dybber

The hacker news crowd is also more than just Americans. Some of us live in welfare states and/or societies with strong trade unions, which we know we can rely on instead, if we ever come to a situation where we need it.

Their website is blocked by my ISP as being unsafe.

Maybe the new Commodore flip phone? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48552614

In Denmark at least we have this, both our drivers license and social security cards are apps on our phones. I only need my old physical drivers license when I leave the country.

They need to balance between the Silicon Valley oligarchs desires and the MAGA voters possible reactions. Banning Volvo would probably not be well received by MAGA, at least Trump would need a bit more time to build the case that these vehicles are now unreliable.

Apple could make settings for controlling exactly what is shared with the various assistants installed including Siri itself. No need for defaulting to full access.

Apple is not abiding, because they want to use time to really ensure they have the best assistant, before they allow competitors to build assistants for iPhone that can replace Siri (in the EU only probably)

Apple don’t want you to be able to say “Hi Alexa” or “Ok Google” to your iPhone, and wake it up.

We have all kinds of data access controls, these could probably also be built around Siri and competitors.

But if you look behind yourself your head is pointing away from the screen.

The first proper zero auth password reset I've seen in production.

LinkedIn had one back in the day, before you got paid for discovering it I guess, never got a decent reply from them, but they eventually solved it.

It went like this: they assumed that if you could read mail sent to some address, that address was yours and could be added to your account.

So if I send you a LinkedIn invite to an email address, and you click the accept invite button, that email address was added to your account. You could then send this email to any address you controlled (let’s say foo@example.com), then use the invite button link in a forged email and send it to someone else on their email, whenever they clicked foo@example.com was added to their account without them knowing.

When you got the response that you were friends, you also knew that you know had an email address added to that users account and you could do a full password reset by using the foo@example.com that you initially sent the email to.

I found it because someone invited a whole mailing list and after clicking it the mailing list email was suddenly added to various peoples accounts.

20 years ago this was not unheard of. One exam we had to translate C code to assembly for one of the exercises, convert to numbers to IEEE754 representations and similar, both tasks where access to a laptop would make it possible to cheat. Also had to modify some small computer architecture diagrams if I recall correctly.

For the linear algebra written exam it didn’t work as if you learned to solve the 4 previous years exams, you could be sure most of it was familiar, so you could just prepare for a few standard exercises without really understanding the content.

Our advanced algorithm course used a bit of a combination, with a project take home exam (knapsack like optimization problem - competing for the fastest implementation) combined with a two hour written exam with multiple choice answers, but again only with books, pencil and paper to get to the right answer. This I think could work today, having both the opened ended project + some multiple choice with pencil/paper.

Roundabouts with with 5-10 bicycles going in and out from the different roads all the time during rushhour (Copenhagen, Denmark)? I would love to see them looking for people’s tiny hand gestures and not just get stuck in our traffic over here.

Reminds me of Peter Naurs Turing award lecture: https://video.ku.dk/video/12592041/turing-laureate-peter-nau...

Well if you have experience reviewing other people’s code, it is not that different than finding an idea, asking copilot to do it, and then review just as if you had a ton of junior engineers to write code for you, which also can go too far in one direction before asking for feedback.

So it really depends on your reviewing ability how maintainable code you will get. It is a bit of effort to review something “you have done” as thoroughly as something a colleague have done. Somehow I still feel sense of ownership even though the LLM did it.

I like reviewing using GitHub’s interface, so I often do a thorough review in that familiar interface while the PR is still draft, and before I have invited others to review. If I review my own code directly in my editor when the agent is done, my brain isn’t in the right context and can get distracted or skip over something.

I think it depends on what you find enjoyable. I think people who like the tinkering and the actual act of coding, debugging, etc. will find it less and less fun to be in this area, but people who like to look at the big picture, and solve problems, will see that they will now be better at both getting overview of larger and larger codebases and that technical debt that was never attainable to solve before can now be “outsourced” to LLM’s.

I find that fun. I work in a 50 year old IT company, with lots of legacy code and technical debt which we have never been able to address - suddenly it’s within reach to really get us to a better place.

I have been trying this as well, and you can quickly come very far.

However, I fear that agents will always work better on programming languages they have been heavily trained on, so for an agent-based development inventing a new domain specific language (e.g. for use internally in a company) might not be as efficient as using a generic programming language that models are already trained on and then just live with the extra boilerplate necessary.

Eventually the models will be generally be so good that the competition moves from the best model to the best user experience and here I think we can expect others will win, e.g. Microsoft with GitHub and VS Code

You still have to synchronize with your code reviewers and teammates, so how well you work together in a team becomes a limiting factor at some point then I guess.

Orwellian.

As luxury vehicles they were also competing in a different market, where competitors have caught up.

That would really boost productivity! Not gonna happen.

The good news is that Trump seems willing to move this to a negotiation table.

And yes, Danish minister of defence have talked with Rutte and Rutte have not negotiated on behalf of Greenland or Denmark.

But maybe this rhetoric about a deal is Trumps way to communicate about this off-ramp to his base.

I will correct that, but my point stands that we in Denmark just can’t sell Greenland. It is not for us to decide the future of Greenland.

I’m just trying to explain how absurd the proposition is seen from a Danish perspective, and why we from Danish side will continue to say no, as and refer to the same thing as our PM’s have said again and again: this is for Greenlandic people to decide. They would have to vote for it, but all the parties in Greenland are against joining the US.

So whatever proposal or threat of breaking down NATO that Trump will come up with will be met with a no from Danish politicians. It is simply not for them to decide. His only option seen from a Danish perspective is to use the military.

Greenlanders could vote to be completely independent, yes. That is the situation right now.

However, Trump has done everything to turn Greenlanders away, and not done anything to convince them of independence would be good for them, so a vote for independence will likely fail catastrophically right now. Independence is many decades away, as they would really have to build a stronger economy to make it happen, but that is the direction Greenlanders would like to go, at least if you asked them 2 years ago.

Escalate to deescalate.

Trump doesn’t understand that Greenland is a ~country~ self-gorverning territory in itself in the Kingdom of Denmark. Just like Australia is country in itself in the Commonwealth.

England would never be able to sell Australia to the US, just as we in Denmark are not able to sell Greenland.

The only way forward is trade war it seems and it would be better to escalate it quickly in order for Trump to understand the message.

Soon dollars might not be accepted if US companies wants to buy things in the EU, they will have to pay in euros (part of the anti coercion instrument that Macron and others have been talking about the last couple of days)

On the other hand, even if the EU heads towards anti coercion acting, it seems they may act too slowly: > The whole process could take a year, but could be sped up.

The effect of tariffs are also slow to kick in.

Anti coercion instrument is probably mostly thought of as a deterrent, nothing they will actually use. But maybe if Trump is dumb enough and doesn’t understand the implications. If they use certain element will probably done quickly, e.g. not allowing use companies to bid on EU projects, not allowing US companies to invest in EU, requiring all transactions when purchasing EU goods to be made in EUR instead of USD.

The recent troop deployment to Greenland just looks like theater since there were like 25 people sent. What does that achieve?

It achieves two things.

1) European countries can say they will ramp up protection from now on, have NATO exercises year round is on table. Moving exercises from other parts of the world to Greenland. This counters Trumps argument that this is about the security of Greenland. We will see bigger exercises at some point (naval exercises for example). These things take longer to plan.

2) The soldiers are from different nationalities. If US will use military force it will not just be against Denmark. US will have to take prisoners of war from a longer list of nations than just Denmark. Nations which also have soldiers helping out in various US bases around the world, so they will maybe also have to make French or German troops prisoners in some of their other bases, not just in Greenland. This effectively makes it much more expensive for the US, as they will not be able to isolate Denmark. And this is probably why a very quick and tiny exercise is being held.

EU has a much better tool ready, the anti coercion instrument. Party leaders in EU have been talking over the weekend about deploying it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Coercion_Instrument

It seems like Google and Meta are using their dominant position to take as big a part of ad revenue as they possibly can, and if that means independent news companies where actual journalism is conducted can’t survive, then they don’t really care.

Danish media are trying to survive, as high quality journalism is necessary for democracy to function. They can’t avoid being on the big platforms, as Google and Meta have this dominant gatekeeper position in the market - this is where the media pull new users into their sites.

The criticism was that Google have a dominant position on search market, Google selected 1% of their users to run the experiment on, but without informing them. That is users didn’t know that their search results were manipulated and articles they would otherwise have found didn’t show up.

So the argument presented by Danish authorities and media companies were that information should flow freely in a democracy and by doing a huge experiment like this without informing users is against the rights of Danish citizens.