Kinda weird the say things like "the team managed to recover", have another article about the recovery and calling it "incredible" and then mention nowhere the recovery was performed bij Boskalis ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boskalis ).
Freedom of information law's in almost all countries are about being able to access administrative documents so there can be accountability and transparency. The court ruled that a 3D scan is in this case not an administrative document.
And let's be real here; A ruling that a 3d scan of a piece of art is a "administrative document" would have been far weirder.
Is a policeman's body camera footage an administrative document? At least in the US the law is called the freedom of information act, not the freedom of administrative documents act. Unless actual harm to an innocent member of the public comes from releasing information held by the government or publicly funded institutions, isn't the correct presumption that it's the property of the people?
Re: what "FOI is for" please see my comment above, excerpting FREEDOM OF INFORMATION IN FRANCE, LAW AND PRACTICE.
Re: "Weird" documents: The CADA and courts have routinely recognized that documents in formats such as audio recordings, x-rays, photographs (of submerged shipwrecks, no less), video, application source code, and computer algorithms may be considered administrative documents, communicable to the public. FWIW, a 3D scan being an administrative document doesn't seem weird at all to me, nor did it seem weird to the many government attorneys at the CADA analyzing the issue, nor to the cultural heritage and open source and digital rights experts and advocates who joined my case, nor to the Paris court.
The Conseil d'Etat did not even say that scans could not be administrative documents, or that that would be weird; they just ruled that these documents in particular were akin to physical works and therefore part of the museum's inalienable collection, and so were outside FOI law.
And that would have been fine, if Google hadn't tried to shove the Google Play Store ecosystem down everyone's throat by throwing up barriers for side-loading apps and such.
They didn't want their tech to be used to, I don't know, blow up a school with 120 children. But did want to allow other kinds of usage. Is that so weird?
Get rid of your high horse. Nobody wants to blow up a school with 120 children. The question is who is in control and making the decisions. Antropic wanted to be in control and make the decisions for the DOD. DOD refused. It's not so weird at all.
It's not a high horse, you're just misinformed. The Trump regime does want to blow up a school with 120 children. The military had, until recently, a program to prevent such incidents; Pete Hegseth gutted it (https://www.propublica.org/article/hegseth-civilian-harm-mit...) because he wants to achieve "maximum lethality" at all costs. To this date, the regime has not issued any sort of apology for the school bombing, because they're not sorry and they'd happily do it again.
I am sorry, that's where I stopped reading. If I want partisan screeching, I go to Reddit (I don't actually but that's what I would do if I wanted it). You may enjoy portraying your political opponents as raging maniacs, but I don't see how it would help me understand anything, and as such, this discussion loses any appeal to me.
With respect, you don't see how it would help you understand anything because you've put on anti-partisan blinders. My political opponents openly, enthusiastically portray themselves as raging maniacs. They see rage and mania as good things that will help them achieve their political goals. Here's just one of the enraged, maniac statements the Secretary of Defense made yesterday (https://www.npr.org/2026/09/30/nx-s1-5986304/hegseth-troops-...):
> "No fatties, no trannies, no beardos, no weirdos, no wimps, no radicals. Just warriors," Hegseth said on Wednesday. "The ideological clowns are out. The patriotic cowboys are in, with testosterone testing on top."
Believe me, I get why you find this uncomfortable! It sucks paying attention to politics, I don't enjoy doing it, and I hope once we put the raging maniacs in prison you and I can get back to being apolitical. But if you're not willing to look squarely at their stated positions and motivations, you're not going to be able to understand what's going on.
Isn't "show stopper" a bit dramatic? What is the big problem with an SSH agent? If security is a problem you should probably store your SSH keys on a HSM like a Nitrokey or Yubikey. In which case you need an agent.
The agent requirement is a symptom of a deeper potential issue: not using the system's ssh. Providing built-in as a fast-path option is fine, but ~/.ssh/config can do a lot of useful things, and providing an easy option to say "just use real ssh" lets people have their config just work.
Specifying identify files for specific hosts, using bastion hosts (ProxyJump), etc. For example, my laptop SSH config detects when I'm not on my university network or VPN and adds a ProxyJump through the department bastion host, but connects directly when I'm on the network. Configurations like that break when software makes too many assumptions about how ssh is configured.
ssh_config allows several ways to execute arbitrary shell commands, such as "Match exec" and "ProxyCommand". Specify a program that can detect networks and choose different connections. Then the config file itself wouldn't change.
I use a Yubikey for some of my keys, and I've never used an "agent", don't know how, and don't want to start, unless someone can give me a good reason to
But not everything needs to be directly exposed to the internet. Framework had their data leaked because their metabase instance was hacked with a zero-day. Why was it directly exposed to the Internet? Why not require the use of a VPN like a Wireguard based solution or Nebula for these "internal" kind of apps?
> Framework had their data leaked because their metabase instance was hacked with a zero-day.
No, Framework had their data leaked because they stored it in the cloud with Metabase the company, which got hacked. Not because of any vulnerability on-premises.
"A total of more than 27 tonnes of gold was physically transferred from the locations in North America to DNB Cash Centre in Zeist, Utrecht, between March and August. Another 59 tonnes of gold kept in New York was also sold off during this time, while the equivalent amount of gold was purchased in London."
reply