In a very recent update, Valve's added what looks like some kind of dashboard to consume game statistics (for a small monthly fee...).

I don't. I think the gist of it was a YouTuber instructing probably-younger, less-experienced people to issue spammy PRs (e.g. small update to READMEs).

In the second scenario, I don't think it's the pre-increment operator that's shown but the unary-plus.

Yeah, IIUC, HAM dedicates its lower-fidelity bands to Morse.

I think https://www.levels.fyi/ gives these classifications.

I think that's a poor application of tragedy of the commons.

Also, in your example, I don't know how other cities' use would impede the funding city's use.

In theory you might get a situation where several cities try to wait each other out for similar tasks, hoping another city will buckle first and fund it.

I worked on image analysis software in a wetlab for a particular type of microscopy. They are in just this position: the lab builds and sells software. The fees are low -- on the order of $10-$15k/license. They use the proceeds entirely to fund ongoing development of the software. And the simple fact is, without these license sales, they don't have the resources to fund development. The software is open source in the sense that the licensees are given the source.

If the lab has to give the software away, all development ends, unless you have $300k/year of grants sitting around.

This is the same bullshit excuse people use to justify subscription licensing.

If they can't get the interested labs to contribute towards the development without the coercion of a commercial license then it sounds like it's either done, or the development roadmap is misaligned with the users' goals. In either case, stopping the abusive current practices would be an immediate improvement for everyone involved.

He's making a joke. I thought it was clear.

Cryptographic verification?

Sure, but that would still leave the data open to the world. Not an alternative to TLS.

Most of the content on the web is intentionally open to the world.

But our personal data is not. So much data is potentially made available from an unencrypted HTTP request.

Nobody is saying that personal data should be unencrypted.

Almost. Yes, you may still be charged. Yes, they may use the evidence of your refusal. As far as equivalence, no: the test itself is just one piece of evidence. Because refusal should ordinarily make it more difficult to prosecute DUI (for what is, comparable to the stop, a very small inconvenience), I think most states have an automatic license revocation penalty attached to it - usually around six months. Field sobriety tests (e.g. walk in a straight line), I think, are much less conclusive and do not have such requirement.

IANAL. Search for James Duane.

I visited recently and was wondering what that was.

https://imgur.com/a/F2iAMm7

Who uses these tokens, and what for?

Ordinary people, for example I own one. It's a USB crypto device which stores private key and certificate. It handles all cryptographic operations inside, so private key can't be extracted (at least trivially). Actually most people use simple files, but it's significantly less secure, because file could be easily stolen.

As to certificates, they are required for some internet services. There's portal http://egov.kz/cms/en which provides almost all government services for citizens and to use it, you should own certificate (so you sign your request with digital signature and it's treated by law like you signed it with your hand).

Excellent, thank you!