Hacker News Reader

Peleuson Apollo will close down on June 30th

> It doesn't really seem to have made a difference.

Twitter is worth around a third of what Elon paid for it. I'm assuming you're happy to just assert that 2/3 of it's lost value is just those "who were leaving anyway" and changes like those to third party apps had no impact?

Peleuson Apollo will close down on June 30th

1) You're correct in saying it clearly doesn't constitute Blackmail.

2) No, the opportunity cost for Reddit is the users using Apollo to browse Reddit as opposed to official channels. This prevents Reddit from effectively monetizing those users, because they cannot display them ads, track their usage habits, and all the other things social media companies do to monetize their user base. The reality is that using a user browsing via Apollo costs Reddit directly (server costs) and indirectly (missed opportunities aka opportunity cost).

3) Reddits bet is that the majority of the user base will be retained. The vocal outcry suggests they will not. Only time will tell which side is right. The other point many 3rd party advocates are making is that moderation tools, the majority of which are considered 3rd party apps, will also stop working. This will most likely significantly degrade the quality of many subreddits. People aren't necessarily angry saying "we demand our equal share", but rather "this is really short sighted and you're going to kill what we care about".

Peleuson Why are McDonald’s Self Service Kiosks so hackable?

> There are payment terminals attached to these kiosks. If someone installs malware on here - just insert a usb stick or use the recovery mode - then tada we have the next generation of atm skimming.

As has been mentioned through out this thread by others there is not this form of interaction between the payment terminal and the kiosk.

Peleuson Why are McDonald’s Self Service Kiosks so hackable?

Honestly I have to say this is the type of security article that annoys me the most.

- Snarky and talks down about people not "in the know" about potential security issues.

- Supreme confidence that they are super knowledgeable about how it "should" be done.

- Fails to provide any actual demonstrable impact, but doing the old "left to the reader" as to how it's clearly exploitable.

But when you drill into the details, they are just fundamentally wrong about how the product is even working, what is possible with the attack surface, and how components are interacting with each other.

There are plenty of vulnerabilities out there, and companies do make stupid mistakes with regards to security in lots of situations. That doesn't mean that every pie in the sky idea you have (oh look, I did a kiosk escape, dot dot dot, clearly I can credit card skim now) is possible.

Peleuson Ask HN: How do you use Bitcoin in a trustless way?

Step 1 is going to be figure out what you are prepared to trust and work upwards from there.

There will always be an infinitely recursive list of trust issues or potential attack vectors, they will just become less and less likely.

What if the hardware wallet is backdoored? Use a Faraday cage. What if both the hardware wallet and Faraday cage is compromised? etc.

Peleuson Celsius acknowledges $1.2B hole in balance sheet

Fucking lol. I can just imagine a company sending a package to the wrong address. The customer rings the company to ask what's going on. "Sorry the blockchain is immutable, we can't change where your package is going, deal with it".

Yes, blockchain totally solves all these problems...

I worry if people are actually this delusional.

Peleuson Celsius acknowledges $1.2B hole in balance sheet

so that all that goes away

All WHAT goes away? You're talking about hordes of people answering customer queries. How the hell does blockchain make that go away?

Peleuson Celsius acknowledges $1.2B hole in balance sheet

Respectfully, I'm not really sure how this is relevant to anything I said?

Peleuson Celsius acknowledges $1.2B hole in balance sheet

I never said blockchain was a solution. I literally just said there are features of cryptocurrencies that are useful.

There are features of cryptocurrencies that would actually be useful in today's financial services.

The main one would be near instant settlement.

PayPal makes billions offering this service, when it could be a feature of the financial system.

You seem to be doing this weird thing where you're trying to imply cryptocurrency is solving a problem, but still wanting to have take backs when people say "cryptocurrency doesn't solve this problem".

If your position is that instant transfer would be useful, there is no reason we don't have that already at a technical level. It's purely a financial system construct that we wait and have settlement periods for the ability to reverse transactions, have added security, etc.

If your position is that cryptocurrency somehow solves a technical problem, I'd be interested to hear what you think that technical problem is.

Peleuson Celsius acknowledges $1.2B hole in balance sheet

> I remember vividly opening the door to the pig pen, and it was just a sea of people, 95% just responding to very basic customer queries/doing incredibly basic computation work and costing huge amounts of money...because, of course, there is no cost pressure from "customers"...a parallel that more people understand is US healthcare admin, huge inefficiencies, pension admin is like that

How does blockchain solve this?

There are always people pushing generalized "it will be good for this" statements, yet they can never seem to give concrete examples of where blockchain would be a better solution than the current implementation.

Peleuson Celsius acknowledges $1.2B hole in balance sheet

Then look at _why_ you don't have it in today's financial services. Is it because there is some technology lacking that only blockchain and cryptocurrencies can solve?

No, it's because in the years of financial market experience, people realise the risks don't outweigh the rewards.

Cryptocurrencies and block chain isn't solving a problem, it's just spruiking the pro's side of a pro's and con's decision.

Peleuson Driverless robotaxi fleet paralyzed for hours in San Francisco

The bait and switch with this comparison is you're comparing something you have no control over (bread slicer which randomly malfunctions) against something you have full control over (my own cutting abilities). No one thinks their cutting ability is inferior, so of course they don't want to give up control, because they are (obviously) better than the average human.

If I posed the question as: Would you prefer to place your hand next to a machine which will accidentally cut your finger off once every 100,000 cuts, or a human chef that will accidentally cut your finger off every once every 50,000 cuts, which would you prefer?

I don't know about you, but I'd give the machine a crack.

Peleuson I Accidentally Deleted 7TB of Videos Before Going to Production

Under NDA but I'll give rough details of what's occurring while also naming my client and disparaging them to the public.

Well that's a brave move...