dsukhin
[0] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/p/office-home-...
[0] https://scihub.copernicus.eu/twiki/do/view/SciHubWebPortal/W...
[1] https://developers.google.com/earth-engine/datasets/catalog/...
1. more pollen (as mentioned in the article), leading to more more allergies, leading to more allergy med sales
2. no free fruit growing in the streets for kids/others to eat healthy snacks (visitors to some “old world” towns admire this about them). The fruit “littering the landscape” being the stated reason for not planting female trees, instead means non biodegradable trash from chip bags and other disposable wrappers litter our cities instead
It would be even more amazing if we ended up in a world where we basically open source public infrastructure projects so that anyone could contribute ideas and/or solicit public comment on new concepts before we invest billions of dollars of public money.
It also immediately comes to mind that Microsoft develops MS flight simulator - could proposed airport innovations be paired with it to test how pilots feel about changes to layouts or e.g. how new runways may affect air traffic and other patterns?
Very cool.
Supreme Court End of Term Statistics
It is however important to consider the technical complexity, effort, and exploitability when valuing an exploit. This was a very, VERY simple bug to find and with KYC very obvious and unlikely truly monetizable without consequences if exploited (unlike say getting access to the private key of a hot wallet). The biggest damage would have been reputational (though a rational person should consider the fact this kind of missing condition check bug made it to production a major issue already). The market would have recovered from whatever flash crash ensued and the attacker wouldn’t be likely to keep their winnings.
Kudos to tree_of_alpha for being the first to look at the API, spotting this, and reporting responsibly - $250k for what appears to be under an hour of work that was driven by curiosity is not a bad deal at all. I know Brian Armstrong frequents HN so it will indeed be interesting to get his take on this as well if he was involved in it.
I also started coding very early and used my time choose a project and dive very deep into the full stack. Web technology is the easiest thing to “show off” to others since it’s ubiquitous and easy to distribute. Even if you consider yourself a “back end” type of person, learn some web dev to be able to show and tell.
This is a time in your life that you can work on a piece of software that’s just for fun and to learn and do something cool. If you are lucky and commercial, that project might become a job of its own that provides you a passive income. Otherwise, it’s a part of your portfolio to help you secure another opportunity. I routinely look to give part time/internship opportunities to folks in your position precisely because others may overlook your talents and passion to develop them and because I was one of them :)
Based on the guide for using this system [1] (see step 15) looks like this specific email address is the one that sends automated confirmation emails upon registration. Perhaps someone was able to inject a message instead of the regular canned text through some sort of reflection attack? This explains why replies to the message result in a canned response. The system also now appears to be temporarily down. So it’s getting some sort of attention (internally taken down (most likely) or maybe denial of service from the abuse).
The Reddit thread suggests the recipients’ emails are likely ARIN IP range contacts. Those are very available from tools like this [2] so nothing interesting with that, but the real question is WHY someone would do this at all? This was clearly given some thought (on who to send this to who would actually take the time to verify the headers) but given the sloppiness of everything else, is this just a script kiddie flex? Whoever it is pissed off the FBI and gained absolutely nothing.
[0] https://bja.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh186/files/media/docu...
[1] https://www.justice.gov/tribal/page/file/1260671/download
Big research institutions that were present when IP addresses were being allocated got A LOT of IPs by simply asking for them. Apple has the entire 17.0.0.0/8 range. Ford Motor Company has one, the US Gov has a lot [0]. Up until recently MIT had all of 18. (they sold something like half to AWS for a hefty sum not too long ago).
As a student (or visitor), when you joined the network (wired or Wi-Fi) you weren’t allocated some internal IP behind a router but a PUBLIC 18.something that was in the global address space because they had so many IPs available. This meant you could literally host something on the public internet from your dorm room because every device on the network was publicly routable by a unique public IP address.
[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assigned_/8_IPv4_add... (see the last section on the original allocation)
Mysterious blue flashes lit up the sky after Mexico earthquake
Humans used to sleep in two shifts
Take Wikipedia for example. They lose money running a high traffic service (edit: see below reply for clarification), but it's plain to see they hold a huge asset in terms of goodwill, usage, knowledge base, and their contribution to research and knowledge growth. Despite its operating losses, its capital value (which may be in the form of social capital) is huge and will likely remain well financed into the foreseeable future.
The fact that the service is free is not relevant: a startup offering an invaluable service that is based on years of user research, development and testing has developed an asset which helps other companies and companies pay what they think it is worth (or at the beginning a subsidized rate to take a risk to try it). Operating losses at most start ups are from continued R&D; but if they were to just declare the product as "done" and have a sufficient moat/network, they could rent seek on the asset for years - yet in many cases that's not what is best for anyone (company, clients or shareholders) - we continue to want them to innovate for the good of the product and there will be stakeholders that would rather finance this research in perpetuity to grow the underlying asset and thus the value of the product and company.
Inductively, that's a company with negative NOL but positive NPV. In the physical world this might be the same as an apartment complex that's expanding (forever). They may currently collect $1M in rent, but they are spending $2M on new construction. The new construction may bring in $5M over its 30 year lifespan but it will never be enough to outpace the immediate outlay of continued construction cost. As long as the time value of money is correctly attributed, this isn't a new idea - just one that's been pulled to an extreme.
Without making any judgement on if this ratio is reasonable: this is 3-5x more than BTC POW but arguably also contains other negative externalities like loss of life, etc.
[1] https://earther.gizmodo.com/groundbreaking-report-gives-us-a...
I don't think they care much about Parler or free speech for that matter. They might not care much beyond the likely big hosting bill they are being paid. Free market at work, nothing to see here.
But this begs the question: Apple Privacy Labels "caught on" because Apple has unilateral control to enforce them in the App Store. If ostensibly the same idea for the WWW did not catch on, is the problem (1) the lack of enforcement/economic incentive mechanisms on the decentralized web or (2) that consumers really didn't care/know enough to create/enforce such free market incentives?
How is a logical person supposed to reconcile a bill that was meant to help the country deal with an emergency is actually penalizing the companies that stepped up to help and charging them for the extra red tape?
Turritopsis Dohrnii, a.k.a. the Immortal Jellyfish
If you look at language efficiency from the information theoretic sense (i.e. most meaning conveyed with least amount of "bits" of data), you can approximate the efficiency of a language by looking at the branching factor and probability of words in its language model. The more branches there are, the more meanining a single word can have in a stream of text (especially a low probability word). However, the more words you have in your language, the more "bits"/letters/memory/etc. It takes to represent the word even if you use a probability informed encoding like Huffman.
If you think of a Markov language model as simply bitstream guided state machine, you can approximate the expected length of output for equivalent length inputs and get an information density approximation of the language model itself.
Traditional Chinese which is not phonemic will have a much larger "word" space but a much smaller branching factor. Each symbol conveys more meaning, but highly constrains the space of symbols which can follow. Where it falls on the tradeoff curve relative to say, English is not obvious ex ante, but we can use this framework to test it.
This answer might be a little dense, but is meant to provide some intuition and a thought framework to evaluate your question.
A 5-story building in Shanghai 'walks' to a new location [Video]
While this model is indeed extremely useful and interesting work, this seemingly casual quote gives new meaning to how unsanitary our phones really are/can be.
> In order to offer an "ad-filled experience" and maximize our profits, LinuxReviews would very much like you to allow our Google AdSense ad-partner to use tracking and cookies so we can show ads from them on our website.
> Options: Resist, Approve (2x bigger)
As a web developer, this was refreshing, but as a user didn't immediately make me want to accept. I wonder what their opt in rate is like compared to the "best" practice
The delay seems to have come from the worry of the perception that it was being used for "diagnosis" of sleep apnea as that would put them in a different category with the FDA. You can imagine how direct access to the SpO2 sensor was a hot topic during the height of the pandemic of a repository illness. In short, the hardware is there, but corporate conservarivism kept it from being used or even exposed to the user.
I've bought a Withings Smart Scale (at that point they were briefly owned by Nokia). The scale is simple, clean, durable, featureful; the companion health app is one of the cleanest/effective specimins of UI I've seen in a while and has tons of integrations. I expect great things here and hopefully less fear about exposing the hardware readings of highly useful sensors.
Tour the Minecraft Institvte of Technology (MIT)
IMHO the cookie consent box is a flawed premise from the start, it's annoying to the user (especially on mobile where it takes half the screen) and there is no way to verify it is actually implemented correctly and doesn't just track you anyway regardless of what you do - hence your comment above.
If one really decides a first party cookie is a privilege rather than a simple data storage primitive on the web because it's been abused by google analytics etc, this is something you can set your browser to ask for permission each time or a content blocker to avoid from sources like Google. Keep in mind, that does affect the site's ability to understand which of it's content is most popular which is not bad on its own - but yes there are workarounds to this too like server logs which are probably more reliable anyway.
This cookie box is the most annoying side effect of GDPR with almost no benefit as it's riddled with dark patterns and "compliant" sites that don't respect the spirit of the law, just the letter.
It's in stark contrast to how FB wrote the post this week about their SDK crashing a bunch of third party apps. Some PR firm did all sorts of verbal gymnastics to avoid actually apologizing and taking real responsibility by shifting blame. [1]
Moreover, the actionable advice to upgrade the SDK is a complete non-technical non-sequter seemingly put as a distraction:
- They admit it was a server side change that caused the crashes. SDK version doesn't change that.
- No breakdown of which versions were affected (or was it everything?).
- Is a newer release safer? Were changes made that we would get by upgrading?
Did anyone by chance MITM the server payload to understand the bad code/bug?