The article they cite from De Volkskrant does mention the reasoning why some information is being restricted; the politicizing of information, and the violation of human rights.
I'm a subscriber of De Volkskrant and follow Huib Modderkolk. He is an investigative journalist in the area of (Dutch) intelligence services. He has uncovered that the Dutch agencies were involved in hacking Natanz, specifically in the last mile part of the operation. He also uncovered a strange motor accident of the alleged agent in the Middle East (out of my head Qatar or Dubai I don't remember and mix some of these countries up, mea culpa). He's done several interviews with former agents and has build up a network of sources.
That the leaders of AIVD and MIVD give this broad interview to him is unique, and a sign that they want to inform the voter before the election on 29th of October. These guys and services are normally very reluctant to share any information because they know the enemy reads it as well. After all, as you asserted elsewhere any idiot can use Google Translate which works quite well with Dutch for a very long time (since forever?).
That's a paywall, and I don't speak Dutch, what precisely are the human rights violations they're accusing the US of?
And these kinds of accusations go both ways, free-speech is under constant attack in the EU, the ruling class doesn't want citizens informed or even able to inform one another of critical political processes and actions without their thumbs in everyone's mouth, that much is clear.
They're very careful in not making any real political statements, which makes sense considering it's the heads of both the military intelligence service and general intelligence service. Here's the relevant quotes thrown through Google Translate:
*Are you more cautious about sharing certain information?*
Reesink: “I can’t comment on what that relationship is like now compared to before. But it’s true that we make that assessment and sometimes don’t share things anymore.”
*That’s a striking shift. What has been the most important change?*
Akerboom: “We don’t judge what we see politically, but we look at our experiences with the services. And we are very alert to the politicization of our intelligence and to human rights violations.”
*What does it mean in practice if there are risks in those areas?*
Akerboom: “Sometimes you have to consider each case individually: can I still share this information or not?”
That doesn't really clarify anything, but if I read between the lines, they're saying "we don't share information if we determine it will help (Trump) politically"
On one hand, this is the modus operandi of every political institutional from the CIA, to the CCP to city states to small towns in California, everyone acts in their own self-interest all the time. They're claiming nebulous "human rights" violations but don't state what they are. Could they mean blowing up boats suspected to be carrying drugs or precursors? I'd like to see Trump stop that myself, it's a pretty dangerous game he's playing.
On the other hand, I would expect the CIA/NSA have much greater potential value for the Dutch intel agencies than the reverse, so them prodding an administration after he was nearly assassinated twuce and many of his closest political officers and supporters were arrested and subjected to lawfare over the last 4 years doesn't seem like a particularly wise course of action. It's true this iteration of Trump is a lot more in tune with the way DC works so I wonder how wise the statement even is, they can accomplish what they're doing without announcing it, except now they announced what they're really up to and should probably expect some kind of retaliation.
I would expect anyone on this particular website right here to be able to let their browser do the translation. For Google Chrome that would even be the default, if it is setup knowing your language(s). The quality of the translation is excellent these days. There is no excuse.
And the defence of "there was no communication between the two brothers and the traders" feels really weak as well. Of course there was a communication, they put a trade offer online, and it was accepted by a trader, albeit automatically.
The search terms for how to evade fraud is also not going to help them.
I wonder if their lawyer advised them not to take the plea deal, it doesn't sound like they have a high chance of getting away with it.
> The search terms for how to evade fraud is also not going to help them.
If you're trying to do large-scale taxes, that's just called a "ruling": not sure if the sketchy-looking loophole you found is legal? Ask the tax man for legally-binding advice!
This doesn’t come from the JavaScript ecosystem. Numeronyms have been in use in the computer industry since before JavaScript existed. “i18n” (“internationalisation”) has been in use since the mid-80s, for instance.
It's basically a piece of software for doing visual programming where workflows can be triggered by events (webhooks, web calls, and a bunch of other things). Has a self-hosting option which is quite nice.
Very true... I'm more experienced with .Net, but usually when you bring in something, it's much more of a compositional library or framework for doing something... like a testing harness (XUnit), web framework (FastEndpoints), etc. No so much in terms of basic utilities, where the std library and extensions for LINQ cover a lot of ground, even if you aren't using LINQ expressions themselves.
It is, but it's still firmly controlled by Microsoft, particularly when it comes to ecosystem evolution. Some people find that uncomfortable even if the source is open - legal right to fork is one thing, technical ability to do so and maintain said fork is another.
Does anyone know how this compares to other products in its field, such as LanguageTool and Harper? LanguageTool can be hosted locally, and Harper runs entirely as an extension, so I'm interested in how the spelling and grammar checks compare.
I've run LanguageTool Server with the ngrams[0] for years, it is legitimately excellent with the ngrams (and mediocre without). The English-only ngrams are roughly 15 GB on disk.
Just have a Windows Scheduled Task kick off this bat file:
I just tested both on the text "Look Dick. See Jane. Jane run home. I says you go home to. They eats dinner." LanguageTool does what I would expect. Harper does not. However, both whine about two spaces after a period.
Edit: Alas, Hacker News also removes the extra space after periods.
Extra space after periods is never correct with proportionally-spaced fonts, which is why all browsers remove it by default.
Two spaces after periods is a kludge invented for typewriters that had monospaced fonts and touch typing teachers need to stop teaching it in the modern era where most writing uses proportional fonts.
Indeed - especially the space before colons and semi-colons. The space before exclamation marks sometimes happens in informal typing amongst Brazilians. But never the space before colons/semi-colons.
What is becoming more obvious is that people on Hacker News apparently do not understand the concept of non-determinism. Acting as if the output of an LLM is deterministic, and that it returns the same result for the same prompt every time is foolish.
Run the prompt 100 times. I'll wait. I'll estimate you won't get a shell command 1-2% of the time. Please post snark on reddit. This site is for technical discussion.
https://www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/nederlandse-diensten-de...
reply