For your consideration, one does not need to have their password manager online to use HIBP; they offer [at least] two different concessions to your concerns:
Thus you could hash your passwords in your airgapped setup, transfer the hashes using a mechanism you trust to an Internet connected device, and then check the hashes
Why not? The trinket was made in China in the first place, so it had to already cost some amount to import into the US + some amount to ship to you + some amount to the reseller.
Skipping the reseller saves you money and pollutes the environnement less.
They're talking about just the postage cost being $10. Even for something that is produced domestically. Postage to mail something >1,000mi: pennies. Postage to mail something across town: $10.
This seems like an "argument from incredulity", where there's no particular reason beyond "it doesn't match my intuition". While I agree that it feels somehow wrong, there are a lot of factors to explain it like:
A few possible factors off the top of my head:
1. Shipping is much cheaper in bulk.
2. A local delivery service has different markups for different kinds of delivery.
3. Local delivery services that pick up from you may have additional expenses, like a wide but shallow network of pickup locations and daily collections.
4. It costs more because somebody is charging what the market will bear and the local market is more affluent.
These are small parcels. Its not really "bulk", as in shipping whole pallets from point A to B. Even then its still cheaper even if you look at commercial bulk account rates. You're ignoring UPU rules.
> 2. Sea-shipping is extremely cheap compared to over land--and has been for literally thousands of years.
And then once it gets to the port it goes on the same trucks that would be driving to drive it across town. It's still driving hundreds to thousands of miles compared to driving 300mi between Dallas and Houston. So its paying for sea shipping and then paying to put it on a truck and drive it even further. It still doesn't make sense it would be cheaper overall, and massively cheaper at that.
For example, say you lived in LA, even right on the water across the street from the port.. Lets say you have widget A shipped from China and widget B shipped from a warehouse at the docks. Cost to ship widget A from China, which includes the cost to get it to their port, on to the boat, across the ocean, off the boat, inspected by customs, resorted, put on a truck, and sent to your home is probably several times cheaper than from that warehouse, sorted, put on a truck, and delivered to your house. Delivered by the same truck, sorted at the same parcel sorting facility.
Once again, tell me how that makes sense or how that should obviously be cheaper.
> 3. A local delivery service charges more for one kind of delivery so that they can charge less for another kind.
> 4. The local delivery service charges more to cover additional expenses, like a wide but shallow network of pickup locations and daily collections.
I didn't realize UPS and USPS and FedEx are bespoke local delivery services, news to me! In fact, the bespoke "local" delivery services that only offer specific services tend to be cheaper in those specific domains, such as overnighting documents between common city pairs (like DFW<->Austin, DFW<->Houston, etc). But they really only do documents and only do overnights between commercial buildings.
These orgs I'm talking about (USPS, for example) are the same people doing the delivery for those China Post parcels. It's not like China Post is driving through my neighborhood delivering these things. So any idea of that cost being a part of it is once again not based in reality, at least not in the way you're putting it.
> 5. It costs more because somebody is charging what the market will bear and the local market is more affluent.
Its shipping to the same people. This isn't a change of affluence at all. And once again, UPS, USPS, and FedEx aren't some local delivery companies at least to my knowledge.
The biggest factor are UPU rules.
> A few possible factors off the top of my head:
Try actually looking into the topics instead of just throwing out random ideas that aren't based in reality or facts and acting like I'm the one that has logical fallacies in my arguments. Yours is filled with logical fallacies such as an argument from ignorance and a hasty generalization. Maybe this doesn't make sense because it's an illogical state to be in outside of appeasing bullshit international laws.
Why do they choose to deliver it to me for so cheap while charging me a fortune to deliver my packages to my family the next town over? Because they're required to by international law. In fact, me paying a ton more to ship domestically subsidizes that cheap delivery from China.
> Cost to ship widget A from China, which includes the cost to get it to their port, on to the boat, across the ocean, off the boat, inspected by customs, resorted, put on a truck, and sent to your home is probably several times cheaper than from that warehouse, sorted, put on a truck, and delivered to your house. Delivered by the same truck, sorted at the same parcel sorting facility.
What's "several times cheaper" in terms of dollars?
How does it change if both packages get sent to Chicago instead?
While I agree shipping from China shouldn't be cheaper, boats don't add much. Getting a 40 foot container to the port, across the ocean, and away from the port is several thousand dollars of costs. For small packages averaging 1 liter and .4kg, you can split that bill across 50 thousand of them. That leaves customs, but how many man-hours does it take to inspect a container of mail? Half the point of de minimis is that there's no detailed inspection per package.
As far as the price to ship cross-country versus cross-town, that's a whole different can of worms I don't want to open very far. Let's focus on "shipped from China" versus "shipped from a warehouse next to the US port".
Yes becasue it'll go on an airplane and make it in under a day. Also economies of scale will apply.Traveling through continents like Asia is just cheaper in general too.
I'm not talking about overnight postage; I'm talking standard 3 or 4 day ground. It ends up on the same trucks after it clears the port. There's no choice of postage that makes it cost less to mail something I made in my own home to my family 300mi away (no matter how long I choose it to be) than to ship the same kind of thing from China within a week. In fact, I've often found it just cheaper to buy a new item with their home be the shipping address than mail the thing I already have to them.
Once again, tell me how that makes any goddamn sense.
I'm pretty sure the disparity here is retail shipping rates versus bulk commercial ones. The days of foreign shippers dumping their packages onto our domestic USPS per UPU rules have been over for years. Most items on Aliexpress these days are their managed logistics Choice, with free shipping over $10. I ordered a bunch of stuff before the de minimis tax exemption went away, and it was all delivered by courier (probably gig work).
Even just domestically, contrast the published retail UPS/Fedex rates with the prices of items with free shipping that ultimately go UPS/Fedex. Reasonable off-the-shelf retail rates that facilitate small businesses is also why it's important the USPS remain intact against the longstanding neofascist goal of gutting it.
You're right Chinese dumping through UPU got a bit better several years ago, but its still usually cheaper for a small parcel to get mailed from China through China Post than it would be for a US business to ship through USPS despite the trucks and sorting in the US is still all the same.
And yes, I agree the USPS does essential work. We need to have it work better for our businesses and quit having our domestic mail continue to subsidize cheap junk from China.
> contrast the published retail UPS/Fedex rates with the prices of items with free shipping that ultimately go UPS/Fedex
Look at sites that still break out the price for shipping. Then realize those sites with "free shipping" are just rolling that into their average margins, increasing the prices for everyone or reducing the quality of their products. Realize they pretty much have to subsidize the shipping on the cheap things or else they'll just continue to bleed customers to Amazon.
I believe your point that UPU rates from China are still lower than USPS domestic. I just haven't paid much attention, and I don't know what Shein/Temu deliveries look like. But my point is that at least recent Aliexpress shipments seem to be completely independent of USPS, at least for my deliveries (I've seen comments from other people that got their last mile Aliexpress Choice via USPS, but I think that was still domestic postage). So even if there are still ways of saving using international mail, the subsidy is close enough that commercial operations are still competitive for some packages.
My point about UPS/Fedex is I do not think large retailers are paying anywhere near the published UPS/Fedex rates. I assume that one of the reasons they can get such bulk discounts is from tightly integrating with UPS/Fedex operations such that UPS/Fedex receive whole trailers already sorted per-destination-distribution-center, etc. And I assume anywhere getting such a deal is contractually prohibited from making their actual rates known.
Why do I think this? From what I've seen businesses like Target/Walmart/HomeDepot/Amazon seem very unconcerned with shipping many small packages from different warehouses. This isn't them indulging the occasional shopper who makes a small order (hoping to make the cost up later), but them being actively content with shipping one or two items per package. If they were paying the steep per-package rates that retail and small businesses pay, we'd see a lot more pre-shipment consolidation.
> Cache plugins still go through the PHP interpreter. I'm under the impression there still isn't anything faster than serving HTML files.
Several WordPress caching plugins, like W3TC (https://wordpress.org/plugins/w3-total-cache/), actually add rules to your Apache/Nginx server so that the cached HTML pages are served statically without touching PHP.
Having a smart-but-no-smartass intern by my side, that is always eager to help, that is at the very least superficially knowledgeable about most things, that autonomously gets better at absolutely everything non-physical (yet), that is loyal yet immediately replaceable should I get bored with it or should a better intern pop up overnight (literally happened yesterday with qwen3), that never tires or gets annoyed at me.... well that's pretty exciting.
What a weird and deshumanizing thing to say. Slaves are definitely people, a machine definitely isn't.
Moreover, slaves aren't productive over the medium/long term. You don't get useful and lengthy performance from raw coercion, the same way you don't get truthful and actionable intelligence from torturing prisoners.
So no, an LLM has very little in common with a slave.
> If what you claim is true, with all of this authority, why can't they write a compliant web page?
I'm not sure why you'd think that they "can't" write a compliant web page. It's obvious they can, just like it's obvious they've been paying a bunch of experts top dollars for multiple decades to think about and test what exactly to write in this page's code. It's also obvious they've taken into account the basic fact that every character* they add costs them a measurable amount of money to serve given their scale.
It's therefore pretty obvious that they're deliberately choosing to write a non-compliant web page. Presumably because among the multiple billions of users they serve this page to, a high-enough-to-matter portion is still using old and/or non compliant web browsers and they don't want to cut them out.
That's not how applied math works. Sure, two variables may cancel out when set to specific values and multiplied or divided together... however that certainly does not mean that the variables are meaningless in the overall equation!
I don't see how it would create a loop? It seems like the parser change only impacts <select>'s descendant elements (to stop "cleaning" them of illegal elements), not <select> itself.
reply