HN user
APU's are great for the mini pc market. I don't need a laptop (currently) but I love using a SFF machine without much fan noise. These parts tend to get packaged into these machine. Lenovo M75q Tiny etc.
Based on these parts speed I may move to a laptop as my "main" machine in the future. Just dock it at home, office and use on road.
At least locally Kcups from Kurig are much more common - 100% plastic. I always thought of the nespresso ones with the recycling bags as more enviro friendly.
But I also thought Apple with its long support lifetimes for products and good resale values was probably better for environment than the android junk with uncertain supply chains, but HN regularly has stories trashing apple has terrible for environment and never says anything about android so who knows.
Why do we falsely claim their pods are plastic? Their competitors use plastic and receive no criticism. They do aluminum and a bag drop program and are trashed
100% my error - main deck for sure. We also boarded using wrong jetway - I guess there was a first entrance somewhere maybe that was different?
I did international first in the 747. Def not ‘cattle car’. The front windows are angled so you can see forward more than usual - it’s surprisingly quiet in the top front and the views were beautiful- you felt like you were floating. I slept well too which is rare (wine may have helped) and fun to think of the engineering that went into these big birds. Only negative is that it is all so over the top - wife and I more comfortable in biz or e+
You can't change 2FA with just your password - you are being confused by the headline.
You need a second factor. That is either your 2FA device, a backup 2fa, backup codes, an authenticated and still valid login session etc.
If you are security paranoid you can lockout insecure 2fa methods, never validate your device and sign up for their Advanced Protection Program.
Note however, google is VERY clear -> if you lock yourself out it is game over. They do not allow humans to override the lockouts -> period. This is obviously good for security. All the folks here complaining about this supposed 2FA issue while asking for human support to allow login override / resets really have no clue about the GIANT security hole that opens.
Witness all the sim card hijacking done through phone co's (that do allow human involvement).
Google is CRYSTAL clear.
Q: Create a replacement Google Account
A: If you still can't get into your account, create a new one.
Q: Why can't I get into my old account?
A: We couldn't be sure that you're the owner. To keep accounts safe, we can't give access to them if we can't confirm who the owner is.
They've closed the big hole (human override / corruption / bribes / social engineering). And have made it so that you have only a bit of extra risk to stay in your account. Don't like that? Don't authenticate your devices as trusted.
You already have authenticated your computer as the second factor. The article headline implies you can just use a password to remove 2FA. False.
You can use your password AND that authenticated and still valid session or device to do the reset.
Google gives you options with your free account.
1) No 2FA
2) 2FA with insecure methods
3) 2FA with security keys and authenticators.
4) Advanced Protection Program
5) Paid account options with additional options / controls.
This is not "apologetic BS"
Your comment illustrates a DEEP misunderstanding of dealing with users at scale.
You have millions and millions of users.
You are proposing that the threat / benefit model is such that if they lose their 2FA device (very easy via upgrades to phones, lost phones broken phones) EVEN though they have their password and and have access to a trusted device within the validity window for device trust they will be locked out, potentially forever from their account?
Do you
a) realize how common this situation is?
b) realize how angry users will be to lose access to all their google services with basically no support route to recover that?
c) what pressure there will be to allow for other recovery methods THAT ARE EVEN WEAKER?
I've gone through 2FA reset procedures over the phone with a few companies, and in EACH case it struck me how easy it would be to socially engineer or use very minimal info to get a new 2FA when they allow these methods (ie, last 4 digits of CC was one reset piece of info). So you need to allow workable 2FA update methods so that your fallback can be pretty tight if allowed at all.
Finally, consumer accounts have basically NO recovery option if you are locked out. I had a relative get locked out, nothing to be done (they had a landline that couldn't accept text messages and the system won't do voice calls). There is NO human backup - all emails, google photos, google drive etc GONE.
Live in a country that criminally prosecutes security researches? Jails them?
This is 100% false. You need to have a 2FA authenticated connection or be on a 2FA authenticated device within validity period to change 2FA settings. You can elect to have 2FA not remember the device you have logged into as well (ie, the remember this device for 30 days option) if you are particularly paranoid.
The headline should say - You can disable Google 2FA on 2FA authenticated connections without re-authenticating.
This is a fantastic balance in terms of security and usability. I switched iphones and google authenticator did not bring my 2FA's over, I got on my machine that had already authenticated and setup a new 2FA. Whew. Other systems were MUCH much harder to restore AND you could still get around 2FA but now with human involvement (social engineering risk). I've worked govt jobs with security so "tight" that everyone got the workarounds worked out - the social engineering would be as easy as I need reset for user X and they stopped even checking who anyone was the volumes were so high.
The loss in security is minimal here, and the loss is controllable, and it reduces pressure on other reset approaches (seriously, if you lock yourself out of google you will REALLY want to get back in).
Anyone who interacted with her got called out by name as racist.
excellent advice!
I thought this unlikely but doing a quick look
This:
https://reductress.com/post/the-best-haircuts-for-what-youve...
is very close to the person (Sonya) on get bright's testimonials.
https://getbright.app/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/testimonial...
It could be the same Sonya just doing other things (hair shots etc) of course so not certain they are fake testimonial photos but certainly weird.
Her point is that her husband got more responses. My guess - her husband would get more responses than you as well.
As someone who also took time off (and built apps) from college, the fact that I'd built some apps (that got write-ups) was a big positive for my early career, even if just prototypes. But I was at a top education org before taking time off so I'd already proven I could get into a reasonable place.
No need to disclose, but your and my story tends to work if you (and or others on team) got into a place like an Ivy or a UC or top liberal arts, majoring in CS or engineering, then dropped out (aka were into the entrepreneurial space)
I think it works a lot less well with an undisclosed and possibly non-tech background.
If you had a path like hers then I am very impressed, your deck or prototype must have been compelling. But very often there are some other proof points (top school acceptance / cs majors etc). That is almost silicon valley cliche at this point.
An awesome scenario would be if someone focused on black led businesses in terms of VC and made a killing.
Many vc's do like past success (even white on white candidates, if you have had multiple successful exists you are much more likely to be funded).
VCs arguably are taking less risk. Now sometimes it stuff like capital domination (I think super stupid)
They like seeing what you've done yourself. You've built x / y / z - delivered this and that - great. This can be big if you don't have an exit yet.
Or proof in pudding - good traction already, good pitch deck etc.
etc.
It's not clear what she's done herself. Even her gym ownership success is complicated by potential involvement of her husband even though she goes to some lengths to say it's racist to assume the ownership was result of some help.
And her philosophy is that she doesn't want help from white folks, just for them to get out of the way. Then she's applying to benchmark vs Harlem capital? Its confusing.
She asks why her husband gets more of a response (a sign of the racism she is facing).
- Her linkedin doesn't show what her major was as an undergrad.
- After 4 years of working she was a powerlifting coach.
- Then boom, in 2017/2018 she is an owner of two gyms and in 2019 she is trying to get benchmark to invest in her app.
Her Husband:
Google Engineer
Masters in CS from Berkeley / Undergrad in CS
Started companies and managed employees.
15 years experience - 40 apps developed. Top 10 apps
Multiple successful exists (to zynga then another one to google).
Talking about being successful as a gym owner etc she says folks can assume its because black folks were helped out.
"They assume it’s because they’re somehow lucky or exceptional or that they gained success because of help from white people. This—of course—isn’t true, but it’s an idea that continues to spread, sending the message that Black professionals require help from white people to build their careers."
"We need to put an end to the lie that Black people are still in need of white folks’ help,” she continues. “What we need is the freedom to live, work, and act without white people and white institutions disproportionately targeting us and stopping us from building the success we are already capable of building on our own."
So it's a bit of a confusing set of messages.
Is she similarly qualified?
I never realized these racism studies were done using such different resumes. This is a bit shocking if so.
You have a multi-exit google engineer vs a trainer?
She doesn't share her deck?
A quick look - did she buy reviews (the block of 5 star reviews)?
ATC get's bothered if you put other planes / people at risk (entering class B airspace without clearance, not maintaining separation etc etc). That is ATC responsibility. And yes, they will punish you with a notice of pilot deviation and then action on your license.
They don't bother you in terms of how you fly your own plane. That's captains responsibility in the US at least. The controller was getting into the go around game here (too high / too fast stuff). The CAPTAIN is supposed to monitor and establish the stabilized approach.
It does exist, but would be easy to fix.
And yet despite bi-partisan legislation to reform H1B we get this stupidity.
It's going to be good to vote this cycle.
No kidding, the US is gobbling up the worlds wealth through tech. The stupidity of throwing this away is monumental.
I don't think the America First folks realize how damaging these trump policies are to america.
The brain drain effect is almost always linked to poor economic performance. And the rules are so ham fisted now. Bipartisan H1B reform goes nowhere (prioritize US masters degrees, block H1B dependent employers from more H1Bs etc). Stupid stuff is everywhere.
Immigrants bringing in revenue (plenty) support US jobs in the US.
It's going to be a rude shock to the less skilled american worker to find a lot of jobs going remote overseas (Canada even) and their middle management / entry level office jobs vanishing.
This historic effect here, where another country educates someone, and then they come to the US, is INSANELY profitable for the US. Seriously, in a ruthless way folks who are not successful in school, have health issues, have criminal backgrounds, are disabled etc don't come in on these visas.
Instead its ambitious folks ANOTHER COUNTRY has invested a lot into coming to the US. How does that hurt the US?
This has always been a huge advantage the US has had. Crazy to see the US throwing it away.
I wish google / aws would avoid the overlapping names where possible.
the "A" series on AWS = AMD instances
The "A" series on GCP = Nvidia instances.
I know - probably on no ones radar at all :)
That’s not how ATC works - atc ALREADY went beyond what you normally see w their suggestions for a go around. ATC is focused on traffic (keeping it separated), pilots are in charge of flying their planes. In fact communicating with ATC is low on list of things to do when their are problems. Priority is aviate, navigate then communicate. And these controllers went above and beyond w their warnings already
Wow. How can this be SO much better than even my cable box!
Seriously, clicking up down with channels, there is very little of that slow feeling blank out / blank in thing that is so annoying.
I'd love to have an OTA receiver go into something like this at my house with this simplicity and speed (I did HD Run or something once and the hoopjumping was high and quality low).
That's kind of funny. Have they decided where they will be building their cars? Normally those types of announcements (new car plant) will get big coverage.
What a clueless comment. Inflation rates in Zimbabwe and Venezuela are FAR higher than these rates as a quick example to show context matters do real rates may be negative. And these rates are lower than payday and can unlock 3x returns for borrowers.
The west takes access to capital for granted.
Every layer of this type of complexity adds risk. Seriously, MCAS was designed to increase safety, but instead added risk.
It may be better to go to full automation then to start having various controls be locked (with the issues around those added mechanisms).
There are already LOTS of situation on airbus in particular where the plane simply will not do what you tell it. Overall this has saved a lot of lives (envelope protection etc).
You CAN almost always override / remove the safety envelope (pull breakers to get to direct law etc) but why. These plans can now be flown by relatively junior pilots (or in this case by folks with potentially fake pilot licenses).
Interesting.
These guys are supposedly launching their ride hailing fleet this year on public roads.
"unorthodox entrepreneurial zeal of Kentley-Klay, an Australian native with no prior automotive experience." was the key mover on all this and "touted Zoox’s strategy of building its own vehicles for full autonomy as wiser than the standard approach of retrofitting existing cars that Alphabet Inc.’s Waymo and others are taking."
Their CEO did attack silicon valley for choosing the path of fear "at the expense of profound progress for the Universe."
Heady stuff! Will be very interesting to see their launch if all this talk pans out! Full new vehicle assembly from scratch PLUS autonomy! Very impressive.
Uh? The UI was giving them plenty of warnings and alerts. They have supposedly been trained thoroughly on all of this.