of actual price increases. When the measures are all the same you can compare apples to apples across different businesses.

Forget cheating, we get entirely fake people applying for our positions.

Someone needs to right a novel about an LLM that gets hired through phone interviews, becomes a star employee, and rises through the ranks to CEO , always coming up with excuses to not show up in person.

Like a 21st century Office Space.

Add in a remote only office romance to give it a romcom vibe.

we get real people who are likely fronts for other people.

can't prove where or what -- could be lazy devs in Alabama, or North Koreans -- but it's happened enough that it's notable

They don't get unsupervised internet access, there's always a supervising adult in between the child and the internet. For the child's devices it's the parent who has access to parental control software which will restrict access no matter where the device is, at the school it's the school, at the library it's the library, and for the friend's device it's that friend's parents. The answer for what pages do you block is that you use a service who does the work of categorizing pages for you. Every parental control software worth their salt will have this. It's basically the entire value proposition of paid filter software.

No matter the enforcement mechanism there is no way to defeat the "Shawn's parents are cool" problem because Shawn's parents will just give him their IDs to verify. And I know this because I'm for sure going to be that parent.

They added an optional date of birth field to a user directory. Are you mad at LDAP for contributing to the surveillance state?

Folks have absolutely lost the plot on this one. These laws are stupid, this implementation is fine. Be mad at your legislators, being mad at some swedish guy won't help you any.