ss248
ss248 on Hacker News
There is a clear reason - to make them uncomfortable. Nobody forced them to work there, and it is obvious to everyone what kind of future they are building there. If you exchange your soul for a good paycheck, this is just what you get.
The alternative is "Oh, you work at Schutzstaffel? That's cool!". That he has done is morally correct.
It's trivial (if you know what you are doing) to load kernel drivers from userspace by abusing windows bugs.
If you trust a program to run in userspace, then it already has all the keys to the kingdom.
Welcome to windows security.
Good that you've managed to read the first sentence. But it would have been better if you've also read the second one where he explicitly said "I created the account just for my Oculus Quest 2 and don't post anything on it".
>They didn't even feel the need to use TSMC 7nm
They just couldn't get enough wafers. They tried to force TSMC to lower the prices and it backfired.
"White is unambiguously the correct answer."
Hmm, isn't sun wavelength actually closer to very very bright green?
Good AR is much harder than VR. So it makes sense to tackle VR first.
>because the players were human
It's a very compelling story, but that wasn't actually the case. The real reason was the flawed design. People just had to kill everything for the materials because of the way equipment was implemented.
To put it bluntly, because the road constant progress and improvement can potentially unveil the meaning of existence of the universe. Nihilism is naive by definition, just because you don't know the meaning, doesn't mean that there is no meaning at all.
Humans are actually special. We are smarter than any other animal on earth and have culture. Human brain is the most complex structure in the known universe, so even on that scale we are pretty special.
And it simply makes no sense to just throw away millions of years of evolution. Your nihilistic worldview is very naive.
If you really want to, you can "manufacture" high resolution timer pretty easily with thread spinning.
kd-11 was fine, the criticisms is mostly directed at "the main dev" nekotekina. Go through the git history of the last 4~ years. It's not amazing or impressive by any stretch of the imagination.
To be honest, i think $3k per month is already pretty generous, considering the amount of work the lead dev does. I followed the project closely couple of years ago and even back then it obvious for anyone who studied the codebase, that nekotekina lost all enthusiasm about the project a long time ago.
They should consider switching to per-task payment model, so maybe some other talented people can participate, because nowadays devs supported by that patreon page do just enough work to put at least something in the monthly changelog.
>the filter doesn't operate on single frames, but considers several previous frames in order to maintain temporal cohesion and to improve quality.
Do you happen to know how bad are the artifacts? I remember temporal antialiasing produced very good results with static scenes, but fell apart on dynamic ones.
I didn't change my argument. "Just bruteforce the login page" is not a go-to method of the competent attacker. Why? Because it's trivial to stop it.
You want simple concrete example of how to stop all that "unlimited amount of ip addresses with captcha solver service" stuff? No more than 20 attempts per day with ip different from the ip of the last successful login. Here it is, you just solved the "bruteforce problem". That's all you have to do. Other things are just quality of life improvements.
What do you mean by "which dimension"? Login attempts per second. How you do it? Depends, but basic answer is captcha. How do you make sure normal user are not affected? You monitor the login attempts and use the metadata, like ip address of last successful login and valid/expired cookies, to assign the "level of trust" on that particular attempt. The lower the "level of trust" the longer it should take. If you have evidence to suspect that account is under attack (like you see multiple low level of trust attempts with random ips) you limit the rate even more, with something like "no more than 10 low trust attempts per hour". If you allow to bruteforce thousand-entries password dictionaries in the reasonable time frame, it doesn't mean the "bruteforce problem" is not solved, it just means that your system is defective.
There is no lock that cannot be lockpicked. The only difference between a good lock and a bad lock is amount of time it takes to lockpick it.
Some sites store passwords as plain text. And?
But if care about security, you might as well solve the problem properly instead of wasting your time implementing "your password must have a capital letter and a number" snake-oil features which only annoy your users.
>Why wouldn't they be?
Because it's trivial to implement decent ratelimiter which stops attackers, but still allows normal users to login.
You're right. I don't know why it's still not a common knowledge that nobody bruteforces the login pages in this day and age. But I guess too many people, who have products to sell, benefit from the status quo, so things are not going to change.
Well, it's hard to compete in the already established markets.
But you have to, one way or another, usually by providing better value.
Be it lower price, faster delivery or higher quality products.
Otherwise, if there is no initiative for people to use your services, are you really necessary?
>The buyer has to pay to make the order
You mean like another lock? But what is stopping the seller from holding buyer's money hostage and force him to release the lock just to get some money back even when he did not receive the goods?
An example of evil buyer would be something like:
1. The buyer buys goods from seller with smart-contract
2. The money in buyer's wallet gets locked.
3. The seller ships the goods.
4. The buyer receives the goods, but never signs the smart-contract.
That way the buyer gets what he paid for, but the seller never receives the money.
No matter how i think about it, smart-contract idea looks abusable.
Basic solution would be for seller with low reputation to lower the price. Even if not a lot of buyers take the risk, lower price should eventually attract enough people to allow a legitimate seller to build the reputation.
But how would you protect the seller from the "evil buyer"? The one who receives the goods, but never releases the lock? Sure, he is not getting his money back, but the seller is not getting that money also.
Banks are not really necessary.
Even by basic game theory, scamming your customers has long term negative value.
Reputation is worth much more than money.
We just have to design systems around it.
Isn't that easy to understand the meaning of the whole word if you just try to understand the parts? If someone is not educated, you just explain the meaning of "meta" and "cognition" and after that they can just infer the meaning by themselves. These are relatively popular words.
Not really actually. Originally he started doing all that mobile stuff mostly because of Zenimax's lawsuit.
>If you download an illegitimate copy of a Switch game that was purchased on a different console/account, Nintendo can detect the mismatch as soon as you log in and immediately ban the console from its network.
What is stopping hackers from purchasing one game legitimately and just spoof the data after?
Easily solvable with something like proxy server on earth. Also i don't think it's smart to directly connect spaceship to the internet, so proxy should already be there in the original design.
>The design goal "avoid reminding the user they're wearing an HMD"
There is a difference between design decisions based on "striving to achieve presence" and design decisions based on "not make people vomit". And high fps with good tracking is closer to "not make people vomit" group.
I agree that it's okay to break presence to do something (i would trade presence for fun for example) and let user push the limit if he can handle it, but you have to understand that VR is already a niche market, so devs usually are just playing it safe.