Zak
Zak on Hacker News
As long as one of the backends is something widely available, I don't see a problem. C is a decent option. LLVM IR is another.
I remember being a young child when my parents were shopping for a car. I heard a radio ad for a car dealer claiming it was the best place to get a car, and I was excited to tell them.
I think that experience helped blunt the ability of ads to manipulate me ever since. I recognize, however that advertising has increased in sophistication, so I block ads pretty aggressively and try to avoid media that makes it impossible.
The fact that a ticket bought online must be printed on paper at all seems anachronistic in 2026. I would expect, or at least hope for a QR code saved to a smartphone as the default.
I've taken hundreds of flights in and between the USA and EU and never once had to show anyone my credit card. In a number of cases, the ticket was booked with someone else's credit card.
For (non-Schengen) international flights, I usually have to show someone my passport.
Did you mean most/all airlines in Japan?
I'll have to give that a good look. The concept sounds good.
I do, however question the taste and judgment of any project that tells users to run `curl ...|sh`.
Bank apps do checklist-oriented security, and nobody has put that on the checklist yet.
I'm disappointed that issue tracking inside the VCS (probably as a separate repository, or at least a special branch) never got popular. That would reduce the importance of web-based code forges and make moving between them easy.
I expect law enforcement agencies to act like professional public services, not venomous insects.
That's a good point. The USA has many counterproductive restrictions on immigration which should be repealed.
To "surveil" a law enforcement agency is usually described as journalism or public accountability in democracies.
A rational employer is interested in how much value they can get, not how hard you work. In most cases, in the short term, an increase in efficiency means they can get more value from you working the same amount of the same pay.
I don't think it should be allowed without a court order. Extrajudicial punishments are bad.
I do think a court order should have been issued in this case. The offender's conduct was severe enough to earn him 15 years in prison, and the risk of continuing/future harm to the victim was substantial.
Seizing and selling or destroying property used in the commission of a crime is common. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me if the value of the property is in proportion to the severity of the crime, and the owner of the property has been convicted of the crime (i.e. it's not civil asset forfeiture).
It seems to me that the correct remedy in this case would be to have a representative of the court preserve specific data requested by the offender, as long as it isn't criminal or harmful, at the offender's expense.
I don't think wiping an offender's phone is justified in most cases even if it might hinder them in potential subsequent crimes, but it does seem justified in this case where the phone contains significant material harmful to the victim of a serious crime.
I was recently surprised to notice a PDF download link on a blog post from Anthropic. My first thought was "would anybody want to read a blog post in PDF rather than HTML format?"
This comment suggests the answer is yes.
Not using remote attestation requires exactly zero effort, but some jerk put it on a checklist and now middle managers want it.
That's my first instinct too. I've seen a claim that devices with root, which is distinct from degoogled, both of which are distinct from using a third-party Android distribution, have an increased probability of malware. I suspect that statistic includes things like secondary devices people use for cheating in pay-to-win games and the like.
Only if it has a place to put the result.
Someone flagged this comment to death (I vouched and restored it), and mine attracted some downvotes.
I'm surprised to see that in this thread. That's usually reserved for politics and arguments about AI.
That's not the whole reason, or even the main reason GrapheneOS doesn't support or encourage root access.
The central design theme of GrapheneOS is to have stronger sandboxes and more limits on what apps can access than stock Android does. Granting an app root access does exactly the opposite; someone behaving rationally and consistently usually won't want to do both on the same device.
Without evidence that using an OS that isn't approved by Google or Apple actually correlates with a higher rate of account compromise or fraud, I do blame them for trying to force it on users.
I've done a couple casual web searches for such evidence and come up short. If somebody has good data on this, I don't think they're publishing it.
Clojure creator Rich Hickey describes traditional imperative programming as "PLace Oriented Programming (PLOP)" when talking about how Clojure's approach is better for certain kinds of problems.
I agree with his point, and Clojure is my favorite programming language, but the computer itself is place-oriented. It runs on reading from and writing to locations in memory, and extracting maximum efficiency from it requires direct control over that memory.
This comment is tricky because "hack" can mean different things in different contexts.
If I run software the OEM didn't authorize on a phone that I own and know the password for, that might be described as a "hack". Unless you're one of the horrible people trying to push OS-level DRM on everything, my doing that is a positive or neutral thing.
If a third party gets software that I didn't authorize to run on a phone that I own by tricking me into opening a malicious PDF, that's also a "hack". Almost everyone considers that a bad thing.
One does not imply the other.
Nobody said exactly that, but your first comment pointed out how cool the capability is without acknowledging that it is trivial to exploit maliciously.
We're on the same side here. I daily a Pixel with LineageOS and root.
The link here demonstrates an exploit which runs arbitrary code on an iPhone when the user opens a PDF.
I'm for being able to hack your own device to do whatever you like with it, preferably without active resistance from its manufacturer. I'm against anybody who can convince you to open a PDF being able to hack your device to do whatever they like with it.
I think it's the relay that has to be expensive.
On official announcements from a municipal government? Yes. Imagine a scenario like...
Foo Town: boil water advisory for Tuesday. The water department has noted a risk of harmful pathogens in tap water and recommends boiling water for 2 minutes before consumption all day Tuesday.
Commenter: It's all those [racial slur]s shitting in the reservoir. If that [expletive] police chief doesn't run them out of town, we're going to have to round them up and shoot them!
Assume the commenter has done this enough times to figure out what the platform's moderation will catch and what it won't. The town would probably like to be able to do some additional moderation.