Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | WaitWaitWha's commentslogin

I guess it is users' accounts, so service accounts are exempt? I would hate to see a headless server rebooting and waiting for an age verification from a service account at a power or water sanitation plant...

Maybe all laws should have a "dev environment", starting with the politicians. All their systems will demand their age and proof of age for say 12 months? Toaster, washer, dryer, cell, dishwasher, car, calculators, etc. Then, if they still want to pass the law, 3 months of red teaming by the "general public" for all the systems that have their data. And, if they still want it, go for it.


https://github.com/c3d/db48x

> The DB48X project intends to rebuild and improve the user experience of the HP48 family of calculators

They just updated their license to exclude California residents. The law is so vague there is a possibility to apply it against the project, per project team.


i did not even think of that! As the current law reads, will smart devices with OSes require age verification? Many IoTs are just tiny Linux versions running on a small processor. This makes all smart GE washing machines, dryers and refrigerators illegal in California.

come to think of it, maybe there is something good about this law. :D


Not just that, but the the copy of Minix in the intel IME of every intel processor.

Not to mention all the printers, routers, etc that run freertos/thread x/vxworks.


I have played this game on the road so many times, just by myself. Airports, hotel lobbies, waiting for taxi, and more. I never played it online though. It is my "TV" to disconnect my brain from the day to day work troubles and hustles. It is not as boring as sitting front of a TV and just consume; it forces me to strategize a bit, use at least a tiny bit of my left over brain cells.

I cannot tell if this is /s or real. there is an entire genre of art that specifically about functionality - functional art. Chairs, tables, buildings, vases, textile, and so on can be beautiful art yet functional.


Sheesh, this makes me realize how boring "modern" interiors are, even though 3d printing makes means this is now much easier.

> Why does i2p (per the article) expect state sponsored attacks every February?

Because The Invisible Internet Project (I2P) allows government dissidents to communicate without the government oversight. Censorship-resistant, peer-to-peer communication

> Where are those forming from, what does the regularity achieve?

At least PR China, Iran, Oman, Qatar, and Kuwait. censor communication between dissidents.

> How come the operators of giant (I’m assuming illegal) botnets are available to voice their train of thought in discord?

How would you identify someone as 'operators of giant botnets' before they identified themselves as 'operators of giant botnets'?

please read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I2P


Sure, but why February and not the other 11 months?

Likely it's just a coincidence — there were other Sybil attacks that are not in February too, so the chance that you'd get 3 in Feb isn't all that low.

This answer is missing the key "regularity" part of their questions, which I would love to know more about.

That’s a great question… Currently we’re in the main Chinese holiday period with the Lunar New Year/Spring Festival/Chinese New Year, so perhaps people traveling back home from foreign lands might use the service more during this time?

I know no one using this in China. And people who can afford to travel (and have visa and passport) will have foreign sim/phone. The timing is just a coincidence

I really wanted this "book" to be good.

In the context of the paper, the entire book seems to go downhill from the definition of ontology for me.

There is no benefit of using Gruber's ivory tower definition. A simpler explanation (e.g., it describes a structured framework that defines and categorizes the entities within a specific domain and the relationships among those entities) would have sufficed, and easier to digest.

Palantir is doing nothing revolutionary or "paradigm shift" when it comes to data and information organization. Their secret weapon is not introducing ontology to information.

Ching (1000BC?) classified reality into binary ontological primitives, created trigrams and hexagrams a combinatorial ontology. Aristotle introduced categories, substance, properties, relations, etc. Thomas Aquinas systemized Aristotelian categories into theological knowledge systems, and used structured classifications.

I am becoming curmudgeony as I see more and more of these reverse-research papers. Write the paper, then find references that fit the statement and use weasel words ...

unbelievable scene unfolds, deep-rooted disease of silos, paradigm shift, fatal flaws, forged in these extreme environments, eliminated to the absolute limit...

Gag me.


mine is axiology, DNAMA. ;)

well my MA said my DNA is secret.

If someone gets this going, first, it will be interesting how Ring (Amazon) responds, second the self-managed home automation (e.g., Home Assistant, Open Home Foundation).

This already happens every single time when there is a security breach and private information is lost.

We take your privacy and security very seriously. There is no evidence that your data has been misused. Out of an abundance of caution… We remain committed to... will continue to work tirelessly to earn ... restore your trust ... confidence.


What else would you see them do or say beyond this canned response? The reason I am asking is because people almost always bring up how dissatisfied they are with such apologies, yet I’ve never seen a good alternative that someone would be happy with. I don’t work in PR or anything, just curious if there is a better way.

clear, direct description of what happened

exactly what data was exposed

what they failed to do (we used cheesy email, SMS as MFA, we do not monitor links in our internal emails)

concrete remediation commitments (we will stop using SMS for MFA, use hard tokens or TOTP or..., stop collecting data that is not explicitly needed)

realistic risk explanation (what can happen what was lost)

published independent external review after remediation/mitigation

board-level accountability (board pay goes for fix and customer protection, part of the audit results)

customer protection (3 - 5 years?), not just 'monitoring'

and most importantly, public shaming of the CxO and the board of directors


Not apologize if they don't actually care. An insincere apology is an insult.

Harvesting data and failing to even secure it should not be acceptable in society. It should be ruinous to the company and the people who run it.

Lose money accordingly - fines, penalties, recompense to victims, whatever... - so they then take the seriousness of security into account.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: