yaps8

Firefox actually also does it, maybe limited based on location.

For instance here they announce it for UK, France, Germany (in 2022) and say it was available in the US/Canada since 2018: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/firefox-news/fi...

I love it, thanks for sharing. Is the confidence a percentage? How is it determined?

Author here. If you're curious about MACB updates of your OS or tools, code is on the repo along with a profiling utility for shell commands: https://github.com/quoscient/os_timestamps

Same here, glad to know I'm not the only one.

Hex-Rays is in Belgium.

Not sure but I think in the video they say the AI does not see cloaked units.

This will not happen. Mind you, they have the right to privacy!

Some stats on Wikipedia may fuel this discussion [1] and conclude than planes are safer by km and by time, not by journey though this is an anecdotical thing (not relevant to compare 10 min trip to work to 8 hour flight).

Besides this is based on old data and as others have pointed out flying has become even safer in the last years.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_safety#Transport_comp...

> without having to beg and wait for the whole world to stop burning fossil fuels, eating meat etc

You don't have to beg and wait for YOU to stop burning fossil fuels, eating meat etc.

It think it's also hard because at this point you don't want to make new friends beside smalltalk (which he does).

Imagine having been with your spouse for 60 years, your friends 40-80 years (?), your children I guess at least 40 years, having a new friend has nothing to do with this, you will never know them this good and neither will they.

Being old and lonely / alone is really terrifying.

> Jack still misses his late wife desperately. [...] "The weekend is a dismal time," says Jack. "The time can drag. I don't have any friends because all my friends are dead. All the ladies I loved are dead. At this age nearly everybody is dead - except me. I'm still here at 96-and-a-half."

It is really not the tone of the article:

> There is a common stereotype that loneliness mainly strikes older, isolated people - and of course it can, and does. But the BBC survey found even higher levels of loneliness among younger people, and this pattern was the same in every country.

> It's tempting to conclude that something about modern life is putting young people at a higher risk of loneliness, but when we asked older people in our survey about the loneliest times in their lives, they also said it was when they were young.

> There are several reasons why younger people might feel lonelier. The years between 16 and 24 are often a time of transition where people move home, build their identities and try to find new friends.

> Meanwhile, they've not had the chance to experience loneliness as something temporary, useful even, prompting us to find new friends or rekindle old friendships - 41% of people believe that loneliness can sometimes be a positive experience.

This is all anecdotes but I've had some (non tech) family members ask about the facebook privacy scandal and they wanted to review their privacy settings.

> top of that Uber disabled the cars built in safety system that likely would have also worked.

What safety system? I haven't read anything saying this, so any source would be appreciated!

This.

Many people comment that the lighting is poor and that a human might understand what's happening too late. This is debatable and misses the point: if visibility is bad, you (and it applies with full force to automated drivers) should reduce your speed accordingly, maybe with the exception of freeways where you are not expected to encounter pedestrians.

Yeah I missed that but it doesn't look good [1] (december 2016).

[1] - https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/19/uber-self...

Yes there is not "one" definition of capitalism, but yours (private property + freedom to trade) misses some characteristics (for instance: capital accumulation).

> Capitalism really is an evolution ("what you get when ...")

"is an evolution" is not the same as "what you get when", I agree that the current system is an evolution of the 17th century, but "what you get when" would mean this is the most likely evolution, which is not obvious.

> Capitalism is what you get when a) you have private property, b) freedom to trade property, goods, and services (labor)

I disagree. We (sort-of) have your a) and b) and capitalism now but the implication part "what you get" is not obvious.

Do you have sources that show a consensus on this implication ?

Well, if you compare the situation where an adversary has access to source code with a situation where they don't - everyting else being the same - , they have higher chance of finding vulnerabilities in the first.

The "security-by-obscurity" point does apply when you compare "going open-source with many observers" to "being closed-source with no one looking", but this is not the case here.

The whole point of ethics is to report ‘I think we broke the law’ or ‘I think we violated this contract.’ to your manager (maybe more, depending on the case) and for your own good (protection from prosecution) you should leave papertrails (emails for instance) that you did so.

How is it acceptable for a company to encourage employees to hide bad (or illegal) behavior ?

Yes, I didn't use or recommand WOT because it didn't seem useful but I never suspected anything shady. How did you know ?

I would agree with the general statement that mathematics has not been the most inclusive field (though it's getting better) and has been reserved to "elites", but I don't understand how it can be linked to statements like "math is everywhere".

His conclusions states:

"If math were really everywhere, it would already belong to everyone equally. But when it comes to accessing and supporting math, there is much work to be done. Math isn’t everywhere."

I guess the same might be told for art or history ; they are everywhere but artists and historians are not and becoming one of them is difficult.

I wonder how they are trained to differentiate between someone who is hiding something and someone who is uncomfortable because they have been in a 10 hours flight, barely slept, have not been speaking english for months and are anxious to be suspected for nothing.

The halting problem makes it impossible to consistently answer the question "Will this instruction be executed ?"

This is why you can't know if the code is malicious : you can't (always) infer meaningful properties about the code (Will it write something on the disk ?...).

I don't know how this company works financially but would it be possible that he is not risking much ?

They might be in a position where they don't have too much debt or it would not be tied to him and not put him in a difficult situation if it failed.

The bottom line might be that the risky part of founding the company is over.

It is a minimum wage, everyone is not paid the same.

This quote strikes me most: "Here I am walking around making $1 million a year, and I'm working shoulder to shoulder with people in her situation who are every bit as good and valuable as I am."

I wish more people would realize that those earning less than themselves are not necessarily less deserving but merely less valuable in a marketed job force.

Could you elaborate or do you have a source on the technique you use to mitigate downgrade attacks ?

It is unfortunate that the suggested example triggers no result.

"0 Results for silly face"