Buge

86 ms·

871.
by Buge 10y ago
I would think Larry Page of all people should be able to fix that problem.
872.
by Buge 10y ago
If it's actually random data then no it won't work. Actual random data is 100% noise and 0% signal. If the ML thinks it's picked up some signal, then it's wrong. You're right that TLS is not 100% random, there is so
873.
by Buge 10y ago
You could spam them. Anyways, it's a privacy violation. Apple shouldn't be handing out your email without your permission. Facebook has a setting allowing you to choose whether you want your email to be public or not.
874.
by Buge 10y ago
Machine learning on random data won't get you anything. And is machine learning fast enough for live network filters?
875.
by Buge 10y ago
You're rewarding them for "the best political coverage in California". Also if the article is paywalled, why would anyone keep it open and let ads play? Either buy the subscription or leave (or try to bypass the paywall some
876.
by Buge 10y ago
You can't unpack protocols layer by layer when they're encrypted.
877.
by Buge 10y ago
The politicians do intervene directly >cities compete to offer the biggest tax So it would be actually better if they did less intervening, by not offering tax breaks to Amazon.
878.
by Buge 10y ago
Well this thing is written in js, and needs to use raw sockets in its implementation. See "tcpSocket" and "pipe" in the code. Sure browsers don't have a js raw socket API, but no browsers are involved in this thing.
879.
by Buge 10y ago
It doesn't mention whether the client verifies the TLS certificate. If not, that's bad. If it does, then this would have to run on a computer with the corporate CA trusted. It might not be a good idea to run this thing on a comput
880.
by Buge 10y ago
Well there's ALPN/NPN, but you could lie about those. I would indeed find it surprising if any commercial firewalls distinguish websockets over TLS versus raw bytes over TLS. Not that it's impossible, but I wouldn't thin
881.
by Buge 10y ago
Instead of stuff inside websockets inside TLS, wouldn't it be more efficient to just do stuff inside TLS? It's encrypted so firewalls shouldn't be able to tell the difference.
882.
by Buge 10y ago
Do CAs have to pay the log providers? From this article it sounds like Google is adding certs to their own log for free. https://www.certificate-transparency.org/faq Also >Anyone can submit a certificate to a log, althou
883.
by Buge 10y ago
> I mean, when a machine learning algorithm mistakenly identifies a cat as an elephant, this is actually hilarious. But when the ML algorithm mistakenly identifies a black person as a gorilla, it's a disaster. https://fus
884.
by Buge 10y ago
Hmm. I'm still running windows 8.1 and never saw that. I've had the annoying countdown plenty of times for normal updates. But never for upgrading to 10. I never customized anything such as disabling updates or anything.
885.
by Buge 10y ago
A number of people recommend doing that as best practice. https://raymii.org/s/articles/HTTP_Public_Key_Pinning_Extens...
886.
by Buge 10y ago
Reminds me of the people who survived both atomic bomb attacks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hibakusha#Double_survivors
887.
by Buge 10y ago
Every classification system has false positives and false negatives. Just because something is blocked, doesn't mean it's objectionable. And it especially doesn't mean that the person who created the video is objectionable. T
888.
by Buge 10y ago
I don't understand.
889.
by Buge 10y ago
Restricted mode was released in 2010 so it's not new. It's an opt-in setting and only 1.5% of people use it. Compare that to the percent of people using ad blockers. https://youtube-creators.googleblog.com/2017&#x2
890.
by Buge 10y ago
Is there any evidence youtube is blocking ads on videos from LGBT people?
891.
by Buge 10y ago
Do they still only support max 720p on Chrome and Firefox? I find that pretty irritating.
892.
by Buge 10y ago
How is that better than the new Google feature?
893.
by Buge 10y ago
Do we know that this new Google feature differs from what you want?
894.
by Buge 10y ago
That was only because they chose a weak password. With a 100+ bit password, it's impossible.
895.
by Buge 10y ago
Keep in mind that a 17 year old taking a nude picture of themself is in possession of child pornography. Do you want a harsh minimum sentence for that?
896.
by Buge 10y ago
That's like saying "The jury found you guilty of shoplifting, therefore we will put you in jail indefinitely until you confess". Sure them confessing after the conviction adds no information, but you still can't compel s
897.
by Buge 10y ago
The existence of the child porn might be a forgone conclusion, but there is a lot of other stuff on the hard drive. And that other stuff is not a forgone conclusion. So by decrypting the hard drive, he would be giving them information that
898.
by Buge 10y ago
That's a good idea, but only provides full protection if all git clients do it. The official git client itself doesn't support that, so people would still be vulnerable if they got a malicious half from github, or a signature on a
899.
by Buge 10y ago
If you multiply the gambling reward with the probability of winning, it will be less than the cost to play. This is the house edge. It's how the casino makes money. It's the same thing with insurance. If you multiply the size of t
900.
by Buge 10y ago
So we need a generator of racist random text? Let me fire up TempleOS.

More ›