It isn't "a binary", it's git.exe (which has a very specific purpose). We are talking about an AI tool which wants to know the current state of the folder it is indexing, that's a reasonable thing for an AI to want to do.
You then take the default of Windows execution order of: look for the executable in the current folder otherwise check the PATHs in order. This is a Windows security issue which has been around since day one.
To me the App is preparing to do some work so it is more responsive to my requests. This is a classic trade off between security and performance, where the odds of a malicious virus being in the root of your project are very small if you are already taking best practices.
Perhaps what we really need is Microsoft to change the execution order and that the maintainers of Git add a new feature where we can block executables being in the root of a repo (or in the whole of a repo). That would prevent every app having to make the same workaround, fix the issue upstream and you'll never have to think about it again.
git.exe is just a name. Cursor has no reason what so ever to assume that a random binary in a random repo is a legitimate git binary just because its name happens to be git.exe.
The trivial fix is to execute not "git.exe" but "C:\Program Files\Git\bin\git.exe". With a configurable git binary
Of course that then leads you down the rabbit hole of whether the llm should exectute a known-good ripgrep, tree, etc. instead of depending on PATH resolution
> can I run it until it's done 150,000km
I'm not sure I get your question. My Mach-e will have 1000-1500 charge cycles before the battery drops to 80% capacity. On a full charge of normal use I'll get 250+ miles, so that's 250,000 to 375,000 miles.
But that's a little hard to pin down, because with good charge cycles (e.g. not going all the way to 100% each charge), it should last longer.
An EV has less moving parts, so it isn't as likely to shake itself apart like a combustion engine car.
A new BYD, that's probably a different question about the manufacturer and if their build quality will hold up over time.
Because the Iranians blocked the entrances with soil. There are satellite photos showing dump trucks at the entrances and the entrances being covered over.
It was a clever move on the part of Iran, because an invading force would need to bring heavy equipment with them, which isn't going to happen.
Well.. kinda? Makes me wonder about just dropping munitions on the entrance, or even just using conventional explosives.
And yes, I don't know the skill set to validate the thought. However, I have seen beaver dams cleared with dynamite, and there's a wide level of explosives which can be dropped or deployed on foot...
(People saying it would be violent, well sure, but so is dropping bunker busters...)
I tested it with my recently restrung BG80 at 27lb and it came out with 26.69lb!
One improvement I'd ask for, is in the string thickness selection. I had to go look up the thickness of BG80. It would be cool if you could preload some of the popular strings in there.
Also, the string tension number is good, but I'll get it to a peak and then I'll stop to press the stop recording button and it's dropped back down. It would be nice to have a "Peak tension" or a graph of the tension.
If it goes off track I put a rule in there. It’s like a junior developer that I have to keep constraining it to project goals, coding styles and other aspects.
I have different files in there to help with being able to reuse rules for different projects.
It’s short sighted to say Europe should spend more on defence. Europe is now going to move away from US weapons and develop its own systems.
That’s a net loss for American defence companies and jobs in the USA. For the US military, costs per unit will go up, because they aren’t mass producing these systems at the same scale.
Trump didn’t just step back from an alliance that existed for 80 years, he also burnt the bridge by destroying trust.
For Europe, it’s probably a good thing to kickstart a new economic recovery, e.g. German automakers can switch to tanks and IFVs.
You then take the default of Windows execution order of: look for the executable in the current folder otherwise check the PATHs in order. This is a Windows security issue which has been around since day one.
To me the App is preparing to do some work so it is more responsive to my requests. This is a classic trade off between security and performance, where the odds of a malicious virus being in the root of your project are very small if you are already taking best practices.
Perhaps what we really need is Microsoft to change the execution order and that the maintainers of Git add a new feature where we can block executables being in the root of a repo (or in the whole of a repo). That would prevent every app having to make the same workaround, fix the issue upstream and you'll never have to think about it again.