HN user
There are update logs of the train software. Because of them it is known that workers of the company literally snuck into waiting trains and updated the software without the owners knowing. So really, but far from that.
This is a reason why it was detected a year later - the train service was delayed and it spent late November and whole December in service. So the "expiration" intended for 2021 only manifested in 2022.
Very charitable. The "expiry date" was set to the next servicing date and there was no way for competition to fix this hardcoded date and this was not documented in the official documents. Clearly a way to force buyers to use the "official" service.
It is also investigated by the Agency of Internal Security and I really doubt they don't have huge problems out of this. This is taken extremely seriously internally.
There's a ton of evidence to prove what happened and they have no chance to somehow wiggle out of this. They're trying... by saying they were hacked. Yeah, the hackers somehow flashed firmware of trains services by competition, to brick the trains. GPS coordinates of competition rail segments were literally hardcoded.
Ironically this one may actually be better represented by a for loop, because after 20 times or so you might want to reconsider your situation.
You already face the same threat then. Many, if not most, nontrivial programs have at least one way to escalate to arbitrary code execution from config. For example sway has exec, basically any useful editor has "on save actions", etc. No need for a Turing complete language when you can just shell out.
It's also a saying I'm Polish, and I also didn't realize it's not in English.
But this is what hobbyist developers care about, which is what ultimately matters.
Can you link to some study that confirms it? This sounds far too simplistic to be true, especially for something as complex and unpredictable as the economy.
Saying it's an urban legend implies it's false, but that's a bit nitpicky IMO. Most people can read most such "scrambled" sentences without a lot of effort, so that part is certainly true (and non-obvious). The original - fact checked in your sources - made don't strong assumptions like "Cambridge researchers", "can be a total mess (...) read without a problem" etc. But overall I still think that's a neat fact.
As someone who watched all the "original" marvel movies, up to a infinity war I think, I don't think anyone expected any depth from them . I wanted to watch a classical sorry full of non-subverted tropes about a hero fighting an adversary, going through a classical hero journey, and eventually prevailing (possibly sacrificing something in a process). This is a tale as old as time and I don't think there's anything wrong with it.
Of course marvel movies are devoid of any greater meaning and don't really prompt the viewer to think about anything deeper, but for me it's a feature, not a bug - when I want to think I open a technical book or start a side project.
What about "Gimp generated imagery" for computer graphic, and "brush generated imagery" for oil paintings?
As a pedestrian and car hater I don't mind that too much. Pedestrians always have priority on the walk signal, and there is a special separate light to allow/disallow cars to turn. In practice they are used where it's safe to implement.
But I may be wrong - statistics seem to agree with you.
I don't want to halt AI training, I want corporations to fuck off from using my (A)GPL code to train their proprietary models which they then sell to people writing more proprietary code. I would be ok if the derived code is properly GPL licenced too.
I suspect many people feel in a similar way too (for example, artists whose art is used to train image generators without compensation).
One: anonymous[1] method of payment online. Maybe this is not a problem you like, but your statement is trivially false.
[1] pseudonymous (in case of BTC) if we're being pedantic.
slightly handicapping people who become accustomed to it and then read text without it.
Or maybe slightly boosting when reading double spaced? (I didn't read the article yet, my plane is just starting).
pooperings
Just a side note, but it's hard to take you seriously when you resort to such childish name calling. I think your chance of convicting traders (me included) would be much higher if you used some technical arguments instead.
Can you share some examples of the outdated information and the lack of understanding by the authors, so we may all learn? From a quick skim I noticed the article mentions CopperheadOS, even though it was renamed to GrapheneOS in 2019, so I'm inclined to believe there are more outdated pieces of information. But again, highlighting the misleading fragments would be an even more valuable comment.
The idea is that the secret key material is never compromised as it is assumed in all security cases.
That's not true, we have (perfect) forward secrecy, backwards secrecy and key rotation mechanisms because we often care what happened after the key is inevitably compromised. In this case the problem makes it hard to "rotate" the keys in a meaningful way, but I'm yet to see a proof it's impossible.
Even with n=1 you can get something useful. IIRC "on average" if you have ID x than the best population estimation is 2*x. Of course the error margin is immense, but it's still better than nothing.
It's good to consider this but... Plenty of sites expose user ID as a regular integer. In some cases you might want to avoid this (leaking user count to competitors etc), but I have never heard about anyone calling this a vulnerability.
Same in Poland. It's both a generic term ("Metro w Londynie" == London Underground) and a name for a specific system (Metro in Warsaw)
If the data protection authority or the law is to be believed, that's not freely given consent
It's not. You can report this to an appropriate civil authority and in theory it'll be resolved (possibly with a fine). In practice the authorities are still so overwhelmed by GDPR that they will only look at the most severe high profile cases. Fingers crossed one day it'll improve...
I've recently started posting my content on LinkedIn (usually just linking to my blog or publication with a short explanation). Main reason is that I'm a bit unhappy with the new Twitter (a place where I used to share the most), approximately nobody reads Mastodon so I can't stop there, and all least I already have LinkedIn so it's low cost to share there.
Fingerprinting by screen size is real. I've checked one day, and it turned out my browser viewport size when maximized is super unique (like <0.1% users unique). That's mostly because I use sidebery (tabs on the left instead of the top) and don't have a (visible by default) bookmarks tab, but wow I didn't expect to be so obvious for advertisers by just reading my page-usable screen size.
In my country you can login to your government services using a bank account (the easy way) and by creating a proper account with password and everything (the hard way). Or with a proper smart card if you really need it.
How am I, someone with no experience in AI, supposed to make an informed decision? Certainly not by myself. By reading experts on the topic? But which experts? Twitter ones? In the day of misinformation we need some heuristics (or trusted experts), just look what happened during COVID when people with no experience in medicine suddenly decided they can make their own conclusions.
I can't relate. I'm a Python programmer and I don't think I ever used a Python version other than the one provided by my distro. Unless you run a very outdated/"stable" distribution, interpreter versions are no more than few years old. Most serious projects don't just jump on the new language version on the day it's released, certainly not my projects, so I never had the need to run a bleeding edge interpreter.
Can you elaborate? I was personally so happy with Pixel4 that I've decided to buy a new version when my phone lost support. I didn't have any specific problems, I didn't feel like I was forced by Google to do things I don't like, and when I started caring about privacy even more, I changed my OS to Graphene (something you can't easily do on Apple owned device, I believe). They're not perfect, but I'm genuinely interested what was the show stopper for you.
I disagree. I think the trade-off is very reasonable. At some point you need to retry (even if the trigger is user manually pressing F5 in the browser/clicking a button again/running a program again). Because they actually have some goal to accomplish.
Some failures really are random, let's say 0.1% of requests fail. For a sufficiently complex backend/operation, one user request can easily generate 100 internal requests that can fail. If you don't retry, this adds up to a non-negliglible chance that a whole user facing operation fails and all 100 requests have to be retried - you actually increased the number of requests that had to be made! As an extreme example, imagine that during training ChatGPT one request failed, and whole training has to be started from scratch because we don't do retries.