Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lulu: An App No One Should Accept

compylr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 356 posts

Re: Lulu: An App No One Should Accept

#71

Post by infinitone »

_p62c wrote: post #54
StavrosK wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the former CTO of that company, I really doubt this. When I was there, the app was built on Django, and I left some pretty competent people behind, so I'm quite sure they wouldn't have made a mistake so rudimentary. However, I don't know what happened after I left, so there might have been some dubious decisions.

Facebook and Google have to do a lot of penetration tests to keep their security in tip-top shape, sure, they have a much larger attack vector in terms of code but my point is there: Where there is public facing code, there is vulnerability. Regardless of if you are built on Django, CodeIgniter, Rails or super-secret-obfuscated-language-mark-two, no application is bullet proof and it would be trivial for any highly s…

Unless you built it on you know... a language that barely anyone uses and has been reviewed and patched over the past 70 years. Like Fortran.

Re: Lulu: An App No One Should Accept

#73

Post by nawitus »

jk215 wrote: post #48
shanelja wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We must have grown up in drastically different times then - I'm barely 20 and for the majority of my life I have been taught that boys are smelly and girls are sweet, boys do the dirty jobs and that men are dangerous and shouldn't be left alone with women. Sure, men have had the upper hand for centuries but we live in an age where the scales have tipped - we need to be careful that instead of having a substantial boo…

Men have had the upper hand since the dawn of existence and still have the upper hand in basically every society in the world.

Nope, men have the upper hand and lower hand, and if you take the average out of that then women are men are equal at least in all Western nations. Even though 60-80% of politicians may be male, that's contrasted with 80% of homeless people being male, 80% of suicides made by men.

If we look at young people, then women clearly have the uppder hand. In addition to having the upper hand in dating, they out-earn young men and have greater success in education. Interestingly, if women are better than men at something, then the explanation is never discrimination, but if men are better than women, then the reason is discrimination.

Re: Lulu: An App No One Should Accept

#74

Post by squozzer »

The real tragedy is that it will drive mate selection further towards those qualities that are most fleeting -- looks and wealth. I will now indulge myself with a chuckle as I think of all those women who will wake up one day years into the future and realize that #Big.Feet = #Cheater and #FatBankroll = #AlwaysAwayOnBusiness.

Re: Lulu: An App No One Should Accept

#75

Post by drharris »

chime wrote: post #25

Wow, it's like everything that I used to fear about the dating world put into one shiny app. Had this been out years ago when I was single, it would've definitely given me a lot of anxiety. Having been happily married for 5 years, all I can say to single folks is that if someone actively rates people on apps/sites like this, they are most likely not the kind of people you want to be with in the long run. As for the s…

Indeed. This would become the first question I asked a woman when trying to date. If she's childish enough to use something like this, I'd have no problem saying sayonara. There should be some expectation of maturity and general couth in any relationship.

Re: Lulu: An App No One Should Accept

#76

Post by shanelja »

infinitone wrote: post #71
_p62c wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook and Google have to do a lot of penetration tests to keep their security in tip-top shape, sure, they have a much larger attack vector in terms of code but my point is there: Where there is public facing code, there is vulnerability. Regardless of if you are built on Django, CodeIgniter, Rails or super-secret-obfuscated-language-mark-two, no application is bullet proof and it would be trivial for any highly s…

Unless you built it on you know... a language that barely anyone uses and has been reviewed and patched over the past 70 years. Like Fortran.

Ahhh, but then you have to content with the 90 year old specialist Fortran penetration checker. :)

Re: Lulu: An App No One Should Accept

#77

Post by manuscreationis »

Millennia of imbalance towards men having the upper hand in just about all societies is a plain fact.

However, progress and equality is not the reversal of an imbalance - it's the leveling of a playing field and accepting that to achieve real meaningful change, the notion of retribution must be taken off the table.

Either it's ok for both genders to have a service like this, or it is not ok for either gender to have a service like this. End of story.

Personally I'd find any site like this reprehensible for either gender (or any other biologically or socially discernable metric, for that matter).

Re: Lulu: An App No One Should Accept

#78

Post by shanelja »

piranha wrote: post #68
_p62c wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook and Google have to do a lot of penetration tests to keep their security in tip-top shape, sure, they have a much larger attack vector in terms of code but my point is there: Where there is public facing code, there is vulnerability. Regardless of if you are built on Django, CodeIgniter, Rails or super-secret-obfuscated-language-mark-two, no application is bullet proof and it would be trivial for any highly s…

> trivial for any highly skilled security tester to interface this way with your database. It's not if you're not doing dumb stuff.

I suppose so, but this heavily relies on no one in your operation having made a mistake, or that mistake having been caught before it was pushed live.

You have to be lucky every time, an attacker only needs to be lucky once.

Re: Lulu: An App No One Should Accept

#79

Post by lifeisstillgood »

Meh, whatever. It seems like a lot of social media - an online, permanent record of an evening in the bar.

I get the impression that this is a "terrible thing" because it will actively hinder the dating chances of some people without redress or knowledge. (Which is exactly like an evening in the bar)

Like privacy, our reputations are taking a digital battering. But just as people watch reality tv and boo at the evil ones, they also learn that they are booing five minutes edited conversation from 24 hours of life - lulu will carry on and so will gossip and bitchiness, but we will learn to adjust to the new levels of transparency - it may be a rough time, but it will happen.

Nb I you can use SQL injection to get a hot date, and don't live up to the injected criteria, trust me, that story will not need lulu to spread

Re: Lulu: An App No One Should Accept

#80

Post by jrajav »

wpietri wrote: post #17

It'd be interesting to see a review of Lulu that didn't seem to be mainly made of "dude with baseball cap, suddenly concerned that he might be called to account". To me, the emotional heart of this piece of writing is his concern with "men kowtowing". I looked at his other articles and his personal site, and I didn't see anything where his writing was half this passionate. And certainly nothing where he'd expressed c…

Um.... So because the author doesn't normally soapbox about this hot-button issue but felt unusually compelled to call this instance out, you're less inclined to take him seriously?

Never mind that either side of that is the worst kind of ad hominem.

Post reply on HN