Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | arzig's commentslogin

All the EV tariffs are staying place past the end of the Trump administration because protectionism is now bipartisan.


That heavily depends on the Dem primaries. I think after the unpopularity of Biden and the 2024 loss by Harris there might be more appetite to rock the boat instead of getting another establishment caretaker.

However, the more radical wing of Democrats still have some anti-globalism in them (eg Bernie). But still, imho: Unusual outcomes are on the table for Democratic party leadership at this point.


> All the EV tariffs are staying place past the end of the Trump administration because protectionism is now bipartisan.

Anything Trump supported will continue to be seen as hot garbage after he is removed from office. There is no appetite for protectionism when it has hurt rather than benefitted the American economy.


It’s been a month. Not long enough for a trend. Every time gas prices spike these celebratory pieces come out and then when gas prices drop at the end the consumer markets revealed preferences are made bare again. Let’s find out if this can sustain for more than a year after gas prices drop.


Last time gas spiked above $4/gallon nationally people were trading in their huge gas guzzlers at an extreme loss (because no one else wanted them either). I read an article about someone who was contemplating losing $30k on their trade-in instead of continuing to pay high gas prices.

(I don't know what my point is, just that people have short memories, and are generally speaking not rational about purchases, or money in general.)


The trend has existed especially outside the US for several years now, this is just an acceleration of that trend.


It’s not even running tests. Test extensions usually have to run something to even populate the tests panel in my first place and provide the ability to run à la carte. Thus opening a folder will cause the test collector binary to run.


They could ask and/or parse the tests for the information rather than run them to output it. I’m honestly still not seeing a killer feature here that makes the security implications worth it!


The trouble is that "just parse the tests" isn't always an option and running arbitrary code is the nature of how software is built.

The easiest example is JS testing. Most test harnesses use a JS file for configuration. If you don't know how the harness is configured how do you know you are parsing the right tests?

Most test frameworks in JS use the define/it `define("some test colection", () => it("some test", () => /* …test code… */))` pattern. Tests are built as callbacks to functions.

In theory, sure, you could "just" try to RegEx out the `define("name"` and `it("name"` patterns, but it becomes harder to track nesting than you think it is with just RegEx. Then you realize that because those are code callbacks, no one is stopped from building meta-test suites with things like `for (thing of someTextMatrix) { it(`handles ${thing}`, () => /* …parametric test on thing… */ }`.

The test language used most in JS is JS. It's a lot harder problem than "just parsing" to figure out. In most cases a test harness needs to run the JS files to collect the full information about the test suite. Being JS files they are Turing Complete and open to doing whatever they want. Many times the test harnesses are running in a full Node environment with access to the entire filesystem and more.

Most of that applies to other test harnesses in other languages as well. To get the full suite of possible tests you need to be able to build that language and run it. How much of a sandbox that language has in that case shifts, but often it is still a sandbox with ways to escape. (We've proven that there's an escape Zero Day in the Universal Turing Machine, escapes are in some ways inevitable in any and all Turing Complete languages.)


yeah me as well. at least have the untrusted code allow certain plugins or certain features of plugins to run that you whitelist. not having vim keybindings or syntax highlighting is too barebones.


It’s not that bad if you configure it. Much like much of Linux…


You always get that last golden egg out when you kill the goose.


Unfortunately the integration is really quite weak with Apple. KDE Connect cannot remain active while the application is not in the foreground. It’s possibly a packaging issue but pairing from fedora is also quite flakey.

As absurd as this sounds windows -> iPhone via their phone link is actually almost as good as apples built in ecosystem to the point where I can make phone calls and send texts on my computer. It’s not quite as seamless especially the setup but that is a well done wizard and it mostly works.


> KDE Connect cannot remain active while the application is not in the foreground.

Looks like you can thank Apple for that one.

https://github.com/KDE/kdeconnect-ios?tab=readme-ov-file#kno...


Quite delayed, however windows phone link can show me notifications and notice incoming calls while the phone is locked so I can only assume there is some set of magical entitlements they need.


I’ve started seeing tabs that weigh in at multiple gbs. Cloud provider consoles are particularly egregious examples here.


I like the gnome paradigm. The gnome implementation is bad though. I was promised that xwayland would be the bridge to a glorious future yet stuff like pointer confinement just doesn’t work and their implementation of refresh rate doesn’t play nicely with vscode. So, the reality is I still use KDE even if it’s not quite as visionary.


I find Fedora hits a nice sweet spot between compatibility/updates and random breakage, especially since they backport KDE versions along with kernels.


So you’re saying the solution since Republicans control congress they should do away with the filibuster, pass a check funding bill and then continue governing under bare majorities with no filibuster?

I don’t particularly like that outcome and I think the public understands that democrats have at least some leverage or they wouldn’t be acting in this way.


The way this normally works is, when the House has passed something and the Senate won't, it goes to a reconciliation committee (with members from both houses), and they bring a compromise bill back, and both houses vote on it.

OK, the House passed something. The Senate has made it very clear that they won't pass it. Well, who's preventing the next step from happening? Speaker Johnson, that's who.


That's it, you've got it. Majority vote, take responsibility for both benefits and problems. Do away with the fig leaf of bipartisan consent.


Typically it does require bipartisan consent as the house and the senate are often not controlled by the same party.

The thing to note with the filibuster is that it's only in the senate because the house got rid of theirs a long time ago.


Sure, there are sessions where negotiation must happen between House and Senate. I personally think we should abolish the filibuster - it's undemocratic in the extreme. Republicans (only!) still have the "Hastert Rule" for the House, which is equally undemocratic, and named after a convicted sex offender.

I'm urging the current Senate, controlled by Republicans, the party also controlling House and Presidency, to get rid of the filibuster because then the ruling party could not escape responsibility for their legislative actions.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: