ghughes

If Cloudflare accidentally leaked additional sensitive data to Tavis during the handling of this incident, and that data wasn't already compromised by the parser bug, then you should call that out in the incident report.

> If there was an idea that could ‘fix’ democracy, it would have been thought-up already.

If everyone accepted this fallacy, nothing would ever get built.

You've contradicted yourself. You initially said:

> Nothing about this attack is going to impact the effectiveness of ASLR in the cases it was designed for.

Then you said:

> This article makes it sound like ASLR has been completely defeated, but it's only defeated in a context where the attacker has significant control - even if that's a likely scenario.

That is indeed a highly likely scenario, so it's simply wrong to say "nothing about this attack is going to impact the effectiveness of ASLR".

Browser engines are common venues for ROP attacks. ASLR is absolutely intended to provide protection in that context.

Wouldn't the average human be fooled by those things?

Google's Key Transparency project [1] is based on this.

[1] https://security.googleblog.com/2017/01/security-through-tra...

This is a stain on our industry, and I hope the drivers continue to unionize. The buses are the only reason that the big South Bay tech companies can attract significant quantities of engineers from SF and the East Bay. I think you'd see a significant exodus if SF-based employees suddenly had to deal with 101 and 280 on a daily basis.

Why do I have to sign up to see the reviews?

No, because "pretty good" isn't good enough when your competition is Apple.

The article makes a lot more sense if you look at it as an acquihire solicitation.

Paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.03242v1.pdf

> no social widget is responsible for figuring out your income

That is actually an intended purpose of many social widgets.

Given that not too long ago they were publicly shamed for implementing an invasive tracking system that completely undermines their customers' privacy, [1] you'll have to do a little better than "some past experience" and "from what I've seen" if you want your assertion that "Verizon is very serious about security" to be taken seriously.

[1] https://www.wired.com/2014/10/verizons-perma-cookie/amp/

Lifecycle of a banking executive:

1. Commit fraud on a massive scale

2. Say "I accept responsibility" but fire subordinates

3. Ride off into the sunset with obscene personal wealth

So your solution is to put an end to the rental market?

It's good PR because it's the right thing to do. I certainly hope it's a trend. It's fairly well-established that humans make babies and need time off work to properly care for them.

I use it frequently, and it's painfully clear that they're drinking the "growth hacking" kool-aid. Their 20-40 minute ETAs are almost always way off. Pricing is intentionally deceptive; it's usually surging, but they don't tell you that until checkout. To top it off, their customer support is among the worst of any business that I've been a customer of, both in terms of service and infrastructure.

Welcome to HN. Don't bother with the sockpuppet accounts next time. This sort of thing is quite likely to get upvoted organically; there's no need to cheat.

This would surely be downvoted into oblivion if it was any other blog.

Imagine a slightly longer, single-lane-width version of this running along the middle lanes of Oak and Fell in SF, one every few minutes, almost never late because traffic is irrelevant.

This coming at you from behind is not all that different to a motorbike, is it? You'd have a special traffic light phase at each end to allow it to loop around safely. This has to be much cheaper than digging tunnels anywhere where earthquakes are a concern.

Belligerent as usual. I wonder if Musk writes these himself.

edit: I'm being downvoted for this, but I wasn't using "belligerent" negatively here; I was wondering aloud whether Tesla's characteristically aggressive approach to damage control is the result of direct involvement from Musk. Doesn't seem that crazy to imagine that it is.

Many major car manufacturers expect to be shipping autonomous vehicles by 2021 or earlier: http://www.driverless-future.com/?page_id=384

The discussions happened. Democracy played out. We lost.

As interviews with founders go, this one is not very enlightening.

I have to disagree as well. Years ago I open-sourced a little utility on GitHub and stuck the GPL on it. I had to stop working on it and soon forgot all about it. I checked on it recently and discovered that it was forked by PhoneGap and is now a critical dependency of their product. I don't recall doing anything to promote it.

> HN used to have lots of submissions about how to run companies right. Is it just me, or have those disappeared somewhat?

I interpreted this as being one of them.

For those wondering why you haven't yet seen practical applications of this research, this answer[1] on Stack Exchange does a decent job of explaining:

> What must be understood is that in all these constructions, each circuit gate must map to an instance of Gentry's fully homomorphic encryption scheme, and at every clock cycle for the obfuscated circuit, all gates must be processed, regardless of whether they are "active" or not in the circuit (this is a big part of why the obfuscation theoretically works: it does not reveal active gates, by always making them all active). This[2] article gives performance result: on a rather big PC, we are up for minutes of computation. That's for each gate in the obfuscated circuit, and for each clock cycle.

> There are millions or even probably billions of gates in the envisioned circuit, given the setup of functional encryption: the "obfuscated circuit" must include asymmetric decryption and validation of zero-knowledge proofs. So now we are talking about using all the computers currently running on Earth, all collaborating on the computation, and they might make non-negligible progress towards running one instance of functional encryption within a few centuries.

[1] http://security.stackexchange.com/a/50972

[2] http://eprint.iacr.org/2010/520.pdf

It's possible they're looking at the long-term picture and investing heavily now to aggressively counter anything that looks like stricter regulation. If they capitulate in Austin today, then tomorrow they'll be railroaded into doing it everywhere else, which will end up costing them not-insignificant amounts of money and drivers over time. Having mandatory background checks also significantly raises the barrier to entry for casual carpoolers, which is a market that Uber is keen to capture.

> Apart from societal control there seems no good reason not to adopt a system whereby everyone is issued a private and public key - which signs every email, bank instruction, comminucation & vote.

Privacy and key loss are two reasons that come to mind.

Is it irresponsible if the self-driving truck is believed to be as safe or safer than a human driver? Humans get into accidents quite frequently.