This article makes it sound the options are normally approval, rejection and abstention, but that this time round a fourth option, "disapproval", was reached. It that the case, or are they just trying to say that people rejected it?
It was certainly weird for me coming from RISC OS. In that case, even though each drive has its own namespace (like with DOS/Windows), there's not just one "current directory" per session - there is in fact only one "current directory" per drive over the entire OS! As such, changing the current directory in one place would affect all relative path accesses using that drive, even in other programs.
It was common practice when writing RISC OS programs (and recommended by Acorn) to store your application's directory path into a system variable, and then use that to refer to all the ancillary files you needed.
That was an enlightening read. I find it incredible that apparently Google themselves don't use the existing corpus of certificates as a test for paranoid_crypto.
The point of furigana is to be exact - it's a pronunciation guide, and its purpose is to distinguish or to teach. If it's wrong, then nothing makes sense.
If I asked you 'are you a sewer (pronounced "soo-er")?', would that make sense? Maybe if you looked at it hard enough and thought about it, but in the meantime, I would probably get some very strange looks for asking.
It's funny to see LLMs being mentioned, because this is yet another case where "good enough" is, after all, not good enough once you know how "good enough" should be.
As far as I know, all the automated options out there (wether it's Furiganator, the chrome extension, or Google Translate's pronunciation) are far from 100% accurate. I still find both to be very useful, I just don't rely on them to be the absolute truth; they still help me on a daily basis. The web page for this font mentioned it didn't show any furigana if it was ambiguous (I haven't verified),and someone else here mentioned it was ~80% accurate. I respectfully disagree with the fact that it's useless if not perfect; I've personally found all these tools useful, and have not learned a single "wrong reading" because of them because I don't use them as a tool to learn kanji readings to begin with.
Yomitan only shows readings for words you explicitly hover over and press a modifier key, so it doesn't distract you, and when you do explicitly ask for a word, Yomitan will show all the readings and definitions.
I'd agree that 80% is better than nothing if you have no alternatives, but you do. I don't know about Furiganator, but Google Translate is also much better than 80%.
For that matter, furigana are commonly used to deliberately override ordinary readings. In some cases, it's more like kanji are used to explain the meaning of some katakana (especially, say, in-world jargon in a video game or LN) set as furigana above them. (Or some hidden or unusual connotation of a common word in hiragana.)
But I do note that it's pulling the images from Wikipedia's servers directly. That feels like it could be pretty bad for Wikipedia's bandwidth. I think I'd feel more comfortable if the art was cached by artfrompixels.com itself, where licensing allows. (And I imagine that for a lot of it there'll be no issue.)
When you get to packages that are old enough, DiscMaster[0] is helpful for this since these packages were often on magazine cover CD-ROMs! There are several files matching "fileutils-3.9.tar.gz"[1]; the two variants seem to be the original GNU release (182.9KiB, the one you're looking for), and what looks like the result of a "make install" (57.4KiB).
The original GNU release of fileutils-3.6 is there too (but be careful; one of the two files appears to include Makefiles from a ./configure run, while the other doesn't), though 3.7 and 3.8 don't appear to be. You'll need to sift through to find what you need in some cases, but it's an incredibly valuable research tool.
Note: To download a file, you'll need to click on the filename, and then click the small arrow at the top that looks like a red arrow pointing down to a white box with red/green lights. (Which I assume is their representation of a desktop computer.)
The YouTube video you link to is actually about a separate incident from the one described in the article. The video is about an incident involving two AAL2482s near Phoenix; the article is about an incident involving two AA5083s near Providence.
It's the same idea though; one was inbound, the other outbound, and ATC had to distinguish between the two.
[Edit: Looks like it's been fixed.]