but then there wouldn’t have been a ‘bug’ for the librarian to fix?

Why wouldn’t collisions matter in a hash map? They’re directly attributable to the speed of the hash map. In fact I would venture to say that collisions are directly attributable to speed in all situations. That matters, right? Especially at the language level.

I mean you are more tightly coupled. It’s way more likely that someone is going to pull the git submodule (especially if you’re doing this with multiple projects) than the someone updating the version of the library inadvertently. This applies even more if you’ve created the library and deployed it to your own artifactory yourself.

I think the point the user was making is that, if it isn’t already distributed as a library, you can just fork it and deploy it as a library artifact to your company’s internal artifact repository. You shouldn’t be pulling an external project as a submodule, that’s just coupling yourself way way too tightly to external code. So you turn that code internal and into a library.

The article calls out hash functions and links to the relevant Wikipedia page, so I don’t think this is solely about cryptographic hash functions, though that seems to be what you were talking to the other user about.

Ah I didn’t know that. I doubt it was that much when I first got it, but I’m unsure. I’ve had it for a long time

I’m pretty sure you can pay for a lifetime access to infuse, cause I don’t think I pay monthly.

I would love to see a comparison of the 2019 mbp vs the one from the article. What additional domains? Are they on the same OS version? What percentage increase for each domain?

https://p.programming.dev/ or https://photon.programming.dev/

Kias and Hyundais were poorly made in the 2000s and they had to work hard to rebound from that. They started building better cars in 2014+ and now they’re fantastic.

You’re right about the data harvesting. We need regulation badly.

Hmm I wonder why it charges so slow.

You use a password manager which integrates with all OSes. You don’t need to ever worry about creating multiple keys. I login to <x> account on whatever device I want using 1Password. It can use a passkey no matter what, windows, Mac, iPhone, etc.

You don’t have to use biometrics either. You can just use a password manager that manages the passkeys and only login to the pw manager with a pw.

You don’t have to use biometrics to authenticate your passkeys.

With passkeys you no longer need to use oauth at all since creating and using passkeys can be done more easily than creating a new password or using oauth. If you’re using Google services of course you’ll still log in with a Google account, but on example.com you can just create a new account with a passkey and never worry about oauth or passwords at all.

Passkeys have nothing to do with Google. They’re a standard compliant control mechanism designed to replace passwords. https://fidoalliance.org/passkeys/

Google doesn’t do anything with them besides store them exactly like they would your password. You authenticate using your device, which Google knows nothing about. The biometrics do not leave your device. https://www.passkeycentral.org/introduction-to-passkeys/passkey-security

Passkeys do not have to be biometric. You can use 1Password for example and not ever use fingerprints or anything biometric and still use passkeys to log in to services. It’s literally just a different better authentication method than passwords. You can still share passkeys through a password manager.

Literally everything you said is scaremongering and making it easier for scammers to take advantage of people. You should be switching to passkeys immediately.

I think OP and several others in this thread just don’t understand what passkeys are replacing, which is passwords. Google doesn’t manage any part of that.

Where in the world are we talking about Google managing your passkeys. The article is about using passkeys for Gmail. You would manage your passkeys exactly like you would with any password, with a password manager like 1pass, bitwarden, etc. Google doesn’t manage or control any part of that.

How do passkeys keep you inside Google’s walled garden?

I’ve spent a significant amount of my time at my last job looking through editing history in Google products. It’s slow and annoying. It’s not easy.