miander

I'm biased, but I feel like if they really cared about the environment they would encourage licensing this instead of keeping it to themselves.

But then the maximum would probably be 255.

Because it creates an implicit expectation that your review should be positive.

So are the documents customers were allegedly asked to sign real, or fabricated? This post calls Mr. Niedermayer everything short of a liar, and yet they didn't answer the obvious question. I am still withholding judgement.

Good analysis. Now that good information on the causes is available, the larger community can discuss solutions.

Of course, said key is a liability if it is found in your possession.

Theory: Wright made promises that he would use his weight as Satoshi to overcome current political conflict within the Bitcoin community in a way that would satisfy Gavin. Gavin sees him as an ally and has vouched for him. A distasteful ally, but for the greater good.

Given how swiftly people are attacking Wright, chances are this would fail before the political situation can be resolved.

The site is clearly designed for people who work in the field, and even then it only took me a moment to find a download link for some data. It even has a workable search function.

I'm not saying it couldn't be better.

I adore this. Good work!

There seems to be a bug that is crashing the rooms. I think it might have something to do with consecutive 90 degree turns.

I'm glad this got unflagged. Thumbs up to the HN mods.

Is there a more detailed/technical article available?

Also, stopping the timer if a user manually presses the arrow to go back would be nice. That's a pretty common feature.

A very unusual move and likely to lose them some customers. Some of them will cough up money and I suspect many will leave. I wonder if this was in response to abuse? At least they didn't waste the opportunity to try to move people over to their Google Docs competitor.

I've noticed this to an extreme degree on HN lately to the point that I upvote posts I disagree with because they present a valid point. The only reason I can see for it is that they have a different opinion from most HN readers.

Needs [2015] tag.

I'm not sure how many others share my view but I think that regulation is worth the benefit to security. I have always been very skeptical of the "but it'll hurt innovation" claim. Won't it promote innovation in new approaches for securing low-cost devices? It sure seems nebulous to me, but I am willing to be convinced otherwise.

I think you misunderstood what he meant... How is a private investigator going to catch him being bitten by an infected mosquito?

This is a really cool tunnel! It's a single tunnel 57km long and the trains are all-electric. There was a nice comment thread a couple months ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10465597

Sorry about being a bit rude in this comment. I didn't mean to sound so sarcastic and I didn't mean to refer to you specifically.

If you're so interested in typing in spam links you might as well search up something like "cheap electronics online" in Google and start clicking around page 10.

This is a legitimate question that many people reading the comments might be wondering. Why is it being downvoted?

Maybe the Internet Archive could participate in this. I imagine that much of this lost-to-time music is recorded on deteriorating tapes which might only be able to be played back a few times. Consumer equipment is getting a lot better but unique recordings deserve professional archival equipment and care.

Which is also why it's a good place for people to critique your opinion. On that note, I believe you are invoking a fallacy by the name of "I'm entitled to my opinion".

It mentions that it takes advantage of improvements in the Windows 8/10 bluetooth stack. Does the fix work in Windows 7?

I wonder if China will be one of the jurisdictions to forbid the use of this status code?

A decline in low-quality Chinese goods would certainly be a boon for the environment. The amount of waste plastic from discarded pens alone must be huge.

This is generous of them to provide this information when most manufacturers are doing everything they can to prevent people from modifying their devices.

How could this have slipped through testing? Did their new version result in substantial enough code changes that the tests needed to be reimplemented but weren't? Of course, testing that kind of software/hardware interaction seems difficult.

Actually, that title isn't accurate either because the article doesn't claim that to be the case; it only speculates. Nor does it even rule out some form of "suicide".

How does this work? If they aren't uploading the picture how are they doing facial recognition? Surely they aren't running their highly proprietary recognition software on users' phones. Maybe they're doing preliminary zealous face-finding and uploading those potential matches for further processing? If so that means that no photo you ever take on your device is private.

Thank you for your wisdom. I think I vaguely grasped that but I let bias prevent me from fully thinking through the other possibilities.