Didn't see it in the actual text of the article, but as a caption of one of the images. The actual book this is excerpted from is Privacy's Defender by Cindy Cohn https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262051248/privacys-defender/
I second this. Exhalation for some reason really resonates with me.
VB.NET is still a supported platform by microsoft, with the GUI builder and everything. We still use VB.NET exclusively at my current job, for better or for worse. With the addition of tools and libraries like…
I love the styling of this page. Everything is so consistent. Sometimes you'll see someone with a similar retro approach, but rarely do all the page elements follow the style this well.
It blinked in and out for me in Firefox 128 (Windows)
To me, this is the real question. One of the purposes of the peer-review is to validate and verify results, which was clearly not done to a great extent here. Perhaps the reviewers were also using some type of AI?
This is called out in the article too, somewhere around the 70-80% mark
Been using this for minecraft mods for a while, main benefit of this program vs something like blender is the exports
I listened to it as an audiobook over the course of a week or two, and it was pretty bearable. I know there is some debate about whether that counts as "reading" the book, but on something like this I consider it close…
Didn't see it in the actual text of the article, but as a caption of one of the images. The actual book this is excerpted from is Privacy's Defender by Cindy Cohn https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262051248/privacys-defender/
I second this. Exhalation for some reason really resonates with me.
VB.NET is still a supported platform by microsoft, with the GUI builder and everything. We still use VB.NET exclusively at my current job, for better or for worse. With the addition of tools and libraries like…
I love the styling of this page. Everything is so consistent. Sometimes you'll see someone with a similar retro approach, but rarely do all the page elements follow the style this well.
It blinked in and out for me in Firefox 128 (Windows)
To me, this is the real question. One of the purposes of the peer-review is to validate and verify results, which was clearly not done to a great extent here. Perhaps the reviewers were also using some type of AI?
This is called out in the article too, somewhere around the 70-80% mark
Been using this for minecraft mods for a while, main benefit of this program vs something like blender is the exports
I listened to it as an audiobook over the course of a week or two, and it was pretty bearable. I know there is some debate about whether that counts as "reading" the book, but on something like this I consider it close…