That doesn't require a special aspect ratio.

You are not answering the parent comment. If the original aspect ratio was a square, making the "full screen" aspect ratio 1:1, then folded out it would have aspect ratio 2:1, fitting two squares side by side.

The sqrt(2) aspect ratio allows a portrait full app to be scaled up to the exactly to the folded out screen. But does anyone want that? You probably want to fit more content on the bigger screen, so some layout necessarily changes.

It's still folding in half, so you can have have one app taking up the whole screen, or two half-screen apps, all with the same aspect ratio.

Just don't name it "terminal solution".

Another reason might be that modifications of the map are entangled and can be hard to revert in case of a dispute. It's much easier for the Internet Archive to just drop snapshots of websites/pages (and they do so, AFAIK).

I don't see how https is relevant for browser JS vulnerabilities.

Man in the middle attacks are much easier.

How is that trust anchored? To public IPs or to public keys?

It's not trust, it's uptime. Tor trusts only the directory authorities, not any nodes. A node that is going up and down won't be used much. They can be used as middle nodes, since those are ephemeral.

If it's IP, it will be the incoming IP, not outgoing. You might want a stable central node that routes outgoing traffic to the currently active transient edge node.

You can't move a fingerprint's IP without bringing it down, anyway, because the directory consensus is cached for a while and your node will look down to other nodes until they get the latest one.

Next token prediction is just an interface. It can be backed by a Markov chain, a neural model or an actual human being.

I'm torn on this. While I can imagine Meta being morally corrupt enough to do all of this, I just can't imagine an exec taking on personal liability for the company.

When they start torrenting on residential IP addresses and bring the content to work to train their AI, they should be.

That's a lot of ifs. Equally likely that the guy was just running a seedbox.

I don't believe, but this feels a bit like:

"Hey... we need to improve our porn detection AI... but we want to avoid paying for all that porn... is anyone open to taking on some personal liability for a nice bonus this year"

I'm just saying... maybe...

Will they get a refund?

Interesting. The website says that it's "validation-focused". I don't know how that plays out for TOML, but the lack of focus in json schema to define an interface in addition to validation can be very frustrating. Most of the time I would rather trade off some expressitivity in terms of validation in favor of having a defined typed interface into the validated data.