You can change that setting in Windows so that it no longer has a 255 character limit.

Yes, you can but then if you have any older software in your system (for company reasons) will not play ball. And it is a workaround, not a permanent solution. Because we still do not have that fabled WinFS so...

Eh, NTFS supported long paths since forever, the problem is with applications using Win32 APIs that are limited to MAX_PATH (260 characters) path length.

There won't be a permanent solution unless all Windows applications start using NT path formatting - which won't happen.

One drive still dies though

Win64 lacks the problem with 255 characters [0]. However, stuff like File Explorer, which the vast majority of my users actually use, can only pass the first 255 characters to the registered application [1], so will Explorer will display stuff with huge long paths, double-clicking that file, or right clicking and "Compress to..." will cause an error.

0 - 32 bit windows will always have this problem.

1 - This is because File Explorer uses a hodgepodge of Win32 and Win64 stuff behind the scenes when running 64 bit windows.

I can't think of any European government that is far left? I am not familiar with all of them of course, so happy to be proven wrong.

I see, thanks for confirming that you're just an ignorant troll. Your post history confirmed that once more. It does make me curious. Where do you drink your Kool-Aid that gives you these "opinions"?

There's a whole trend with websites not uploading anything to their servers due to privacy and whatnot, where do you suppose the data is being saved for repeat visits...

What your'e describing I would expect to be measured in kilobytes, not tens of gigabytes.

There is no reason for any person to think that a website needs to store data sized in the "full Ubuntu install" range to facilitate repeat visits.

You make a reasonable point, while kilobytes might be too little it probably shouldn't be 30gb. 5gb might be ok. In the settings it should be possible for the user to set their own limit. I am not familiar with browser storage but there is hopefully a mechanism to inform the user that their limit might not be enough.

> There is no reason for any person to think that a website needs to store data sized in the "full Ubuntu install" range to facilitate repeat visits.

Do you think people expect that for apps they've installed? Should those also be limited to a few MB?

I think that when I install an app, typically it will tell me up front how much disk space is required. For example, in the Mac App Store, the size of the app is at the top of the page.

> Should those also be limited to a few MB?

I also want to highlight that many/most websites that think of themselves as apps are at odds with their users in that perception. As an engineer, I know full well that e.g. the URL https://homedepot.com is powered by a sophisticated set of apps. But most users think it's a website.

This is important because people do & should have a different relationship with software they have chosen to install on their machines and websites. Yes, I know e.g. Figma.com does complex client-side stuff. Every Figma user would click a dialog to grant permission for it to do what it needs to do.

The problem is the current state of the art is that literally any website can spam up your disk and you don't even know. If I visit the website for a local radio station, or an e-commerce site, or university, or a site that will tell me what time it is now in a different time zone...I do not expect that it will download tons of data and store it on my disk in case I come back. That some engineers think that is reasonable is why the browser sandboxes need reinforcement.

> But most users think it's a website.

I'd be willing to bet most (younger?) users don't know what the difference between an app and a website is. Can't really blame them when the line between them has been blurring more and more over time. I think a growing number of users wouldn't even mention installing as a differentiator because you install PWAs (except on iOS).

Anyway, I think an important bit of information that was lost here is that browsers automatically purge data so that your disk doesn't fill up. If you're running low on space it will clean it up for you to make room.

> I do not expect that it will download tons of data and store it on my disk in case I come back. That some engineers think that is reasonable is why the browser sandboxes need reinforcement.

It's a reasonable thing to do for an app, so why not a website/PWA? Video games are a pretty good example where some stream assets while you are playing so that you don't have long install/update times. Getting in game faster is more important.

> most (younger?) users don't know what the difference between an app and a website is

Yeah, I doubt this because younger users overlap most heavily with "had to ask a parent for permission to install an app."

> It's a reasonable thing to do for an app, so why not a website/PWA?

Again, I chose to install an app and it has transparent install requirements. A website does not clear either of those bars.

You have to keep an eye on them, but they don't just make tests pass.

Claude sonnet 4 (this time last year) did do this. It once made simulation if a test script passing. Literally a script that just echoed test names and then said pass.

Change happens fast, a year old model is pretty outdated.

I'm sure it can happen, hence why I said to keep an eye out. Its main mode of operation is not to cook the tests however.

Happened to me, 3 days ago - deleted some tests and flipped assertions after outlining that it wasn't to change any assertions.

Our team was doing a similar task to move between test frameworks, and I had to do a git diff of hundreds of thousands of lines to try and work out where a test had disappeared to.

> 3 days ago

Your fault. You should have used a model from 0.000005 seconds ago!

Reading is difficult.

> Change happens fast, a year old model is pretty outdated.

What change? That you should not fake the results of a test because that defeats the whole purpose of a test has been known before there were computers.

I don't know, the weather?

Which is also the only way that makes sense... Permanent residency but you have to be... Outside the country? lol

In the EU you can apply for a permanent residency card when you're in the country. One of the prerequisites is how long you have been in the country where you're applying. It seems unlikely the other countries have the same policy as the US has now.

Yes

Post it somewhere else, this is for non-AI projects.

They have a big target on their back so the low hanging fruit is (mostly) gone.

Do you mean we'll input their brains with an alternate reality or just removing their pain and distress signals?

Regardless of the answer. Lab meat still seems more ethical, it was never a sentient being in the first place.

That person has no idea or even care for what is or isn't ethical outside of other people maybe being upset about it and trying to stop them.