fraa-orolo

The rate is based on Euribor [1], fixed for 6 months in my case (and commonly most everyone) but anything between 3 to 24 months was possible.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euribor

I just bought an apartment with 15% down. It's in the EU; 15% down is about the standard here with no special exceptions.

With government assistance programmes it can be even 5% down but you'd have to qualify for some protected category.

> The direct profit motive leads to "forfeiture corridors". This is where typically drugs will go in one direction and the resulting cash will go in the other. The police will set up to seize only the cash going in one direction and not care one iota about the drugs going the other way.

That just sounds like drug dealing with extra steps.

Get your bloodwork done, see if there aren't any obvious deficiencies. One very notable would be iron deficiency which is quite common. Low iron leads to low hemoglobin, which leads to you being tired, low energy, so it's harder to lose weight but also less obviously low iron does a number on thyroid hormones which in turn can also lead to slowing metabolism and weight gain.

> I personally don't having sex on a foam mattress

I'm sorry but you personally don't what on a foam mattress? You left out like the most important word of all of your comment. Don't mind, don't like, don't love, don't prefer?

It can be guessed from the context but still.

> I'd say when the data is observed is when it becomes surveillance.

If I recall correctly, that was exactly the US government's defense after the 2013 Snowden leaks revealed it was tapping every internet connection possible and sucking in every piece of data available.

Have you seen users? I have to convince users not to install random crap.

> FYI

I'd wager they're fully aware of the differences between tungsten carbide and pure tungsten, having done a doctorate about it.

We can't and they probably will, everyone else seems to already be doing so. There's that Swiss federal police report that only about 10% of NCMEC reports are actually relevant (https://fedpol.report/en/fedpol-in-figures/fight-against-pae...)

Indeed, I touched on that in another comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28227141

Because it's not a cryptographic hash where a one bit difference results in a completely different hash. It's a perceptual hash that operates on a smaller bitmap derived from the image so it's plausible that some innocuous images might result in similar derivations; and there might be intentionally crafted innocently-looking images that result in an offensive derivative.

Salvador Dali could do something similar by hand in 1973 in Gala Contemplating the Mediterranean Sea [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_in_Dalivision

The thing is that this is a better and more privacy preserving technique.

Their hubris is in not seeing or thinking that they will be able to stand up to all kinds of abuses of this system that its mere existence will invite; their hubris is also in thinking that they will be able to perfectly and without mistakes manage and overview a system making accusations so heinous that even the mere act of accusing destroy people's lives and livelihoods.

A false positive in matching faces results in a click to fix it or a wrongly categorized photo. A false positive in this new thing may land you in jail or have your life destroyed. Even an allegation of something so heinous is enough to ruin a life.

The "one in trillion" chance of false positives is Apple's invention. They haven't scanned trillions of photos and it's a guess. And you need multiple false positives, yet no one says how many, so it could be a low number. Either way, even with how small the chance of it being wrong is, the consequences for the individual are catastrophic. No one sane should accept that kind of risk/reward ratio.

"Oh, and one more thing, and we think you'll love it. You can back up your entire camera roll for just $10 a month and a really infinitesimally minuscule chance that you and your family will be completely disgraced in the public eye, and you'll get raped and murdered in prison for nothing."

Since we're talking anecdata anyway, it could be from decreased sleep quality instead of direct causation.

I've got a bone to pick with the article - it makes it sound like the Scottish only invented whisky in the beginning of 19th century:

> So it was only a matter of time before the Scots started storing their local moonshine, a clear distillate called uisge beatha (“water of life”), inside them. “Around 1800, distillers in Scotland realized that putting this clear spirit in a barrel not only made financial sense, but also made the liquid look and taste better,”

whereas Scotch whisky has been around for at least 500 years. In the second half of 18th century and early 19th century making distilled spirits was outlawed in Scotland, so, naturally, people turned to moonshining - much less risk in that than storing casks for decades to mature into proper whisky; that's the reason for the prominence of clear spirits.

To recap: the problems are that data is accessed without independent permission, and data is collected for reasons other than serious crime.

So the solution is to create a government body to rubberstamp access requests, and reclassify more crimes as serious?