cyphunk

Sergey appears to have attitude issues and the IOTA team have serious damage control issues, but the MIT team also, maybe wisely, appear obstructive at certain important points. In paticular the probability of attack in the wild seems a valid question that was never dealt with by the MIT team? (Disclosure: I'm not invested in IOTA one bit, nor is anyone I know)

What I witnessed after reading through all those letters is a common clash I see over and over of two types of cryptanalysts: Those whose knowledge grew in resource expansive environments (internet/cpu space) and those whose knowledge grew in resource constrictive space (e.g. satellite broadcasting). In particular they clash on the idea that there can ever be a valid use case for a less-than perfect security schema, so-as-to provide certain desired resource benefits, while still being sufficiently secure for a specific use case.

Cryptographers dance around who has perfect security at heart, never getting down to the issue: that they disagree on necessary trade-offs. By the time they do get to it, one will disengage entirely from conversation and assume the other is just stupid. That has happened here (both sides I think). It's a common outcome.

(Disclosures: I worked as a software+hardware reverse engineer, not cryptographer, in the satellite TV space. So I'm not anything close to an authority on the topic but was around these debates often.)

There is no reason concerned US citizens have to, nor will, tolerate another absurd US intervention (aka WAR).

part of what is interesting in a job is what you do day-to-day, but also part of it is what the company does day-to-day. There are plenty of companies, most of them smaller, that seem much more interesting a place to work on the second quality

> Why aren't you creating something interesting? Good careers don't go to those waiting to be handed a golden egg.

It sounds like you're implying that to work on innonvative projects one has to have the mind of an entrepreneur. While it's not a bad mind to have I don't think utilization of ones skills in a meaningful and interesting way should depend on that?

why does every promo video of anything out of the valley have to include this universal inspirational soft rock music? please, stop marketing everything like a surf board, change your music tastes, go spend time in transylvania.

that is a cheap shot. while it could be screens, it could also be the polarization of society. and while the polarization may also relate to the decentralizatoin of media and it's arbitration (enabled by screens), this too is more complex that just the screen.

Long walks on the beach

I feel I'm in the minority when I say decentralization shouldn't be an assumed good, as Zuckerberg does here. Very often decentralization is a form of obfuscating responsibility. Centralization is not inherently good but it is certainly good to know where to throw your molotov cocktails.

do you have examples of any cryptocurrencies that introduce such a curve. the centralization of wealth problem is serious.

you had me at...

"Russian messaging app Telegram is heavily encrypted and,..."

enough of the mccarthyism.

anyway, time to log off of my freedom infused american hacker news app and go work for a bit in my almost fascist italian code editor on my communist chinese computer

Tarnovsky wasn't the only key. There was also a single minded team of former intelligence investigators spread around the world coercing and infiltrating, on top of a smartcard dev team packed with most of moscows mathematics prize winners, in addition to another red team in haifa with their own tarnovsky's. I speak from first hand knowledge because in my younger and more naive years I used to worked with them.

Still, the analogy applies because the stakes with a cryptocurrency that depends on transistor security become a much more interesting target then the, now boring++, paytv market. It should not be assumed that any secrets will stay inside of that secure enclave, at all.

++it's boring to hack paytv because streaming, downloads and card sharing removed a large bulk share of the need

lol, the Sam Altman quote is classic... what a duche:

“This is uncomfortable, but it’s possible we have to allow people to say disparaging things about gay people if we want them to be able to say novel things about physics,”

I absolutely abhor arguments that are based on the quest for pure excellence. I promise you nearly every discriminatory argument in history was based on excellence. And yes, to have civility we have to get over that and say: no, you can't say shit about gay people. If that changes some elite collectives overall IQ, get the fuck over it. Your novel comment on physics is simply lower on the scale of priorities.

in Germany the freedom provided to humans and their capitaland the state, is quiet different from how humans and their children are treated. Like free schools and kindergartens and lax rules on public transport with children and tons of maternity leave, but yeah on the other hand you have to do a ton of work when you want to make a startup. I'd say it's the difference between an entrepreneurial make-or-break-it society like the US and, well, socialism

You know it was hard enough for PayTV smart card developers to keep transistor level reverse engineers from getting inside their chips, and all that was at stake then was $35 content subscriptions. I can't imagine how putting personal banking inside SGX will fare. Or, I acknowledge I am probably missing something. Am i?

Hackernews should change the "flag" button to "wounds my masculinity".

After years of using hckrnews.com which shows flagged posts, I think 90% of flagged front-page posts are about harrasment and gender issues often in the tech field.

I'm sure that someone telling an academic jerk "I think there is a misunderstanding" also happens, but I doubt I would have the patience and strength to always do that when it happens often. Also, someone else saying it has a greater impact on changing the overall harassment culture than if just the victim themselves said it.

The description of this technique is excellent. I once used this many years ago to determine the hidden depth of card card sharing networks for pay tv. it's not exact but it does help quantify issues with deep unreachable data, and sets a base line to compare against over time.

It could be the jury saw, as I did, that the blame isn't on the one police officer standing trial. The officer giving instructions should also be on trial, as should the entire system that trains their police officers so horribly, a system that hasn't figured out how to handle drunk people[1]. So I'd agree with the jurries conclusion

1. "stand up, take cloths off, turn around" or how about just sending in bomb diffusing robots, or how about using rubber bullets...

It is full folly to blaim the police men and women here. It would hide the real issue: police get absolutely horrible training, the rules of engadgement are too loose and do not account for these situations, america is full of guns and so of course the police have to behave like an army. Improving on any two of these issues would help prevent many of these deaths.

rest in peace, hal finney

Not news

Long time security researcher here... most smart companies do not bribe, they simply hire , post exploit. An employee or even consultant under NDA can’t disclose very easily. In fact many fortune 500s will seek out up and coming analysts for some fluff project with little other reason than to get that NDA.

every computer vision task != AI. Is it google or just the plebs at tech media that spread this everything == AI meme?

I'm not sure how one evaluates that they do good OpSec? Even firstlook failed and accidentally got Reality Winner arrested. So how does one know? Personally the question of OpSec gets more intense when A) I learn they let in a reporter from the New Yorker in to do, well, basically it's a Cribbs episode. And 2) when I learn that the group managing critical leaks is on the same floor as everyone else. Could you please protect your sources at least as well as Apple protects the Animoji release?

you imply that when someone that is not a programmer, and say works in the rare stones industry, goes to google to search for ruby gems, that they are not shown a bunch of programmer garbage?

parents do not worry... hip hop killed the evils of rock and roll, and the internet killed the evils of TV. I'm sure something is waiting around the corner to resolve the evils you fear in the internet. in the meantime, take the attacks you perceive being weighed against your children as reason for you to spend more time with them. it may be that the internet isnt a unique problem after all

could someone explain, is the reveal here only that a state bank chose to invest its capital in american companies? should a bank not do that? I mean, Putin can lick my tiny gonads but I also think Al Franken and much of the media are channelling the dead corpse of McCarthy when they assume everyone should be suspicious of anything russian, so I'm generally suspicious of much of russia-bate being thrown out there. To me, when I read this article, I see greedy capitalists finding a profitable place to invest there capital, not much more.

Stop referencing Cambridge Analytica. They grossly overstated their results with intent. Everyone seems to have taken the headlines produced from their first post-US-election presentation as truth, without even bothering to watch that presentation. Because when doing so even the most forgiving would get a sense of screaming suspicion. They brag about taking one Republican candidate (Ted Cruz) from the bottom of 20 candidates to... #3 in the Republican party primary. And then the logic of the headlines continue on to claim that this means with 300 likes they can predict you better than you mother. Candidate #3? I promise you there were as many data analytic companies as there were candidates but the difference is that only Cambridge Analytica came up with the clever marketing pitches to promote their strategy and only they had the guts to promote that strategy even though their pony lost the race. And it shouldn't surprise anyone because good marketing strategy, not good data, lead to such sensational headlines. Cambridge Analytica should be treated with the suspicion provided to all marketing firms, because it is clear when looking closely that this is what they are, and one with a rather shady history full of scams at that:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-23/trump-dat...

https://hn.algolia.com/?query=cambridge%20analytica&sort=byP...

Stop referencing Cambridge Analytica. The headlines that their marketing produced just happen to fit so nicely in the techno-evil horror fluff stories we all as liberal leftists (myself included) so desperately want to eat. But find better references, please!

Oh my, if it is valid to compare crypto forks to biological evolution, then I'm left to wonder how awesome humans would have been today if all the great forks didnt get killed off by lousy first-network effects.

> Aren't we putting too much trust that social media ads can really sway the election that much?

In anticipation of many using Cambridge Analytica hype as a response, a search on HN of previous articles about Cambridge Analytica should be be examined:

https://hn.algolia.com/?query=%22cambridge%20analytica%22&so...

> People generally do love Silicon Valley and what it creates. It’s the media that doesn’t.

Befuddled by the Pinocchio Press again!