fmx
fmx on Hacker News
Thank you for explaining. OK, so I get that it's not as simple as "there is NO reason to have remote access to a fridge". There are reasons to. But there are also reasons not to. I hope the decision-makers involved will start carefully thinking about the trade-off involved.
Maybe they $500/store/year is not worth the risk?
Maybe having read-only remote access will still save $300/store/year and $200/store/year is not worth the risk?
Maybe having a physical button that someone at the store needs to push to temporarily authorize write access is worth the hassle?
etc.
OK, you got me there - I actually used to do this, too!
I'm glad the author mentioned this particular learning. Even if you do enjoy reading your own jokes, many other people will find them at best annoying and at worst confusing. When you add in people from other language/culture backgrounds the risk/reward of jokes gets even worse!
There was a famous conflict over rms's joke about the abort() function in the glibc manual[0], which said:
> Proposed Federal censorship regulations may prohibit us from giving you information about the possibility of calling this function. We would be required to say that this is not an acceptable way of terminating a program.
I think that joke illustrates nicely what I mean: it would only have made sense to people in USA, and would have just confused others. Even those who understood it would - IMHO - most likely not appreciate it being in the glibc manual. People don't read manuals to be entertained - they read them to find out as quickly as possible how to get their work done.
[0] https://lwn.net/Articles/770966/
This big warning gave me pause, too. Why not have a compression option that automatically checks the data after compression (by decompressing and checking against a hash of the original data), which would reduce the probability of undetected errors to that of a hash collision? i.e. like `7z a` followed by `7z t`, but in one command.
A "Message Echo" textbox that makes it
look like you can get a response to a prompt without logging in, only to redirect to the sign-up page. Such a classic dark pattern - and such a sure way to get me to leave your site immediately.
I've literally taken one step on your website - the one your site design invited me to take - and immediately got tripped up. I'm not coming back.
Even worse, I've seen the JetBrains AI auto-complete insert hard-to-spot bugs, like two nested for loops with i and j for loop index variables, where the inner loop was fairly complex and incorrectly used i instead of j in one place.
> The first class passengers are effectively paying 3x as much
3x? If only! If we're talking international first class (not US domestic "first"), it's typically 10-12x the price of economy.
GMail disagrees with you, because GMail users disagree with you. They are clicking "report spam" on your emails. Whether or not you think what you're sending is spam, the recipients think it is, and that's what matters. (Based on the other comments in this thread it's not hard to see why they might think so.)
Perhaps a stupid question, but why do notifications need to be stored in a database in persistent storage at all?
OK, maybe they can be stored until they're dismissed in case the battery suddenly dies, so they can be displayed again on next boot and are not lost, but it sounds like they are being stored long after they are dismissed.
> Ironically, the good clients pay within 2-3 days normally, and the difficult ones are very “long tail”.
Why ironically? Isn't that exactly what you'd expect?
There have been so many cases of Apple, Google, etc. doing this that it's hard to have any sympathy for them at this point. If it was some grandma who didn't know better that would be another story, but the author was surely aware
- that Apple *can* always *just* disable their account
- that Apple regularly *does* do that
- that Apple does not care about them at all
and they chose to bet their entire digital life on Apple's benevolence anyway. They lost that bet.
We need more stories like this hitting the mainstream news until even a non-technical person's reaction to this is "well, what did you expect?"
The number of monsters on the screen doesn't seem to affect playing speed for me, but when the wall of fire appears it slows down the game very noticeably. (Using Firefox on desktop.)
Just tried it and, apart from the UI being highly confusing (you just get a blank workspace basically, and it's unclear how to see other DBs and objects in them) it seems to have no support for PG schemas. When I did manage to connect to my DB it showed me the tables in the "public" schema only.
Right, I didn't notice the end date, sorry. So that was ~5.7% return for ~15 months (not 26) and the remaining ~28.7% was in the last 11 months.
> since launching Grizzly Bulls (
https://grizzlybulls.com) in January 2022, 6 of our 7 models have outperformed the market on an unleveraged basis:
> VIX-TA-Macro Advanced: +34.38%
I'm not sure how to reconcile that with the numbers shown on https://grizzlybulls.com/models/vix-ta-macro-advanced
When 2022 is selected as the starting year, it shows an increase from 16,911,242 to 17,881,510 which is an increase of 5.7% in 26 months.
> This is a pay-per-call work and we need you to join as a interviewee (not interview candidates) for technical calls.
> Are you strong enough to pass technical interview?
> We will pay $100 for per call whether you pass the call or not, but hope you try your best to keep working with us.
I've never seen this kind of thing in a legitimate job at. It smells like a scam to get bank details, especially combined with the very generic description here and lack of any company details.
I like the brevity of it, but I don't like the assumption that every good candidate will have everything that they want to share with a prospective employer on their LinkedIn page. Something like "Link to resume, LinkedIn, GitHub, etc. (whatever you want to show us)" would be more inclusive.
That is the second-shortest job application form I've ever seen. (The shortest one asked for a name, email and LinkedIn without a free-text field. I think "who are you" is more important than "name".)
Ah yes, that actually explains a lot! Thanks.
I see, thanks. I guess that answers one question, but raises another: why have his packages depend on more of his packages? If his goal was to be included in as many node_modules directories as possible, and handlebars-helpers was already included what's the point of pulling in is-odd/is-even, too?
When I first heard of the is-odd and is-even NPM packages I was sure they were a joke, yet there we are: 200K weekly downloads! Publishing the packages may have been the effort of one spammer, but many developers obviously chose to use them - that's the part that boggles my mind.
Just want to say I really like the values on your careers page. Compassion and humility, but raising the bar at the same time. (Of course, it could all be complete corporate BS, for all I know, but I'd really like to believe it's not!) It's such a shame you switched from "remote (worldwide)" to "remote (North America)"!
Yeah, as hilarious as this is when it happens to a bad guy the really sad aspect of it, for me, is that their customer service experience is not so abnormal. If it were, most would immediately identify it as fake. Like, counting the numbers of nuts in a photo is a bit much, but we are so used to horrible CAPTHAs now that it's just plausible. Same with the phone menu, etc.
Here is another good one:
too easy to hit CTRL+Q instead of CTRL+W https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=52821Only 20-and-a-half years to fix that one! In this case it wasn't because nobody got around to it, but because people could not agree on the fix, even though more or less everyone agreed that the old behavior was bad.
The timeline of this vulnerability might just be the best argument I've ever seen for full disclosure:
2019-09-26 Reported to vendor with POC
2020-01-14 Followed up with vendor
2022-01-24 Publicly disclosed (still no fix over 2 years later!)
2022-01-28 Fix released by vendor
I wonder if the same will happen with this RIGOL oscilloscope vulnerability.
No, the whole point of the original post is that a lot of users see (and use) the option, so that the app's database of personal data is full of rubbish.
I don't think the GP's scenario is realistic. A user would see that their location on the map is wrong before they even get a chance to begin navigation.
Besides, Google Maps already sometimes tells people to drive through roadblocks and locked gates and such (which it isn't aware of), so it already requires the driver to think for themselves to some extent.
XPrivacy was great, but apps would regularly crash when I denied some permissions - so apparently it was not faking data well enough. It got so bad that I would never just click "deny", but always "temporarily deny" first. Then, if the app worked, I would deny permanently. If it crashed I'd have to figure out the minimum set of permissions I could get away with granting.
I was with you until you mentioned "GDPR" right after "effective enforcement". GDPR is, if anything, a great example of ineffective enforcement.