371–380 of 394 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't like this proposal but engineers should not be shamed for doing their regular jobs. We all do it in some form or the others.
Tell me you build stuff like this without telling me you build stuff like this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The cars themselves phone home all the time. You have to physically remove the transceiver to prevent it or run a jammer nonstop at the risk of a felony.
Yeah. I’ve never owned a car newer than 2006 though. These days I just ride a bike. Though the fancier e-bikes have gps tracking…
I saw this coming from miles away. Computers are better at solving CAPTCHAs than people are and people can be bribed or convinced to join botnets so IP whitelisting doesn't work either. Now we have tons of fingerprinting and behaviour analysis but governments are cracking down on that. Plus, YouTube had a massive ad fraud problem with ads being played back in the background in embedded videos, so their detection clea…
> saw this coming from miles away. Computers are better at solving CAPTCHAs than people are good point... it's interesting how Captcha was initially popularized as a reverse Turing test, but it's just variants of Proof of Work today. And it seemed clever at the time for Google to leverage this for improvement of their OCR models (it was!), and makes you wonder what utility is derived from the proven "work" today.
It was roughly at that point I felt captchas became highly objectionable, especially when combined with site you were forced to use at work.
Why should Google profit from the work of the general public in this way? All of the knowledge learned from implementing Captchas should be made entirely public. I would hope it already is! But boy does that feel naive in this world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Technical" isn't really what I meant in the first place. It's about convenience/UX. Lots of OSS has been technically great but very lacking in that part, understandably. The prime recent example of this is gamers. I've seen many people say a version of this: "I tried Linux before but it was too complicated/didn't run most games/when I ran into something I had no idea how to solve it, so I just went straight back to…
For me "technical" meant relating to the technology (tool, product, interface, ecosystem, etc.) rather than the person .
Just doing a casual search will show you so many people migrating off of managed SaaS to self-hosted solutions and from closed source platforms to OSS ones over the last 12 month, the acceleration is massive and it's due to the combination of LLM themselves and the quality of these things going up. Just 3 years ago it was still very niche, common on HN but near unheard of outside of it. A lot of people who always wanted to do it but just didn't have the time. The SaaS stocks getting crushed isn't just all vibes, there's a real move behind it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uncompromisingly insist on only using things you have ultimate ownership and control over, even when that means dramatic and life-altering inconvenience, and where those things don't exist, build them yourself. Unfortunately, "build it yourself" is relatively easy when it comes to software, and almost impossible when it comes to the hardware running that software. It doesn't matter if you have full ownership of a com…
So why doesn’t someone build these chips in their garage then?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You realize how rife abuse already is using google's infra? Do you really think google's gonna be right there, cracking down on this? This is at least as much about locking people into their infra as it is cracking down on fraud, and anybody who doesn't recognize that is at this point willfully blinding themselves.
Yes. I used to work on Google's abuse team and am 100% aware of how much worse things would be if they actually didn't fight it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You don't think that some people simply disagree with the idea that this is bad? Some people think women shouldn’t be allowed to vote, not all opinions are created equal.
You can't say not all opinions are equal and everyone should have an equal vote. Are some ideas worth more than others should some people's votes count more than others? You can't have both.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You don't think that some people simply disagree with the idea that this is bad? Some people think women shouldn’t be allowed to vote, not all opinions are created equal.
You can't say not all opinions are equal and everyone should have an equal vote. Are some ideas worth more than others should some people's votes count more than others? You can't have both.
It is impossible for both of the things you suggest to be true at the same time.
But if “well, women getting to vote isn’t inherently better” is a hill you want to die on…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Quite the opposite. That user's comment was killed because it was classified as AI-generated. Of course it was a false positive due to the AI-generated text they quoted. These systems aren't foolproof. But we're very serious about preserving HN for curious conversation between humans.
How does that work when most of the articles posted are now AI generated?
I've ranted about this before, but the gist of the problem is that you're expecting humans to put effort into discussing something that the "author" did not consider worth the effort of creating. There's a fundamental imbalance there that causes the whole "the author put effort into creating this so you should put effort into discussing it" system that encourages high-effort posting to fall apart.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quite the opposite. That user's comment was killed because it was classified as AI-generated. Of course it was a false positive due to the AI-generated text they quoted. These systems aren't foolproof. But we're very serious about preserving HN for curious conversation between humans.
> But we're very serious about preserving HN for curious conversation between humans. How does that work when most of the articles posted are now AI generated? I've ranted about this before, but the gist of the problem is that you're expecting humans to put effort into discussing something that the "author" did not consider worth the effort of creating. There's a fundamental imbalance there that causes the whole "the…