Establishing the initial exchange of crypto key material can be.
That's where certificates are important because they add identity and prevent spoofing.
With TOFU, if the first use is on an insecure network, this exchange is jeopardized. And in this case, the encryption is not with the intended partner and thus does not need to be attacked.
Liverpool had one of these. The universities bought in and in principle academics had access to use the space and materials costed to the institution. So yes, a co-working space with access to fabrication equipment and a few small companies in residence. Very expensive for private consumers and we were never sure who'd get the bill if we used the fancier machines, so it was underutilised. Eg some high end LPKF PCB equipment that could do printed antennas and all sorts of interesting stuff, but the rental cost was rarely worth it over rush ordering from places like oshpark.
Kind of an odd setup because any company that actually needed the kit (eg a darkroom for optical prep) would be better off renting a tiny industrial space and building out their own labs, and contracting out the rest.
And since the universities paid into it they could have pushed for ownership and made it a proper facility for students and researchers.
That matches my experience with this sort of makerspace. It launched with much fanfare and I was really excited. However it was far too expensive for me to use as a private individual, and didn't have enough high end or specialised equipment to make it worthwhile for most companies in the area. It was very disappointing all around. I walked past it on my way to and from work and never saw anybody there. A couple of years later it closed down.
That said, it'll probably allow people to get more things done than at a community space, especially with professional operators making sure things are maintained properly.
Since it seems to be initiated and funded by the state, I give it between 2 to 4 years before funding runs out, politics change at the top, and the space shutters to make way for newer, more exciting ideas though.
Indeed. I believe it is a different category altogether and probably good that they are kept separate.
Just as cheap office spaces for fledgling machine sharing opportunities may give founders the help they need in the very first stages of a company.
Community spaces on the other hand move at a slower pace and are driven by the enthusiasm and volunteer time of their members. Both of which are hard to maintain if the effort ultimately benefits a commercial venture. These kind of "shared hobby cellars" are still very viable and can collect and impressive inventory of tooling. Sometimes people move from one to the other.
Different use cases different approaches. It's unfortunate that the same name is applied to both.
If it’s almost free and access is guaranteed depending on merit it’s a good thing. If it’s super expensive and for few people… early stage startups shouldn’t waste too much money on offices anyway…
It's private/public partnership with an established "makerspace" called Motion.Lab. Historically their cheapest memberships have been 250 EUR per month. Unless something changes this initiative is an incubator/business park.
It's interesting that the state is contributing, but it looks like the intention there is to encourage industrial startups to the city. That's probably a great thing to do but I think calling it a makerspace is stretching the definition a bit.
I balked when I saw it refer to the makers as "stakeholders". It sounds like something a "policymaker" who's never set foot in a makerspace would say. Good luck, I suppose.
Yea. The leet amount of payout seems like this was someone saying that the classification was technically correct, but it's worth fixing either way and it'd be nice to pay an amount.
> > Whether and under what circumstances trans women have no advantage over cos women is a highly complex question.
> Again, not really, except for all the misinformation online. If trans woman have such an high advantage, why haven't they dominated the Olympics for the last 20 years?
Not really sure why you specify 20 years, but I'm too lazy to go through the history of IOC positions to figure out the one 20 years ago.
Because looking at the current one already provides the answer.
The IOC doesn't take the position that it is a simple topic.
The wording in https://olympics.com/ioc/human-rights/fairness-inclusion-non... (and click through) is quite clear that they see a tension between inclusion along the axis of sexual identity and a continuation (or successor) or male/female category split.
There is a pretty good argument that this should be required for copyright protection. The point of copyright is supposed to be to ultimately get works for the public ___domain, when the copyright expires. If the source code has never been released then it's failing at its purpose. Once a work is in the public ___domain the public is supposed to be able to make derivatives etc. So to have copyright protection for software you should have to release the source code.
A noble idea, but it should be pointed out that of all of the software ever written on planet Earth, only Ada Lovelace's somewhat notional code for a non-existent machine would be in the public ___domain in the year 2024. The earliest you would expect to see "modern" code entering the public ___domain is sometime in the 2060s, and that would be written in Plankalkül.
Obviously, if we’d like to require programmers to release software in source code form then we’re going to need some rules. If programmers are made to release software in some source code form then what languages should we require? Clearly, Brainfuck is out of the question, for example. Though, it would do no good to legislate the programming community into a religious war over FP or OOP. My proposal, however modest, is that the law require software be released in some kind of well-specified, portable language. Something succinct and powerful. Something symbolic, abstract, and much higher-level than the underlying hardware. Hm. How about x86_64 machine code?
That's generally handled with a "preferred form" clause -- it must be released in the form it was written in. If you originally wrote the firmware in Brainfuck, it's fine to release in Brainfuck. But you can't transpile to Brainfuck and release that.
The value in the stock market is an increasing function, but neither nondecreasing, nor constant.
And most of all, not monotonically increasing.
The monotonically is important because it says that at every zoom level the function is increasing, while it being increasing just says it about the function shape in general.
Kinda useless to reply to a throwaway after 5h but let's see
1. Minor mistake. 42% marginal is at 60k~ish, the 278k number is 45%
2. The effective income tax rate around 100k is in the area of 25%. When there's numbers thrown around above 40% they usually include the 19% sales tax, CO2 tax etc. it's a slightly odd number including government induced cost.
VAT is never included in income tax comparisons. So, please tell me: How do you get to 50% effective tax rate in Germany with anything less than a ridiculously high income, like 250K EUR+?
Establishing the initial exchange of crypto key material can be.
That's where certificates are important because they add identity and prevent spoofing.
With TOFU, if the first use is on an insecure network, this exchange is jeopardized. And in this case, the encryption is not with the intended partner and thus does not need to be attacked.