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


Not backing up cloud is a good default. I have had people complain about performance when they connected to our multiple TB shared drive because their backup software fetched everything. There are of course reasons to back that up I am not belittling that, but not for people who want temporary access to some 100GB files i.e. most people in my situation.

The concept does not really exist it is a Windows thing. You could call Puppet or other config managements group policies, but Linux is not a monolith so it is more organic.

You are not required to accept anything other than digital ids. So from experience, whatever demands euid has will be what is required to identify you.

There are about 3000 deaths per year in Sweden attributed to position from cars, and 300 physical accidents. So it is a really big issue, but it is almost impossible to make people understand that their car use and modification mains people.

Modified cars can release 1000x more polution, on streets with 800 daily cars that will have an affect.


You can ban modifying your car to pollute more (which we do) without banning modifying your car.

This isn't complicated FFS.

The difficulty against this in the US is the unfortunate reality that the people coming to these shops to enable their stupid trucks to roll coal are the people who should technically be raiding and shutting down these companies. This can be fixed.

Physically, you can already modify your car to be controlled by a stupid program and that has been possible since at least the 90s. You can do the supposed harm by not being aware of damage to your exhaust system.

The solution to exhaust harms of ICE engines is electric cars, not a reduction in consumer rights.


The EPA heavily regulates any emissions defeat devices. The problem is they spend most of their time going after tuner shops where most cars run on ethanol rather than diesel shops who cater to brain-damaged customers who think rolling coal is "cool"


In Spain (but I think in every EU country) you must go through legal inspection and certification if you do modify your car. And most of the aftermarket mods people install are totally illegal and would not pass that exam. I mean changes like putting a spoiler, lowering the height from ground etc


Agrred, but it is remote root access is the danger, they already have root access to the physical dangerous things.


That is blatant whataboutism. Stop performing mental gymnastics and accept that what you personally want is not what’s good for society as a whole.


It's not whataboutism, it's a legitimate question. How does it increase safety on the road to reject local SSH connections by a dumb user, when that same user can mess with the car physically?


Simplest example: a driver could probably disable attentive driving checks by pasting a script in from a web search in a few minutes. Nothing like an inattentive 3750 lbs weapon.


A driver could also install a little machine that turns the wheel slightly at regular intervals, to the same effect.


Yeah and they could hire a professional driver or a engineer and IPO for billions a life sized driving AI powered crypto robot too. Look, like clearly google + ctrl-v scripting or running an one click deployment exe on your computer on a whim is different than physically ordering/picking up something and then installing it into a vehicle?


Of course they're different, but you're trying to argue that the former takes objectively less effort than the latter, and it doesn't. One or the other may take less effort depending on who you are and what you know.


I've heard multiple people claim an ankle weight on the steering wheel is sufficient for hands-free driving.


Actively combated by Tesla as they detect it also. They actively apply patches to try and detect things like this and block it.


Which would get you in trouble if you were to be pulled over by the police at any moment.


How does adding another way to cause safety issues affect safety?

Give me root access so i can install openclaw.


Youtube is doing it though, and more site will follow. I need better AD blockers, but I do not see an easy way to block streaming, WASM and canvas.


There is some kind of middle ground here.. My first HTML file still renders like it did on Mosaic. The HTTP server I used back then still works today 35 years later without maintenance. I do agree that HTTPS is a simple solution but there is too much cargo cult around it. Honestly I do not see the use to maintain everything published if you follow sane practices.

EDIT: I have 15 year old things at work that do not compile, you have to maintain it for sure, biggest problem is cryptography. I am not sure that unstable tech should be part of the application ever.


Unless I'm misunderstanding your point, your HTTP server from 35 years ago is still working today without any maintenance? Does that mean no security patching and no updates for bugfixes? or does "no maintenance" means something else I'm missing? I find it difficult to discuss these topics when comments like these pretend that you can leave your system exposed on the internet for years without any maintenance.

If we're talking applications that don't actively listen on the internet that's fine, and I would agree that we should have complete software that just works. But a webserver, unless it's for personal/home use, it's on the internet and I don't see how it could work for 35 years without any update/change


Static html webservers don't really have any need for security patching or bugfixes constantly like dynamic complex stuff. They literally can just live forever. The sites themselves are just files. Not applications.


I hate to break it to you, but HTTP servers (what is an html server) absolutely can have all manner of fun exploits, like RCE.


I am very sure the west sacrificed a lot of wellbeing because of the vast amount of money spent on war. Peace time was great.


Not true. We spent more taxpayers' money on 2008 banks bailout than on every and any war (+ space race) combined.

Also, investing into military tech prevents war on your territory, which is, well, highly disruptive.


According to this [https://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/costs-us-nuclear-weapo...], the US has already spent more than five trillion dollars on nuclear weapons.


Over 85 years and that's an inflation adjusted number. We give away more money each year (USAID/soft power efforts) than we spent on average on nuclear weapons. And neither of those items are of much significance on the US federal budget. Currently, social safety net programs are half of the federal budget and the total military budget is about 1/6th of the budget for reference (that's 2/3rd total between those two parts of the budget).


CBO estimates $95 billion/year maintaining and modernization nuclear weapons for the next 10 years: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61362

Total USAID budget: $50 billion in 2023, $19 billion in 2026. https://www.usaspending.gov/agency/agency-for-international-...

> And neither of those items are of much significance on the US federal budget.

$95 billion / year is $620 per US taxpayer.

> social safety net programs are half of the federal budget

I suppose you are referring to the big 3: Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Those are programs that people pay for. In the same way that retirement savings, pensions, and private health insurance is something that people pay for.

But whatever, every dollar wasted to blow up people in another country can be excused because the federal budget includes programs that provide services to people in this country...or something. It is extremely revealing how some people are completely unbothered by some spending and are extremely bothered by other spending. The nuclear weapons don't bother you, but spending a bit of money to help alleviate famine for people in destitute countries is just unacceptable.


No. My point is not that something costs more than something else.

Look at a city and the traffic there we know that everything can either feel empty with only a ~8% decrease, or be completely gridlocked with a ~8% increase. Small adjustments in what we spend money on has a great effect. Being destructive is the easiest way to show this. If you bomb a hospital, does that cost ten million USD for the bombs or one billion USD to rebuild and handle loss of quality of life.


Wasn’t the bottom line a net gain?


This is the point #1 in the article, the need for better sampling methods. You do not get that easily.


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

Search: