cracker_jacks

Is the end to end encryption removed for all clients when a legacy device connects?

I don't understand how some devices could be end to end encrypted in a meeting while some legacy devices in the same meeting are not. How could the legacy devices send and receive to the encrypted clients?

Which experts are proposing the way forward is actually a total lockdown? This article is distorting what experts are actually saying. This virus will not go away, it needs to be managed. Please consider the following articles of what experts are ACTUALLY saying:

https://medium.com/@AmeshAA/covid19-a-path-forward-868d5e8dc... https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/17/coronavirus-us-must-confront...

Quantitative hedge funds must be making an absolute killing these couple weeks from the number of individual traders trying to daytrade through all this volatility.

I guess most of the people against this change have been lucky enough to never live in a place where the internet is actively censored.

It must be nice living in a place where you don't have to worry about access. But for many of us, there's no point in privacy without access.

It's also great to have data for justifying the points you claim. You are claiming that insider trading (information asymmetry) is a net positive benefit for the software industry.

Can you expand on this? Trusting a VPN is equivalent to trusting the VPN provider. As long as you believe the VPN provider is more trustworthy than the network you're tunneling through, I don't see why trusting VPN is bad practice.

How about "corporations are supposed to take advantage of things they can take advantage of to better their position"? If a corporation believes they are a net positive for society, then any advantage they can get furthering their own abilities is viewed as a net positive.

Quoting individuals who make blanket statements like that without providing any evidence (or possess authority on the subject of genetic testing) is doing a disservice to actual viable applications of genetic testing, especially in the health domain.

I don't want to belabor a secondary point too much here. But I will add there's a big difference between feeling guilty for being wrong and feeling guilty for lying.

The topic of how to deal with genetic information is an important one. There are many nuances about the technology itself which are distinct from how it could be used and potentially abused. This article does an awful job for this topic on so many levels:

> But it was too late to tell my grandma. She’s dead now and I’m a liar.

The personal story is over the top and this is not the definition of a liar.

>“The science across all that is probably total junk,”

--Jennifer King, director of consumer privacy at Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society.

Why would you run a quote like that?

The writer in this article clearly has an agenda and the alarmist attitude taken isn't doing this issue justice.

> cancer progresses much faster in summer than in winter

Can you point me to a reference for this? This pattern is surprising and I would like to learn more about this.

Is the Starship Mk1 more structurally sound than it looks? From a first glance and having no knowledge of its design, it looks like an empty soda can that would deform at the slightest disturbance. And the way it crumpled in the video doesn't seem far off from what I would expect.

Where is the 9980XE @ $979 coming from in the price vs performance chart? Where can I get a 9980XE for $979??

I agree that the improvements like the ESC key and 16" screen are good things.

But is it strange to anyone else that a company that prides itself on being innovative and motto is "think different" is parading around a screen size change and a keyboard regression as the biggest selling points for a product launch?

How does creating more demand ease a housing crunch?

A terrible summary of why VPNs are useful. Goes on and on about privacy with no mention of bypassing censorship. It must be nice living in a place where you don't have to worry about access.

There's no point in privacy without access.

This is a strange definition of decentralization. I suppose it gives you redundancy. But aren't you broadcasting information about your request to multiple parties if you're doing recursive resolution from different providers?

But I agree that this should be a choice on the client-side.

I think you're arguing against the wrong thing here. You want decentralization of DNS. I don't see DoH really impacting this issue in any clear direction.

On one hand, you have centralized DNS (based on your ISP). DoH gives you some choice over that now through your browser. On the other, you have only a handful of DNS providers to choose from. DoH is just a technology, there's nothing preventing ISPs from still providing their DNS services over HTTPS.

Some of the numbers in that table do not make any sense and makes me question the quality of the entire article.

Where are the numbers for the Cerebras chip coming from?:

- How do you have a TDP of 180W for an entire wafer of chips?

- Why is there a peak FP32 number when they are clearly working with FP16?

Each of these chips is a completely different architecture and it makes no sense to compare them at this level. The only meaningful comparison is actual performance in applications because that reflects how the entire system will be used.

What is the alternative solution here? How do you effectively protect access to websites while simultaneously making sure you never get false positives?

I really don't think going back to not having Cloudflare-like services is a step forward. Is there another way?

This article doesn't do a good job of explaining the censorship-resistant benefits of DoH. The author conflates privacy and access as the same thing. They are entirely different.

Access to information is the first step. Privacy is a luxury after access.

What is the cause for concern? I am trying to understand why DNS-over-HTTPS could be a bad thing from the user end.

I'm referring to solar as a distributed energy source. Imagine homes and buildings having their own energy sources.

Solar energy seems like a great way to decentralize energy infrastructure, making it more robust to attack.

Has one of the fundamental components (water) for farming changed at all in recent years? Perhaps there hasn't been enough of a market force for innovation after the advent of irrigation.

The other tradeoff is you're giving Google an extraordinary amount of power to decide who is allowed and not allowed on your website with no transparency on how this decision was made. Not sure what company is willing to blindly trust Google with that power.

In our research, we show that the fovea observed many times in biology may be an emergent property that emerged from an attention system:

https://bair.berkeley.edu/blog/2017/11/09/learn-to-attend-fo...

So this blog post posits that there is a growing upper bound to the effectiveness batch size. Is there a similar analysis on checking whether there is also a growing lower bound? Or does batchsize=1 training work for all these tasks?

Who feeds the current exchange rate? Wouldn't that require trust from a central authority to determine?

What are you thinking the salary of early stage startups are in the Bay Area? I really doubt the ratio is 2:1 compared to Paris.