That may be true but doesn't contradict the point of the parent commenter.
If Auth.js wanted to give up, that would be fine (although disappointing, since multiple options is always healthy, especially for something as critical as auth)
but this deal where they are "becoming part of BetterAuth" and recommending that new users use BetterAuth on the project README is concerning to me
Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that".
Since you asked for feedback, maybe a user portal, with a document library would be the tips from the top of my head. Maybe with something to track learning over time. Though this would surely increase hosting costs.
There was a hackernews post a few days ago, pointing to a reddit thread where some guys proved that the founder/s of relection AI were faking their model by just passing the input to Claude (Sonnet 3.5) and stripping the word "Claude" from the output, amongst other things. Then when they got caught they switched it to GPT 4-o.
After this, I will be very skeptical to anything they claim to achieve.
I am a bit surprised by how hard this article makes out the problem to be.
Crowdsourcing should make short work of the problem, with the right incentives, which the government will be able to offer.
Additionally private map providers (e.g. Google, Apple) must surely have this data (since they are able to route navigation to private addresses). Why not just negotiate with them?
> Additionally private map providers (e.g. Google, Apple) must surely have this data (since they are able to route navigation to private addresses). Why not just negotiate with them?
The article points out that the PAF is kept up to date by virtue of thousands of postmen and postwomen physically visiting the rows in the database on a daily basis, as part of normal business, and logging updates. That level of routine maintenance is what any non-PostOffice PAF alternative would have to also do.
Amazon, and probably Google Maps, are two of the very small number of organisations which _might_ have the resources to build this postcode->GPS mapping, as a sideline to their current business.
They probably do license the PAF, of course, but they illustrate the sort of scale required to assemble that data independently.
I was a postie for a short while. A particular row of houses had no number 63, 61 and 65 were next door to each other. I always wondered if I posted something to 63 would it land in my sorting rack? Sadly I never tried, but I am fairly sure it would have. I often observed manual intervention to resolve addresses, from years of collective postie knowledge.
Because the OS data doesn't provide addresses, just locations of the postcodes in coordinate terms, so you can't provide the typical website address lookup.
I can't find any good information post-privatisation, but at least before 2013 the postcodes themselves were copyrighted by Royal Mail (likely Crown Copyright as with government data). There were attempts to enforce this in 2009[0]. I suspect the copyright is now owned by Royal Mail Group Ltd.
That aside, a practical issue is that Royal Mail still retains the rights to _allocate_ new postcodes for any new properties. Yet another failure of this particular privatisation.
This example could be all javascript (and I try to do that in some scenarios). Most of the other demo's on my site are just javascript/D3 or other libraries even with some slightly more advanced metrics, https://crimede-coder.com/demos.
There are some cases in which I do want python numerical libraries though. Say I wanted to do a forecast ARIMA model based on arbitrary combined inputs for the graphs, or do different types of spatial clustering of the geographic data. Those would be cases pyscript would make sense.
The public dashboards yes IMO easier to not have to worry about server.
ECHR is law in Sweden and the constitution states that no law can be enforced that is contrary to the ECHR. This has consequences for when defamation is punishable.
Edit: And the EU charter is basically the ECHR but with some minor additions and it's own court.
> the constitution states that no law can be enforced that is contrary to the ECHR
Yes, but the decision of what is contrary to the ECHR is made by the ECHR and they always give pretty ample margins to member states. The ECHR is supposed to be a lower limit on what protections are given. Not the ultimate authority on what protections should be given.
Maybe they'd rule these cases in violation, all I'm saying is that I wouldn't be shocked if they didn't
> the EU charter is basically the ECHR but with some minor additions and it's own court
No, actually it's completely different from the ECHR. The ECHR is a treaty which applies to all actions and legislation of the parties.
The EU charter is specifically targeted at EU law. It is a protection against interference originating in EU law and its scope applies only to EU law and its implementation.
So if your rights are violated due to an EU regulation you have recourse because of the charter, if they are violated due to how your country implemented an EU directive you have recourse, and if they are violated by your country because of how they are enforcing some legislation you have recourse.
However the member states themselves could pass their own law completely violating these principles and as long as it doesn't infringe on EU competences you'd have no recourse (well, you'd still likely have the ECHR)
If Auth.js wanted to give up, that would be fine (although disappointing, since multiple options is always healthy, especially for something as critical as auth)
but this deal where they are "becoming part of BetterAuth" and recommending that new users use BetterAuth on the project README is concerning to me