ok123456
ok123456 on Hacker News
In 2026, it's also: "They have FedRAMP, and some "cyber" person told me we need GCC-High to pass an audit."
Along the same lines, Docker "deskilled" a lot of what used to be called "sysadmins."
They absolutely tried at one point or another.
Yes? They used Facebook APIs in conjunction with their own data points. This is basically all of "ad tech."
The Cambridge Analytica "scandal" is basically an advertising campaign for Meta itself. Their ad platform worked exactly as designed: it allowed creepy, microtargeted advertisements. Instead of dish soap, peptides, and dropshipped garbage, it sold a political candidate.
Much worse is how Meta enabled a genocide in Myanmar.
So you have to pay a small amount of money to keep running your criminal enterprise? This would slightly raise the cost of doing business. Scams and banned goods already account for 10% of "Meta" revenues [1]. This move acknowledges that reality and creates a new rent-seeking behavior around it.
https://www.reuters.com/investigations/meta-is-earning-fortu...
No insurance will touch that car with a 10-foot pole.
Why would that stop someone?
What's to stop someone from going full Gallagher, just going to town with a 16lb sledgehammer, on these things?
Most people are to one degree or another.
Look at what Chrome Enterprise can do: whitelist/blacklist extensions and add-ons, force-install extensions, centralized history logging, configurable data loss prevention (e.g., red alert when someone uploads "confidential-financials-2026Q4.xlsx" to Claude), SSO configuration, and endpoint verification just off the top of my head.
Having an offering in this space would be one of the most sensible decisions the Mozilla Foundation has made in recent history.
A Go binary with CGO=0 and all templates/documents embedded gives you a better overall tooling and deployment experience. Put it in a scratch container for complete isolation.
Screenshot of Solaris x86 too.
Thank you for your service
Don't kill people because the voices in your head tell you to do it; don't kill people because a computer program tells you to do it. It doesn't have agency; you do.
Adding safety controls on LLMs makes about as much sense as adding safety controls on TempleOS because the random messages are getting too prophetic. It's as if all the leaders and captains of industry have devolved into some primitive, weak-scifi shamanism.
This whole "discussion" about "AI safety" is about giving them more runway to avoid delivering quantifiable value to investors for a little longer while they "figure things out." The great consensus from the valley is that everyone needs internal (and therefore bullshit) controls. Trust us now! But nothing with real teeth that would require a costly regulatory and compliance framework.
This is a great ad for GLM-5.3.
The Houthis are using Claude. We should ban that.
MongoDB is dying. Netcraft confirms it.
Just like sid=trolltalk on Slashdot.
Something about the lack of socialization leads tech people into these off-putting ego cults.
While it's not exactly the traditional Randian objectivism you're alluding to, effective altruism adds an extra step: it ostensibly helps people. But, ultimately, it's a distinction without difference: no one escapes the dialectic. Individuals, especially ones cloistered off from the world, are not good arbiters of what will make the world better, or of understanding the higher-order effects of their actions.
> It doesn't do nothing.
Yeah, it's called regulatory capture.
Treating security as an accounting exercise has never stopped a 0-day. Better software tools and practices have.
> The FBI had some very smart people.
They trusted Oracle. I'm not sure I believe you.
PeopleSoft 0-day.
Just goes to show that the wall of IT bureaucracy does nothing. I'm sure they had an ATO, a several-hundred-page SBOM, compliance audits, etc.
No, the greatest is from the Sweet Smell of Success: "The cat's in the bag. And the bag's in the river."
These companies have a demonstrated track record for having no qualms about bald-face lying. Suddenly we'll have an influx of "private sector researchers" to cover those tech jobs.
Excatly. It was meant as a temporary program in the early-90s. It wasn't meant as a permanent solution for skilled labor staffing.
We've had about 35 years to build a domestic pipeline of Novell NetWare, SunOS 4, Windows 3.0, and dBASE IV developers and experts.
Then you will have unscrupulous contracting firms miscategorize employees to take advantage of those different quotas.