machrider

Appreciate this, I was feeling the same way as the original comment. It looks maybe over-sharpened, but I don't see anything as glaring as the text of the article makes it sound! (Of course, I'm not a video codec developer.)

It does remind me of how stereo & speaker manufacturers sometimes boost treble a little bit (rather than being perfectly "transparent" to the original signal) because it gives the impression of clarity. But ideally each step in the processing chain "colors" the signal as little as possible, because those little differences can add up.

One thing I've worried about with self-hosting small (or smol) services is that I'm responsible for securing them against attackers. Even if my circle is 15 people using a particular service, potentially thousands of malicious actors will be poking at it over the months and years I'm running it.

I'm a big fan of self-hosting, especially things that I can run inside my home with no internet-facing ports. But anything that will be outward facing has to be sandboxed from everything else, kept up to date, and monitored for intrusions. It can be daunting unless you definitely have time to stay on top of it. I'm curious if any self-hosters have thoughts about this.

https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/28/23659191/amazon-sidewalk-...

I mean, bandwidth doesn't really matter if we're talking about whether the device is sending home private information about what content you watch. It doesn't need to stream video back to Samsung to be basically malware.

This is exactly like that time on TNG they used random phaser settings to get a single shot on a Borg drone before they blocked it

I guess the thing about dragons was true; it's not mentioned in this list.

I'm liking vimwiki, for what it's worth. It feels like a pretty small set of changes to vim that make the wiki stuff "just work", and otherwise it's my regular ass plaintext world that I love.

There's an open source app that does it, AirGuard: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.seemoo.at_t...

So I don't think it's a technical limitation.

I'm running Jellyfin on a recent Intel-based Synology (they also have cheaper ARM CPU models), and it can transcode H.265->H.264 on the fly using about 50% CPU. It also runs in a Docker container so it's pretty easy to manage. I'm a big fan!

I just tried the camera app with a QR code (on a Pixel 5) and nothing happened.

It's funny how the end user isn't even in the list.

If you like this sort of thing, you should also check out the Netherlands Bach Society [1] on Youtube. They've been producing incredible renditions of Bach works and sharing them freely for a while.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2kF6qdHRTM_hDYfEmzkS9w

I was really amused by this. Also if you try to visit over HTTPS, it serves up an expired certificate.

The Higgs boson was expected though, while this claimed boson is not predicted by the model at all?

Do you think he would notice if the test machine downloaded a ~100MB file from the web?

The cost of living is about to skyrocket in Seattle, if I had to guess.

There are crypto functions that are not amenable to quick solutions with quantum computers, right? Is there any reason why we wouldn't start migrating to those functions today? It seems foolish to wait until technology matures and present-day crypto is completely invalidated before we react defensively. Is anyone working on this?

The problem with noise is that your signal has to be bigger than the noise in order to be intelligible. Preferably you'd find a channel with less noise, not more.

They should have said "Cadillac" here, based on the table. It's a mistake.

For one thing, you can safely go a lot faster on asphalt than on dirt while still being able to round corners and come to a stop.

I got an "error connecting to the database" type of message. I think the entire site was having trouble with the HN traffic spike.

My conclusion, traffic is probably changing due to what is in the news rather than anything else.

I appreciate you throwing some data for a few keywords together in your comment, but you'll excuse me if I lean toward trusting the published paper instead.

FWIW, paper is downloadable here (at least, for now): http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2769645

Google cache: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:4ToCZE...

Black screen here, too (although the loading text went from 0 to 100%) on Firefox 44 on Windows 7.

What the hell is the justification for the document being secret, anyway?

I think it's sarcastic. Elsewhere he says unless you get 9 or more correct, you probably can't tell.

This behavior used to be common in IRC, where there are really no consequences for being a dick. In IRC, my experience was generally: ask question, spend 5 minutes justifying why it's a reasonable question to ask, then maybe (or maybe not) get an answer.

I think StackOverflow does a pretty good job of incentivizing people to give helpful answers, so I haven't seen this behavior as much there. Even when the person asking has flawed assumptions, the answers tend to steer them politely in a better direction.

Goodreads | San Francisco, Sunnyvale, and Seattle | Engineering full-time

We're the world's largest site for readers and book recommendations; we'd love to talk to you if you share our passion for technology and the impact we can make with it on readers and the book industry.

We are hiring engineers for several parts of our site, including our UX, Back End, iOS, Community, Android, Authors, and Social Reader teams.

Please check https://www.goodreads.com/jobs for descriptions of any of these and reach out to katd@goodreads.com if you have any questions.

That makes sense. I'm also curious about data though. Unless they tunnel all your traffic through a VPN, you just have to hope your apps and web sites are using https correctly. (And if they did tunnel all traffic through Google servers, it would raise a different set of concerns...)

Any idea if they're layering any additional security onto the unsecured WiFi connections it seems to prefer? (attwifi, xfinitywifi, etc. are all unencrypted, and I personally only use them in very limited ways for that reason.)

Ross may have tacked this on after this exchange with Foscam regarding an IP camera line streaming RTSP with an ancient (and buggy) live555 release:

http://foscam.us/forum/a-reported-problem-with-your-fi9821w-...