Anyone who is not explicitly privy to a fully bespoke, end to end encrypted data transmission and retrieval system has no way to determine the function or purpose of that system.
It could be text, audio, video, raw signal bitstream from an IoT sensor, or a full duplex async combination of anyone of those.
It wouldn't be a "chat service" to an outside observer, it would just be seemingly random, opaque bits between two endpoints.
well, for example, you could roll your own secure messaging over WebRTC data channels using Web Crypto. There won't be anything unusual looking about the traffic as it will all be wrapped up inside DTLS/SRTP which is the transport for WebRTC. so, it's encrypted twice and would look perfectly normal to any outside observer. there's no way to tell what is happening in the messaging layer WebRTC "encapsulates".
At end of day, if someone wants to do this, there is no way, afaik, it can be detected. so, all these laws won't really help combating serious criminals who have some savvy.
It may just be me, but I have found greater joy and satisfaction working in Go compared to any other language. I believe this is very important when considering the finite and decreasing time remaining in my life.
Sometimes "good enough" performance is perfectly fine when considering a bigger picture.
That's one of the most reasonable ways to look at it, among many voiced here.
I agree with it, it's the same reason I enjoy C# (and sometimes F#) - it gives the sense of control, gets out of the way when you want to get things done, and gives powerful tools when you want to push it to the limit.
The problem is - Go is not an underdog the way C# is if you look at GitHub statistics, and has reached the escape velocity that gets it picked for all the fun projects, even when they would have been better served by C# which either offers a purpose-built capability or good tools to implement such. And when Go fails that, it will be made work despite its shortcomings, similar to Python and ML.
It's very painful to move languages when such move involves the sense of settling for less. I tried a lot and very few felt like an improvement - some would perform better in a particular area but would also have significant shortcomings I'm not comfortable with in areas C# doesn't.
Sounds interesting, but their page appears to be broken for mobile. They have something hijacking the scroll behavior making it near impossible to actually read anything about this.
Why do web devs constantly have the need to break decades of UI convention?
I'd mostly agree, although it's worth mentioning that there are certain invasive species and harmful plants that are best to get rid of however you can. It might be worth taking a look at what's growing even for people who aren't interested in pulling weeds.
Thanks for the link. I'm not a marijuana advocate, but from that article it sounds pretty plainly like so many other stories of law enforcement effectively stealing cash because they can, and are often instructed or incentivized to do so.
It could be text, audio, video, raw signal bitstream from an IoT sensor, or a full duplex async combination of anyone of those.
It wouldn't be a "chat service" to an outside observer, it would just be seemingly random, opaque bits between two endpoints.
reply