I think for photojournalism it should be original raw image, as captured in camera — zero edits for colour correction/cropping/filesize etc — platforms can link a digital sig from a postprocessed version but you keep the provenance proof tied to a published original.

Are they allowed flash? What about studio lighting? What about commentary? Paid actors?

"Hey, do me a favor, wear this hoodie and go hand this plastic baggie with white powder in it to that guy over there, it's for an art project, he's going to act like he doesn't know you, and then you just run in the opposite direction to where you'll be payed"

Or "here's three photos of XYZ taken on three seperate days at his new favorite coffee shop, notably across from this elementary school. Read on for our take on why he likes this shop so much!"

Or even something as simple as positioning the camera just so that one national head appears shorter than another. Or, in an interview, adjusting lights on the 'hero' to make them look good and highlight the shadows on the 'villain' to make them look ominous.

Use a mirror set up to make it look to the 'villain' that they are making eye contact but are instead looking weirdly askance.

Limitations are the origin of creativity. Force publishing RAW would just force journalists to be more creative in their framing.

Also, no edits for filesize? Lossless RAWs are huge! Especially from professional cameras. You could end up loading a gig of data for a single article with 10 images, or even more for larger frames. The few who care enough to see the 'real' image (that is still tainted by photographer intent regardless of file size and editting) are motivated enough to click the lossy jpg for the raw. Those who do not care aren't going to sit waiting on the order of minutes to see the first image.

Or what about: the photographer tries to hide so that they don't contaminate the real-life that they are watching, but then the person sort of hears a small sound from the photographer's direction -- they don't actually SEE the photographer, but they get interrupted.

Or: the CCTV is well hidden, but the people who installed it left behind some mud that got on someone's shoes and that made them late...

That's pretty much how the Apple one works. The raw sensor data is signed. But you have to process it because raw sensor data is unviewable.

Provide the raw original, and the exact processing steps used to get the presentable one.

ok, point camera at a screen. let's counter that by also taking 360° image with secondary camera. Ok build some props, let's add gps into it. fake gps. let's add inertial tracking and self-destruct on tamper. Ok, but we really need a fake image, here is our badge, give us signing keys for special use case...

You cannot replace honesty with tech.

> Also, to be able to sell stuff, you gotta comply with the CE rules one way or another, there is no free card here.

Yes but there's a big difference between "only import electronics that aren't fire hazards" and "you have to pay custom & excise on anything you import".

and if you have no website at all, it takes zero seconds to load.

But for people who are developing websites that are more than just text, this is an excellently written article and great advice.

It's funny, for mobile app dev it feels like the community are a lot of focused on staying off the main thread, this is the first time I've come across one for webdev.

"The 'right to repair' regulations introduce new rights and supports aimed at encouraging repair over disposal, including a repair obligation for manufacturers of certain products and the establishment of a national repair platform to help consumers locate repair services."

If your hardware start-up was going to tell me to buy a new product if it broke after a year, then I've no problem if it doesn't get going in the EU.

We don't need more cheap tat, we need things that can have a reasonable shelf life. We used to expect that from products as standard. Then when more things became electronic, it started to drift into obsolence after X years.

But there's so many products that don't need to be replaced. I don't need a state-of-the-art pedometer or weighing scales, I just need one that does the job it did when I bought it.

I imagine that it probably went like this "what about identical twins?" / "Don't worry about that for now, we'll solve for it before we go live, but it's not in this milestone". Then someone pulls rank and decides the product is "good enough, we can't wait for all bugs to be fixed" and gets it deployed.

Issues get closed to make the metrics look good, not because they’re actually fixed.

I don't think the parent meant that it doesn't need moderation, but we've always had that in IRC/boards etc.

But there's nothing akin to personalised algorithms, resharing posts, multimedia content etc. I mean even text formatting is very lean :)

that's absolutely true, it's also the fastest website i use daily, by a large margin

To me, the biggest hurdle to trying to manage agents like humans is that there's no real continuity, out of the box at least.

You can trying to get around this with RAG and markdown files and skills but you're basically building from scratch the "tools" on how to remember the codebase that you take for granted with people

There's no continuity with outsourced consultants either. But still people manage to make it work.

With the exact same tools you use with LLMs: proper documentation and detailed instructions.

Then you can grab any random consultant or LLM with a fresh context and get them to work.

The fact that you had 'hydration breaks' in enclosed, fully air-conditioned stadiums is very telling.

An argument I've heard is that since hydration breaks can affect the game, if you are going to have them they should be mandatory and at the same time in all games in a tournament rather than doing them like they did when they were originally introduced in 2014. Then they were only done in games when the conditions on the field got dangerous.

Seems like the wrong spot to optimize for fairness / equal playing conditions when the weather itself affects the game in so many more ways.

football games can have "momentum". An extra break allows for a breather and a tactical intervention from the coach. That also why we saw keepers sitting down (faking injury) in the Premier league last season. Anyway, a hydration break while it's raining is a bit of a tell it has nothing to do with the needs of the players.

I can't remember this sports without a hydration break (half time). So they've been mandatory for a long time.

I was in one of those enclosed stadiums. It was not air conditioned. It was hot as hell, above 30c the entire game.

It was 14C in the Azteca though.

Not all stadiums were enclosed

That's not the point he was making at all though.

He wasn't saying "buy a fancy pen, it's better for your brain".

The positioning is "every time people hear that I write on paper, they come up with all these reasons why it won't work for them (crap/smudges/etc). These are the things I do so that's not a problem for me"

My understanding of what they were saying Buzz is is that agents are "1st class" users in their own right, rather than being an app integration.

If you have a user called Claude, then you just apply ACL as normal & you don't care if they're human or bot, right?

The issue is when users interact with claude, what can they see? If the AI can see super-secret-payroll-details.md - is it allowed to discuss that with any user? is there some sort of internal ACL within claude that asks pretty please don't tell everyone they're underpaid?

That's why multiuser agents can be an issue.

The other way to do this, is to have claude installed for everyone, and any user's chat with claude uses their personal permissions via something like oauth delegation or AWS IAM role kinda things. But that, again, is complicated ACL logic living through the delegation of roles and access

I'm not sure the permissions problem is solved even if we assume models inherit user permissions. Imagine I'm a manager and someone contacts me about an HR incident involving one of my reports, or other sensitive information. The agent probably shouldn't have access unless I explicitly provide it.

I would've thought you could solve that with multiple agents.

So rather than having "Claude" installed as a god-mode user in all channels, you have 10 instances of a bot running, each with their own context and ACLs.

For example, you could set it so that the agent's ACLs become the intersect of the least privileged user in all the channels it lives in - you try to add a bot to the "Executive Bonus discussion" and get told

> You can't add AliceBot to this channel because AliceBot is also in #intern-onboarding alongside 'Johnny Appleseed' and Johnny doesn't have access to this channel. Would you like to create a new bot?"

I am sorry to be the bearer of bad news: That is just massive ACLs and permissions issues with extra steps.