HN user
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/rosalinekarr; my proof: https://keybase.io/rosalinekarr/sigs/K5LjVOIrdwZ8ltfDX3Z1KqQpFSazTZ-mRxAXI3cGbRk ]
This is long overdue. Chelsea will probably be doing interviews soon, and since [she's already been pretty outspoken about internet freedoms][1], she may even bring some much needed attention to issues like net neutrality, government surveillance and the never ending erosion of our online rights.
Let's hope the media doesn't tear her apart.
[The propaganda Comcast is tweeting right now is absolutely ridiculous.][1]
The parent comment is cherrypicking tweets from WikiLeaks. Take a look at [their actual feed][1]. They have since [discounted several conspiracy theories against Macron][2] and [brought into question the legitimacy of some of the files][3].
[1] https://twitter.com/wikileaks/with_replies
If they withheld the information that they received in the interest of neutrality, would that be better?
[WikiLeaks has stated repeatedly that they publish everything they receive.][1] Blaming them for failing to release information from the other side assumes that they have that information to release.
[1] https://theintercept.com/2017/04/19/intercepted-podcast-juli...
WikiLeaks has already identified several files in the leaks containing [Cyrillic tags in their metadata.][1]
There seem to be a lot of people theorizing that it could be something about the paper itself that they're looking for, i.e. flash paper, paper circuits or physical one-time encryption pads, but what if it's not about the paper at all? Maybe, the TSA is simply trying to discourage passengers from traveling with or using paper, thereby encouraging people to store their information digitally on phones and laptops where that data can be more easily copied and analyzed?
Now I know where I'm going to be getting my wallpapers from for the next few months.
I'm seeing a lot of comments about how terrible different people's standup meetings are at their particular companies, and I can't help but think the problem isn't with standup itself, it's with these companies.
At my job, we meet for standup via video chat as early as we can. That's about 9am for some of us and 10am or 11am for others depending on timezones. We each say what we worked on yesterday and what we're working on now, which only takes about 5 to 10 minutes, then we enter what we call "parking lot." We call it "parking lot" because if this were an in-person meeting, this is bit where we would be talking in the parking lot on our way out to lunch. No one is expected to stick around unless there's something urgent related to what your working on that needs to be discussed. Anyone is free to hop off the call at this point.
During parking lot, we discuss impediments, anything that's going to keep someone from getting work done that day. If the problem is something complicated that's difficult to describe via text, we chat about it face to face and work out a solution together. If the problem is simple, we just agree to talk it out in either a public or private channel on Slack depending the kind of problem.
The purpose of the meeting isn't to build a big report of who's working on what or to guilt us into working harder. It's just to guarantee that we're all online at a given time each day to help each other out. Working across several timezones, we all have wildly different hours, and without standup, we would probably be waiting for days to hear back from each other about any issues we run into.
Maybe standup is a problem for other people or other companies, but for my team at least, we couldn't work without it.
I didn't necessarily mean the US exclusively. I was thinking more of the internet in general, but I'll provide some specific examples anyway: in the US, I believe [the efforts of our government to undermine net neutrality][1] pose a serious threat to free speech online; in the EU, [well-meaning but misguided laws regarding blocking hate speech and potential taxing internet access][2] pose a similar threat; and in Australia, the government has already [blocked some websites under the guise of copyright enforcement][3].
Outside the western world, the situation is even worse. In the past few months, [the Turkish government has blocked thousands of websites and several DNS servers including 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4][4]. While China has always maintained strict censorship on the internet within their borders, lately they've been stepping up their efforts by [replacing major websites with state-run alternatives][5]. Further, [Russia has started following China's model with aggressive, nationwide IP blocking][6].
I know censorship has been a big challenge to free speech on the internet for a long time now, but lately, it feels as if the problems are escalating much faster. Nations are locking down their citizens access to communication, discussion is becoming ever more politicized, and partisans on all sides are cheering along the erosion of our most fundamental rights.
I know I sound like a conspiracy nut and doomsayer waving around the classic "End is Nigh" sign and wearing a tinfoil hat, but I can't help but feel like the internet is inching ever closer to dystopia. I feel like we're on the verge of something terrible, and I'm afraid that despite our best efforts, it may already be too late to stop it.
[1] https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/2017/05/9-senator...
[2] https://openmedia.org/en/leak-eu-commission-points-link-tax-...
[3] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/06/australia-passes...
[5] http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39779088
[6] http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2017/0...
Just to be clear, I don't agree with N-O-D-E's political leanings, and I think the examples he used in this video were very poorly chosen, but I still think he has a strong point regarding censorship in general and the slippery slope our society has been sliding down lately, so despite the heavy-handed partisan overtones, I still wanted to share this video with you all. I'm curious what HN's take on it all will be.
For anyone unfamiliar with CRISPR, I strongly recommend this quick introduction video from Kurzgesagt on YouTube:
I don't think rejecting a technology entirely is the best way to avoid abuse. I get that some of these devices are a little silly, i.e. WiFi-connected toasters, but a lot of IoT devices have great potential for making the world a better place. For example, the FitBit and other health trackers can do wonders for helping people get healthier, and devices like Bluetooth-enabled glucose monitors can even save lives.
This idea that we shouldn't even consider connecting tools to the internet because the internet is scary and dangerous feels like a knee-jerk reaction to me. I believe there is a right way to build these tools where the risk added is minimal to non-existent. Refusing to pursue this tech at all because some people do it wrong just feels like ludditism to me.
Imagine what would have happened if people abandoned computer technology after the first few viruses were discovered.
This is awesome. I've been wanting something like a "brew browse" command for a long time to see what popular tools I should consider trying out. I'm probably going to spend the rest of the night googling everything I don't recognize on the most installed list.
Anyone have any suggestions for things to look at first?
I still haven't managed to crack Hacker News, though. Tough audience.
Just link a bunch of studies to anything you say.[^1] It doesn't actually matter if they're related.[^2] No one really checks the sources anyway.[^3]
[^1]: https://arxiv.org/abs/1502.02876
This seems way too good to be true. Seeing as the timeline on their mission page puts the first manned flight at some time in 2019 and their technology page states that the vehicle is built primarily with aluminum and carbon fiber, I'm guessing that this thing is incredibly light, maybe even under 500kg. The video seems to back this up with how easily the craft drifts side-to-side in the air with cross-breezes.
That low weight is an impressive feat of engineering, but it's also a big disadvantage for any real world applications because passenger and cargo weight is going to be a huge problem. You can't build passengers out of aluminum and carbon fiber. Even combustion-powered, light aircraft have serious problems with weight, and their pilots frequently have to work passenger weight into their fuel calculations.
My guess is that this technology will do wonders for aerial photography, scientific research and maybe even military reconnaissance, but transportation and any kind of serious shipping are still a very long way off.
Because dryers are expensive appliances. If they're going to make one that only lasts one tenth as long, it better cost one tenth of the price too.
This looks like it will have the same problem as early bluetooth headsets: you look crazy using them. As well as they can get it to work and as popular as it becomes among early adopters, it will never really catch on with the general public because most people are too afraid of looking like an idiot to use it in public.
The repel could be dangerous too. There are plenty of features that websites are legally or ethically obligated to provide, but they would rather users not use them. I'm imagining email newsletters with really hard to click unsubscribe buttons.
This idea that the government should somehow be exempt from proper cybersecurity ethics is disgusting. When the CIA or the NSA find zero day attacks in software, they should report them immediately to be fixed, not build tools specifically to exploit them. It's only a matter of time before these attacks either leak or are rediscovered by other malicious parties. The government is effectively turning their own people into cannon fodder for their ridiculous "cyberwar."
no database
Where is the data being stored then? Some kind of key value store or filesystem maybe?
Why does it have to be several hundred PSI? They don't have to put it at the bottom of the ocean. A shallow lake or river would work just as well.
This is really cool, but executing other people's javascript in a page makes me nervous. What sort of restrictions are in place to prevent malicious exploits?
stop feeding people an endless stream of ad-stuffed trash media selected by an algorithm maximizing for clickbait factor and nothing else. I genuinely believe that it's poisoning people's minds and doing significant damage to our society.
I've been hearing this from a lot of people lately, but every time I do, I can't help but think we've got it backwards. People aren't becoming worse because of clickbait and fake news. Clickbait and fake news are becoming worse because of people.
Long before there was Facebook, plenty of people bought and read magazines and newspapers like the National Enquirer and the Daily Mail. The only difference now is that those people, just like everyone else, have access to much more of that content thanks to the internet. Taking that content away from those people isn't going to make them smarter. It's just going to make them angrier and more determined to seek that stuff out.
In my opinion, the only real solution is improving education, but no one wants to talk about that because that's the hard way. It's much easier to demand that certain news sources be censored or that certain news aggregators impose a bias against them, but that's a very dangerous road to travel down. Today, people are talking about sources like banning Breitbart and The Daily Caller, which is well-meaning, but how long will it be before people start talking about banning sources like The Intercept or The Guardian? There are certainly plenty of people in both political parties that would gladly slap the labels of "clickbait" and "fake news" on them as well.
iTunes used to be the best music player/manager available, but over the years Apple has let it fall to feature creep and countless poor design choices. It's so bad now that the official fixes for some of its bugs now include things like "backup, reset and restore your entire iPhone" or "move these obscure system files from one folder to another then back."
There's definitely a market out there for people that want to bring back the 'good old days' of early iTunes.
I was actually a little disappointed with "Lo and Behold." Maybe I set my expectations too high, but it struck me as very disorganized. It seemed like it was trying to cover too many topics at once and draw connections between them that weren't really there.
It still had beautiful cinematography, but I just couldn't enjoy the commentary.
Theoretically, ATP could be harvested from plants or bacteria. They could also be modified to produce the ammonia directly via this reaction. That wouldn't actually reduce the energy cost, but it could reduce the economic cost by making it logistically easier to produce. Maybe instead of making ammonia in complicated chemical plants, we could "grow" it on farms.
"You wouldn't steal a car!"
"Yeah, but if I could burn a copy..."
I can't wait to see the first ssh client for VR.
Is this supposed to be a joke?