jimmydorry
jimmydorry on Hacker News
As you look at those other countries (Australia) flooded with subsidised to below cost-to-make EVs, note how they are killing any chance of a sustainable local EV industry. It is a total governmental derreliction of duty to see how cheap Chinese imports played out with solar panels (and many other industries before that), and still welcome cheap EVs instead of attempting to kick start (or protect) a local option.
Why is the default assumption that these attempts to contest parking fines are frivolous? Have you never received a fine for parking legally? The fines are created by a human after all. If the system was perfect, they wouldn't offer a way to contest them.
Thanks for sharing the reasoning!
It also allows it to be much worse too. I can't wait to do tech support for my grandparents that followed the instructions to install ScamAppStore to install an app they saw on a Facebook ad.
The EU was actually on the path to forcing everyone to use micro-USB. Thankfully Apple (and others) pioneered USB-C (bringing what it learnt from developing the lightning connector) in the time it took the EU to go from making all of the phone makers sign a Memorandum of Understanding to making it legislation. Now the EU is frozen in time, stuck on USB-C for the forseeable future. The economics to make a device dual port (USB-C and something new) aren't there, so we're not likely to ever see an improvement on USB-C... in an alternative timeline, we could have been stuck on the even worse micro-USB.
Bringing it back to the topic on hand, this is very much an area I wouldn't want to see a heavy handed EU legislate something that just further cements the incumbants and makes everything worse forever... just like mandatory micro-USB would have been. I can totally see the EU legislating something like a mandatory Meta communication protocol with compulsory attestation from Meta servers.
People are spending more than 70% more on memory because that's all that is available. Everything seems to indicate that people will pay a lot more.
This outage started a lot longer than 13mins ago. At least now I have an excuse to leave the office and have a long coffee break.
And wikipedia runs off a tiny tiny fraction of what they raise. Almost all of the good on wikipedia comes in-spite of the organisation that owns it. Without the community pouring hundreds of thousands of hours into the project (unpaid) a year, wikipedia would be dead immediately. And if there was ever a time in its life that the project needed good leadership and innovative thinking, it would be now when AI is seriously threatening its survival. If people stop going to the site and instead go to the chat bots that scrape the site, there will be less and less incentive for the power users to continue maintaining wikipedia.
Canada effectively requires leaving and re-entering. It can take multiple months for an online visa to get processed, meanwhile leaving and reentering takes hours.
You're being naieve if you don't think SNI will be fully deprecated in the future when a standard is settled on and reaches wide-adoption.
Scare prompt fatigue is real. If you're constantly blasting users with "XXX wants to do Y" which sounds scary, you're training them to just accept without thinking.
Mozilla has frequently made questionable choices with its ad tie-ins and promotions. Mr. Robot ads, anyone? Unlike Chrome, Mozilla has also embedded full on data-collection schemes (Cliqz which tracked typing and browsing to test monetisation strategies).
Security upgrades are never opt-in, and for good reason. The status quo would remain in-secure. Every encryption suite upgrade, SSL software version, DNS versions, etc. maintained backwards compatibility for a window then closed it... just like we have seen here with manifest v2 -> v3.
"Please stop looking at all network requests, especially when you don't need to."
doesn't result in action... while:
"You can no longer look at all network requests" requires extension makers to update to the new paradigm.
A valid claim. The unfettered access to. etc.
If you've run a site with CORS reporting enabled, you'd see that a significant fraction of your userbase have malware extensions running (prior to manifest v3). I was absolutely shocked when I looked at the logs a decade ago, and I bet the problem is far worse these days with the proliferation of malware buyouts of legit extensions.
Google has no shortage of options for serving up ads that can't be blocked by normal ad blockers across all their properties (youtube, search, etc.). They in-line the ads these days! And if they really cared about the fraction of a fraction of a percent of people that even install any kind of adblocker, they could make the served ad content un-blockable by serving it the exact same as the content.
>How do you secure against the system vendor (in this case the browser) limiting what the consumer/user can or can't do (alone or with the help of third parties) with the product after acquiring it though?
If you don't like what a browser is doing, then move to another one? You're acting like you have spent a tonne of money on buying Chrome. Even if that was the case, it's not a clear case of an anti-user behaviour. There is a good reason to deprecate the webRequest API, and we'll see more browsers move towards that in the future (Safari has had declarative blocking for many years now, I believe).
>preventing modifications (and thus also repairs) is anti-competitive
There is nothing stopping someone from forking a manifest v2 version and maintaining it. I'd argue this can't be compared to any company actually doing anti-competitive things (e.g. tractor company, printers, ice cream machine companies, etc.)
>An adblocker, by its nature, needs to access *
Well that's what is in contention. Does everything claiming to be an adblocker really need access to *? Is Adblocker5++ (totally not malware) entitled to as much access as uBlock Origin? You can declare upfront all the URLs you don't want accessed (which on top of security gives a substantial performance boost), and who's to say someone won't figure out a better way of working within these constraints?
I think a big step forward, towards a better security model, was overall a good thing, even if it meant that a good extension no longer had unfettered access to everything your browser saw. I don't think this change is ridiculous at all. And I don't want them to stop here either! v4 should close more of the avenues that malicious extensions are abusing! Extensions should declare everything up-front, so it's easy see if abuse is occuring.
So you're saying that because Google didn't completely up-end the security model and break almost every extension in the one-go, we should have no-progress towards a more secure extension model?
uBlock Origin via declarative blocks is almost as powerful as the original. While I would trust gorhill with almost unfettered control over my browser, I don't trust EVERY extension owner (no do I trust uBlock Origin in perpetuity).
The average Joe wouldn't know where to begin in setting that up. That solution is far from solving the problem.
If you don't have the capability to train these models, then there's almost no chance of you having enough GPU power to run inference at a large scale on these models (assuming the weights for such a model are ever released or leaked in the future). And that's ignoring the fact that you won't have cultivated a sector that can continue to learn about and improve on said models.
It's not the price of power that matters, it's the heat produced. Every extra W consumed is an extra W of heat that needs to be handled, and for consoles that tend to be chucked into confined spaces, that's an issue.
Loudness might be subjective, but if we're trying to compare builds, they should at least be in the same ballpark.
Looking at this article, they seem to only care about one dimension of this product: cost. It would have been far more interesting if they explored: cost, performance, size, heat (by proxy of power consumption), and loudness.
If you're tech savvy enough to monitor your equipment, you're probably smart enough not to install "free VPNs" or "free stream pirate apps" to get pwned in the first place. You probably changed your router's default password and kept its firmware up to date, and don't give your TV internet access, right? That's more than Mom has done.
Right, this is orthagonal to the discussion though. While the IPs and bandwidth might be free, managing the malware botnet and trying to keep a low profile so as to not attract attention of authorities, makes it a risky market to cater to.
Those rates are still cheaper than some datacentres charge in parts of the world.
Yes, the status quo right now is merely bandwidth... but if there was money to be made in providing a small amount of compute for the sake of solving the next gen captcha's, you can bet offerings will expand to meet it.
It's impossible to prove a negative. They could all be running secondary scrapers using malware proxies... but what we do have is plenty of evidence of them using fixed IP pools with appropriate user agents. I don't see any Chinese user agents... so two guesses who may be driving the bulk of these AI scraper requests via residential proxies.
These options are up to 10 times bigger than the SteamMachine, approach almost twice the power draw, and are up to 2.8 times louder than the SteamMachine. They aren't even close to comparable... so why exactly are they making this apples to oranges comparison? No one is assembling a PC to put under their TV, and even if they are, ignoring the obvious form factor, heat and loudness issues... they'll most likely still want to install SteamOS for a "console-like" experience, which is still a win for Valve...
First option:
* 35 litre case (~10 times bigger than the SteamMachine)
* ~250W power draw (vs. ~185W SteamMachine)
* 32-36 dBA (vs. ~23 dBA SteamMachine)
Second option:
* 35 litre case (~10 times bigger than the SteamMachine)
* ~285W power draw (vs. ~185W SteamMachine)
* 32-36 dBA (vs. ~23 dBA SteamMachine)
Third option:
* 19.2 litre case (~5.5 times bigger than the SteamMachine)
* ~295W power draw (vs. ~185W SteamMachine)
* 34-38 dBA (vs. ~23 dBA SteamMachine)
Fourth option:
* 19.2 litre case (~5.5 times bigger than the SteamMachine)
* ~275W power draw (vs. ~185W SteamMachine)
* 32-35 dBA (vs. ~23 dBA SteamMachine)
PoW barely affects the "residential proxies" aka. malware botfarms. The IPs are free for them and siphoning additional system resources for PoW doesn't matter at all for them. PoW only affects the large centralised scraping by the AI providers, which are not operating behind "residential proxies".
All it takes is a populist with a good message to make a political group. All functional Western nations have voting mechanisms that allow for radical government change, if there is enough public support for it. It might take a decade to fully manifest, but if we're entering an age of such extreme, then I would expect people to eventually vote for such change.
Indexes rebalance frequently. The "correct weight" today, won't be the correct weight in a year.