HackinOut

Kindle DX has a 9.7" at 1200x824. Still too small for me...

Pixel Qis are not e-ink but still amazing. As you said they are reflective LCD, and can also be backlit, thus readable in low light just like a regular LCD. Their market is also small devices, so the size problem is still there (Last time I checked I think there max size was 10.1 inches)

There are not but existing ones can probably do more than you could think of: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R92qSBU_WzA

Bottom line: you can drastically increase refresh rate but you loose contrast.

And yes, way too less resources into R&D, people just don't get it. It's just like nowadays everybody likes glossy vs mate LCDs. It's frustrating because all of the problems can be solved: refresh rate, size, color. I have been waiting for years (at least it feels like it!) to code on an e-ink! (And then take notes on a paper-thin one but I'm gonna stop here... :)

The closest to hacking on an e-ink are people transforming their kindle DX into a screen with GNU Screen or even VNC (Don't try it). The loveliest project involves the Raspberry Pi: http://www.ponnuki.net/2012/09/kindleberry-pi/

HN Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4502577

EDIT: elaborating

Don't forget Isao Takahata another founder of Studio Ghibli and director of Grave of the Fireflies, Only Yesterday, Pom Poko and The Tale of the Princess Kaguya. Yet have to see The Tale of the Princess Kaguya which is discussed in the article but the drama Grave of the Fireflies is a masterpiece to me. The only truly beautiful film in my memory which I bitterly regret having watch. To me the best movie to give you the feels of World War II, even more than acclaimed titles like "The Pianist" or "Life is Beautiful". A must see.

IMHO Isao Takahata is the primary reason why an end to Studio Ghibli doesn't make sense despite Miyazaki bitter vision of the Studios. For those who know Miyazaki's temperament it's not a big deal. My interpretation is that he would have wanted the Studios to be as true, ambitious and fantastic as a Ghibli movie. Well by visiting/knowing the Studios, I bet most of us would be quite taken aback by the lovely people and the atmosphere reigning there.

From same director, the comedy My Neighbors the Yamadas has been done in the same style. Didn't read westerners reviews (and won't :) but it would be genuinely more difficult to enjoy because of the Japanese wordplays/culture related humor. I still enjoyed it a lot with limited knowledge of the culture.

Just saw your comment: Thanks for the insight! Now that I understood the root causes and laughed at the related word play, I won't forget anymore :)

It seems to me that lphilips54 is trying to achieve with a license what we would need a patent for. (He speaks of his algorithm)

Thanks for this. I would be interested to know if, in practice (in a court of law), attempt to show something is derivative work when it's not is a more common instance than when it actually is. How easy (or hard) is it to prove something is a derivative work? (i am especially thinking of 2 pieces of code doing basically the same thing with the same algorithm, no patents)

I meant IPSec, ND is functionally the same as ARP. Also IPSec support is no longer required with IPv6 so IPv6 might not really help with that.

"The US in no universe will launch a military action against a rogue, shells-pointed-at-Seoul, nuclear armed nation because they hacked Sony."

Is that your gut feeling? :p I understand it's backed by strong arguments but so were (some) security professionals opinion. They might give updates after the FBI's communiqué and are aware of the limitations of their argumentation. That being said I do share your opinion on the matter...

EDIT: elaborating... EDIT 2: Not sure why I'm getting downvoted. No matter how much I believe US won't go to war there is always a possibility I could be proven wrong. I don't think security professionals analysis was based on "no information at all" (think things we know about North Korea), no more than the analysis we have about US not going to war.

In theory we agree. But in practice there is little to no firewalling in the default configuration of home routers BUT there is masquerading NAT which behave as a firewall of sorts. NAT under linux is actually done with iptables which is considered to be an "interface to the linux firewall", although it's only for practical reason, once again.

Now I do agree that my point was kind of moot because it's indeed easy to firewall without NAT. I am all for IPv6 if it's done well. I especially like the idea of finally moving away from ARP Spoofing attacks thanks to Neighbor Discovery (ND).

Well I don't have stats but from personal experience (perhaps I have a bit more experience with french rather than US providers), home routers do not use a specific stateful firewall, and use masquerading NAT. So it would depend on the way NAT is done.

There is a difference between theory and practice: there is no specific use of stateful firewalls in today's IPv4 mr. nobody home router (i.e. most of the routers do not use the --state option of iptables). If we move to IPv6 only, ISPs need to (and will) use --state (or equivalent). The way mr. nobody has a sort of "stateful firewall" nowadays is actually thanks to the popular use of Masquerading NAT (i.e. iptables -t nat -j MASQUERADE). So jackweirdy is kind of right "NAT" (in practice) as become a pillar of internet security, in spite of itself.

This is the one thing I didn't get: if it's mapped to nerves why can't he do two pivots at a time? Is it a limitation of the robotics?

Despite the cool robotics and brain control (nerves to be exact), seeing that guy do the one practical thing, picking up a glass and trying to bring it to his lisp after 40 years, was actually the coolest thing.

From a practical aspect, IPv6 (and the removal of NAT) can't come alone: standalone stateful firewalls need to be generalized as well, to replace the way they are embedded in the NAT implementation inside people's modem/routers nowadays.

NAT as become a pillar of internet security in spite of itself. So with IPv6 as to come improvement in security. As you said the generalization of SSL/TLS as well as ND and IPSec that comes with IPv6 but we also need the generalization of stateful firewalls to emulate what NAT was doing for us. Ironic...

"Privacy is not dead: Microsoft lawyer prepares to take on US government" http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/dec/14/privacy-is...

Related?

HN Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8750751

Well not your regular cows, they surely belong to a spacex farmer! :D http://www.spacex.com/careers/position/5749

Thanks for the insight. Seems fair to regulate publicly owned goods. Maybe the problem is that the regulation is too dumb? For example it could encourage taxis at night (like many have said Paris at night is terrible and taxis are way too expensive), or be based on congestion like cromwellian suggested?

Thanks, so apparently they limit the number of licenses causing those horrendous prices? In that case it seems to me they are still at the root of the problem and should fix it now that it has surfaced (paying back licenses that where purchased shortly before the VTC law for example).

If you ask me, we are way to focus on sustainable job in France. Unemployed people need to start somewhere. Which is far more easy if you are from the UK or the USA.

I feel the same about Uber, had some not so good experiences with UberPop but still hope it will stop those taxi licenses jokes (apparently costing 200k to 300k EUR).

But I don't understand this decision since the government has to do something anyway because of the VTC (kind of taxis but they can't pick you up in the street, i.e. other Uber services. They do not need a taxi license) which have been authorized. A really good news for the poor fools who just invested in a taxi license...

I am a consumer (of UberPop among other transport solutions) and I am (genuinely) not understanding: agreed it's not ride-shares, but why is there laws that make non-ride-shares so complicated? UberPop is simple, for the driver, the consumer and it drives the costs down, this sounds really nice to me.

If it's only about safety and consumer protection, well shouldn't it be a consumer choice anyway? (agreed it's easy for me, a male above 30 to tell this... and despite the bad experiences I also had in Paris with UberPop although my drivers had GPSes - one had 2 of them, was confused as hell and should certainly be looking more at the road) Just like I do when I choose real ride-shares (i.e. not UberPop. We have blablacar in France for example which is hitchhiking through the internet).

It seems that, in France, politics made a huge mistake coming up with horrendously expensive (apparently 200k to 300k EUR) taxi licenses and now some people are at risk to pay for those mistakes, namely people who have recently invested in one of this license. Cause even if UberPop is banned, VTC (Vehicule de Tourisme avec Chauffeur) are now legal and make those licenses quite useless (or at least the investment isn't nearly as justified as before).

It's obvious to me that the law have to go in the direction of new technology or the consequences will be quite disastrous. I agree that Uber's attitude seems a bit harsh but I would thanks them for any induced (political) changes in the direction of technology.

EDIT: didn't know the adverb "patently" was not referring to patents, thanks dminor for teaching me english :) (I'm french obviously :/)

When looking at the example, it did not grasp my attention because it's rare to have links broken in the middle of a word. It did though with words starting with the letter y for example. Too bad because it looks awesome.

Worth noting that a continuous line can hide several links. The security conscious that likes to hover links before clicking them know this well, hence I always appreciate the use of a css :hover that would also somewhat attenuate that problem. (http://jsfiddle.net/46qvv6kn/)

Thanks for confirming my crosspost :) However, as I was just saying, wouldn't it be nice to clearly see that we're talking 0.x directly on the website and not only when we install the npm package?

EDIT: Thanks for your answer, I am going to stop crossposting now :D

To be fair they are still working on 0.x, they probably don't recommend the whole thing to be used in production (although I personally wouldn't mind for some specific projects...). At this stage, I understand they just want to showcase some cool stuff. This being said, we should always be really careful about security when using dependencies, especially when it's in beta, and especially when mostly everything is done client side. It would be also nice if something more explicit was mentioned on the hoodie website. Like the last release version for example (0.x).

As discussed before here on hn (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5514284), this seems like a great successor (or at least a well-maintained alternative) to CouchApps and Kanso. I will definitively give it a try once PouchDB becomes a dependency :)

Apparently, the encapsulation cell seen in the article is of the Atlas V rocket which puts it into orbit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V

I have no idea how this thing could go into orbit. Anybody there who can enlighten me?

Yes, to me the real problem is indeed owning your stuff... The ability for right holders to revoke your licenses at any moment without a warning and with no control on your side is unsettling. I have worked on a VOD website where we sold so called "forever" access to a video for a specific price, today the website is down, people do not have access to their "property".