nucatus

I can’t stand all this hype anymore. They’re pushing it so hard that I’m starting to develop an AI phobia. If it were really that good, they’d already be making big money off it. But it’s not — it just needs your data (codebase?), supposedly to make it better. The fact is, at least they’ve gotten halfway there, which from their perspective, is sweet. All the AI labs are actually losing a ton of $$$ to this AI race, but the data, ohh yeah! Let's go, baby!

I am strictly talking about the coding capabilities of the LLM, and not their core LLM capabilities, which they genuinely excel at.

Nature paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-08033-4

I think this is not true in most of the cases. The (security) technology behind the debit/credit cards using the SmartCard chip (IC) is pretty ubiquitous. It is the same as the security technology guarding the SIM cards in your phone and even your eSIM. Basically the protocols and the interface specifications are the same. In the end, they are just smart cards. Imagine this technology not being strong enough, because I remember the days when the security of the pre-paid public phone cards was quite rabish and any kid with some skills and knowledge could forge a card with unlimited credit.

It very happens that the father of the smart card technology to be a french guy [1] and the current biggest provider of this technology is the french aero-space/defense/security company Thales Group[2] followed by another frech company called IDEMIA.

There is a very nice biography of the technology [3].

[1] https://artsandculture.google.com/story/roland-moreno-s-ubiq...

[2] https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/markets/digital-identity-and-...

[3] https://computer.rip/2023-09-03-plastic-money.html

Here is a summarization of the experiment: https://www.the-scientist.com/foundations/universe-25-1968-1...

Probably this paper [1] is very well known among the classic HN audience, but I dare to leave this link here for the ones who missed it. It is an easy read and it just explains with plain words the backbone of the UNIX system as it was envisioned 50 years ago.

[1] https://dsf.berkeley.edu/cs262/unix.pdf

very basic and limited.

I use ProtonVPN and I guess they aren't that stupid to mess up the future of their company by abusing the customers of the service that started the company in the first place. I guess other VPN services offered by prestigious companies, like BitDefender are quite safe from this standpoint. Yes, the free VPN services have always a large risk associated with.

I see this is the first and only post you have on HN. Since you shared with us the problem you have with Stripe, would you be so kind to share the address of your webstore so that we can make an idea about the stuff you are selling.

It is becoming hilariously unpolite to see all these complains revealing only half of the story.

Submitted a bug report regarding poor performance like 2 years ago and they are still "looking" into it. I guess the shiny look has priority over performance for them.

https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-270042/High-CPU-us...

This is rather a simplistic view with the wrong conclusion of what the education means to our society and culture. The scientific progress has always been carried out by a small percent of population, and not a mass process. Its only recent when the education was made available to the masses.

I also suspect the author mistakes the term education for kwoledge. And yes, some knowledge is lost, but that is due the technological progress. It's always been that way.

The core of the law is to have the same standard across the entire consumer products. Which basically it is already, only Apple having the power to ask you more money for unnecessary accessories whilst contributing to more e-waste, even if they talk against it - hypocricy detected.

Say no more. You're hired.

I guess it will be in the detrimental of the users to have Apple publicly disclose all the security risks they are exposed to. Although the current state is not perfect, it is the optimal choice. There is no way of making these risks publicly available only to "power users". How would you disciminate the good actors from the bad actors in this category?

While there is a point in representing the state of the infrastructure as SQL to enforce type safety and other constraints, I still don’t understand what are the _real_ advantages over the current tooling. All the key advantages listed there, including type safety and cloud providers defined constraints, are already well covered by the actual battle-tested tools and frameworks.

Here are some areas where I identified some red flags regarding the present approach. These are key aspects of the everyday life of an infrastructure engineer.

Usability. The SQL abstractions simply don't scale to make the human<->machine mapping work. You would need another layer of abstraction to map that infrastructure into a state that is easily readable and understandable for our brain. On the other hand, the more consecrated tools use building blocks that both map well to be translated in infrastructure state _and_ are easily understood by our brain. Add some stored procedures to the party and you’re lost in the weeds.

Versioning. What would be the easiest way to extract from the SQL storage the difference between two versions of the infrastructure? With the traditional tools, that is an easy diff which reveals changes in a matter of several keystrokes with no extra layering.

Reusability. How easy is to port infrastructure code to other cloud providers? How easy is to define resource templates?

The "printer refill scam" was just an example of how a product is turn into a service. Funny to see the post being ignored just because people are so mad at printers.

Then you must take some rest. Get a good recharge of your batteries and get back on the field only when you got stronger. Enjoy life, eat well and move around a lot.

If you follow the youtube video posted at the end of the article, you will see that there are another two separate youtube videos as followup of the first one where some of technical details are discussed.

all you need to know about gradle is that there are two phases: configuration and execution. Everything else are details :)

Use Calibre to transfer the book to a kindle - this worked for me. However, the code is hard to read on the e-reader. I recommend to use a large display to read the book.

If history is not something to care about, then what is the point of importing WhatsApp history?

The teamcity application is a java application that can be easily analyzed for security threats. Nothing stops you from decompiling it and check the code. This story looks very much like a scapegoat for SolarWinds' poor security practices.

To avoid some confusion, this is only the "distributed" part. The actual store is handled by the https://github.com/google/leveldb library.

What is coded in that video is the python version of it. The actual version is written in Go.

No reference in the statement relative to the security of the Raspberry platform, since the security of the device is close to zero. The Raspberry SoC is not capable of a secure boot process, at least not for now.

I'm curious whether this is something that will be addressed in the near future, since this is not something you can turn a blind eye to, when you claim the industrial sector.

Android apps are usually written in Java, and more recently in Kotlin. These kind of apps are quite easily reverse engineered, because java binaries are not machine code binaries, rather java byte code. Today's IDEs will decompile the java byte code in no time, giving you access to the source code.

The only line of defense the developers have is to obfuscate the code, but that only means that you will get access to a version of the source code where the original name of the variables, functions, classes was changed to abstract names so that code is harder to read. Even so, you are in much better state that going through disassembling an ELF binary.

I said it before and say it again. These things you call cryptocurrencies can be anything you want but currencies. Who ever claims the contrary has no clue about how a currency works.

If you claim this is a highly speculative asset, then yeah, you are right. But if you really want to call this a currency, you have to convince a government to use it as an official currency. No central bank in this world will accept to use a currency that is out of its control, that can't depreciate or appreciate at will.

I guess it is fair to assume that the bitcoin has become a extra-money sponge that absorbs the extra money floating in the market right now. When there will be less and less "free or cheap money floating" people want to get their money back from the investments they made and this is the exact point where the burst occurs. It would be no problem if the decrease is happening at the same speed as the one of the initial increase, but due to human emotion, the decrease is happening orders of magnitude faster than the increase. At that point, the money will magically disappear.

It's a natural process that balances the value of the money available in the market.

One interesting point to note here is that the value of the entire bitcoin monetary mass is about 0.25 trillion dollars. That's something like 1% of the whole US national debt.

Again, this can only work if a quite strong parallel economy develops, where everything is in BTC. Well, for that to exist, it needs to get to a comparable level of a real state economy, and this is pretty damn hard. That, in order for you to have a stable exchange rate when you need public services, like health services or to pay taxes. Otherwise, just having always to exchange your BTC in the de-facto currency so you can do your daily stuff, that is just not money. You can call it whatever else you want.

In terms of currency, the bitcoin has the same attributes (all you have listed) like any other asset. The Apple stock, for instance, classifies for a currency in the same way the BTC does.

There is a term here that is misused. The world «currency» has nothing to do with this, otherwise very nice and genuine technical artifact. The people who coined the term definitely have no clue about economy and how currencies work.

If those were called «crypto-highly-speculative-assets», that would have been a totally different story. But "Currency"?! That is way to off.