atherton33

Likely typo for "dig myself out"?

> We knew what each program sounded like when it was working normally, and could hear each and every disk seek.

This is actually a vulnerability too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tempest_(codename)

The code you hired the developer to write/maintain should keep working for you after he quits/dies. Or you made a real bad investment.

If you were trying to convince me that hacker news is extensively astroturfed by companies to support their viewpoint, you did that. Ouch.

Great point. The n+1 sql queries antipattern comes to mind as a very common "push loops down" application in line of business stuff. Let the db do the work/join.

> This shiny piece of yellow metal looks like gold, tests like gold, sells like gold but is not...real gold ?

This is exactly a thing said about lab vs found diamonds in jewelry.

I agree with your point, I just think this is an interesting similar effect.

Our conference rooms and phone booths are booked out weeks ahead, so it's not like there's a choice. They even turned a bunch of them into desk space because of the hiring that happened during wfh. I'd never met the people I sit next to before, and we work on totally unrelated projects. What is the point?

(I'm not a lawyer, you should talk to one, but as long as you don't go deleting stuff, in my non-lawyer experience, you might not need to talk to one yet.)

Whatever activity put you on their radar, they have no idea who you work for or if you were on the clock at the time. There's no penalty to them sending this to you and having it not apply. But if they don't send it to the right places, it hurts them later.

Sounds like they're not asking for anything to be given yet, they're asking for a lit hold pending future asks?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_hold

There was an example of this reposted here just last week: https://www.benshoof.org/blog/case-cracked

The crack for The Colonel's Bequest worked by hardcoding the RNG in the interpreter to always return the same number. This broke every random element of the game, which is undetectable on a single playthrough.

The way the DMCA works, to my understanding, Google has to accept the notice, unless NewPipe submits a counter notice, which can be done here:

https://support.google.com/legal/troubleshooter/1114905

Proceed as if reporting infringement, and the option will appear to specify this is a counter report.

If the reporter chooses to continue, the next step is with the courts.

Could be correlation. There's pretty plausible reason to have a cutting edge research lab close to the highest risk place for natural outbreaks of the viruses it studies.

There's probably heightened risk of having an unpatched vulnerability exploited if you keep processing the payload past the point where you suspect a bad actor is on the other end.

What's likely changed is your expectations.

Hackers.

I think the idea is they're showing worst examples (lemons) rather than best (cherries).

The dock seems to be magsafe style contacts not wireless

I'm not sure that's a good counterexample? It hasn't been possible to actually buy a Raspberry Pi anywhere in something like a year, though the hype rolls on.

The fines should be to the shareholders. Ownership should be determined recursively to all actual humans. No trusts, no corporate owners, no funds.

A strawman: Maybe proportion of ownership times current assets and all future income. Whatever fraction of their financial being is proportional to their share of the corporation is "dead".

If you have X% ownership share, you are fined X% of all your current assets and X% of all future income.

A message needs to be sent that it's not okay to invest in a company that is doing harm and then walk away from it. You're ethically and morally liable, the law should reflect that.

I think it might be super interesting to use width to represent depth of the pixel.

When I want to buy something, like cat litter or dish soap or notepads, I open a browser and type "amazon.com" and search for what I need. What should I type instead if I want to support your open source approach? It wasn't clear to me from your writeup.

If it's just off-chain social consensus that matters what purpose does the crypto even serve?

Why would users and developers without stake get input? Doesn't that subvert the point of staking?

Literally everyone who uses the word "lifehack"