ollyfg

I probably deserve to get downvoted to oblivion for this but... I've deployed JSFuck in production!

We wanted to obfuscate this bit of code, to make life just a little bit harder for reverse engineers. We made this huge function where we pretty much passed in all our application state, and it would run this JSFuck code, and spit out a token. We even made a few tweaks to the code so that you couldn't just reverse it back into JS with something like https://enkhee-osiris.github.io/Decoder-JSFuck/.

Performance was surprisingly alright, and it has never hit an environment where it couldn't execute. All in all, a fun few hours setting it up, and I haven't had to touch it since!

Not sure if it's what you mean by blank (not a big keyboard geek, but I just got a Moonlander), but when you buy it there's an option for all of the keys to have "-" on them, so it's effectively blank?

Wow! How have I not heard of frida? This should make my normal process much simpler!

1) Decompile App -> smali

2) Decompile App -> Java (non-reversible, but easier to read)

3) Search the app for certificate pinning code (check for network_security.xml or grep for OKHttp pinning functions)

4) Find the code I just found in java, in the smali version

5) Remove the pinning code

6) Recompile smali -> apk

7) Fix whatever was causing the smail not to recompile

8) Recompile again

9) Pray

10) Install on device

11) Run app (that hopefully doesn't crash)

12) Pipe connection through Charles proxy

13) Read api calls!

I'll definitely give it a go.

In general I think there are nowhere near enough resources on decompilation, particularly on a purportedly "open" platform like Android. Really looking forward on the rest of the tutorial coming online.

Interesting!

I've switched to using Ian's knot, and have found it to be both faster to tie and easier to set up. I think once you work out how to 'pick up' the laces in the right way, so that they are already in the correct starting position, it gets a lot faster/simpler to think about.

Of course, I haven't been in your shoes - my laces are all the round type and I haven't tried it with flat ones.

To each their own!

Looks good! One feature that would definitely get me using this for personal projects is the ability to add/customise axis. You might already have this, but I didn't see it in any of your examples, so if this is present, please advertise it!

My general reaction when seeing a chart without axis is "pretty, but I can't see what it means", where as with decent labelled axis I can dig into it and look at data points, and come to my own conclusions about the data.

Still, this is a useful service that could make life much easier - keep at it!

Would you care to share the link to that live stream? Sounds fun ;)

Have you tried openshot[1]? I haven't played much with it recently, but when it came out it was the most stable, simple video editor for linux.

[1] http://openshot.org/

Middle click (if you have it) gets around this!

If there is one thing I've learned from university, it's this. Keeping units makes your writing messier and longer, but when it comes to checking they are absolutely invaluable. Your equation to give you volumetric flow gave you (kg/s)? Well density is (kg/m^3) so just divide your answer by density! (this is a problem my friend was having just yesterday)

This reminds me of the way Big Brother is working on a new language that doesn't have words for things you're not allowed to do - if there's no word for it, how can you think about doing it?

Off topic, but does anyone know what's up with the "?hn_email_told_me_to_repost=true" in the url?

Wow, that sounds really cool! What parts did you use (how much was "from scratch")? Any blog post or article about this? I'd love to read more.

I think that it is a jerk thing to do if your service is exactly the same as the one in the thread, however in this case the first poster has identified some annoying problems with Google's system, so pointing out your own system which (I assume), doesn't have these problems is constructive advice (In my opinion).

I understood it as a halfway pill between the red pill and the blue pill from The Matrix, and subsequently got very confused. Looking at it as a typo makes a lot more sense!

But IE6 will break! :O

Wow, this makes a lot of sense. In what ways is this different to the way I was taught through school and university (that for a+-b * c+-d, the answer was (ab)+-sqrt( (b/a)^2) + (d/c)^2 )?

I can see that ((a-b) (c-d)+(a+b) * (c+d))/2 is different to a*b, and that makes sense when you think about it, but the second part is confusing me a bit.

Also, I'm a bit confused by your suggestion to break it down into cases, do you mean if an uncertainty is negative? Because at the moment I'm making all uncertainties positive, but if there are cases where negative ones are correct, I need to fix that up.

I'm not entirely sure I understand what you're saying here, but I think the difference you're noticing is due to co-variance, and the fact that this calculator doesn't take it into account (or just assumes that it's 0).

For example, when you use covariance properly you could say: x=2+/-2 x-x=0

since covariance = 1

But this calculator assumes that covariance is zero, so it does the calculation (2+/-2) - (2+/-2) = 0+/-sqrt(2^2 + 2^2) = 0+/-2.8

If I'm misunderstanding and this is another problem, please help me, I'm not all that good with uncertainties, but am trying to learn more in this area as it's very useful.

Hi, author here, I just want to say that if you happen to know more correct uncertainty propagation for scientific functions, please submit a pull request.

Also, this is aimed at undergraduates, so it ignores covariance.

I use a Dell XPS 13 and it works like a charm :)

For me, I think for a while until I find something that I really want to make, or something that bugs me that I can fix, and even if it's something really very small, that motivation powers my first steps back into coding. It doesn't matter if someone's done it before, just do it your way.

> police were lurking outside people’s windows and sending powerful electronic signals into their private homes in order to collect information from within.

Is it just me or does this not sound terribly terrible? My neighbours wifi router sends "powerful electronic signals" into my private home every day.

This is really cool, I didn't know that so many of those sentences might be considered valid.

It got my country right with it's second guess (New Zealand), which is pretty good considering what a small sample of kiwis it must have.