buran77

71 ms·

841.
by buran77 5y ago
Wouldn't it be even worse if a landmine could just come to you at any time and "decide" to take out it's target and everything that surrounds it? Maybe the algorithm was tripped and you're a "good enough&quot
842.
by buran77 5y ago
Landmines have a simple binary "decision" process: is the target on them or not. So in itself that's not a decision, it's a physical phenomenon: you close a switch, you trigger an event. Drones have several layers of add
843.
by buran77 5y ago
The US does its best to prevent allies from having any kind of military technology outside of US control, particularly if it's effective. Allegiances aren't set in stone and the US won't take the chance to see that tech used
844.
by buran77 5y ago
I don't see a problem with an OS bundling a browser by default. For so many people today the OS is anyway just some plumbing that runs their browser. But when it starts throwing popups at me to use this instead of that, or to reset my
845.
by buran77 5y ago
Today's super/hyper-cars definitely try to be beautiful and stand out visually but they're as much function as they can be. The form just follows the function. Every line prioritizes aerodynamics, every component is about wei
846.
by buran77 5y ago
Perhaps the idea is that today generally speaking there's a clearer separation between art and engineering. We tend to have functional things, or ones focused on impressive visuals at the expense of the functionality. Comparatively ver
847.
by buran77 5y ago
The view OP presents is a bit grim though. Most of the real "modernity" of the '70s was not something regular people would enjoy. Going to the Moon, or the Concorde were no different from today's fusion experiments, incl
848.
by buran77 5y ago
This is precisely why all the international responses to the current incident focus on using the military interception rather than the principle of forcing a plane to land just to get your hands on one individual. EU countries like Spain an
849.
by buran77 5y ago
If you're considered an enemy of the state you're not safe on any side. Some countries terrorize their own people, others terrorize someone else's people. As I said in the past, after moving between democracy and dictatorship
850.
by buran77 5y ago
There are ISPs who provide that information based on agreements with the law firms (what you called the automated process - quite literally there's no meaningful human intervention at any point which goes against every principle). Thos
851.
by buran77 5y ago
Yes, they represent large content owner conglomerates and have the permission to go after pirates. The shady part is where they can just go to the ISP and request the personal customer information associated to an IP they believe is transfe
852.
by buran77 5y ago
Even worse, they are given free access (no warrant) to ISP information about the individuals they presume to be infringing so they can tie an identity to an IP linked to infringing material. Lawyers win either way, via the fines that they a
853.
by buran77 5y ago
I think the point may be that average (and averagely educated) people tend to be easily sold on the idea that many things are a zero-sum game. That they will have a worse life if someone else has a better one. Many political campaigns rely
854.
Intel 11th Generation Core Tiger Lake-H Performance Review:Fast and Power Hungry(anandtech.com)
1 points by buran77 5y ago|0 comments
855.
by buran77 5y ago
A crippling kind of fine would have to be applied by the EU, not by one country. The EU is a big enough market that withdrawing would do even more damage since the company still has to pay the fine but without a good chink of their market,
856.
by buran77 5y ago
Indeed they don't. And yet they're still not laws which is great for us because those rules or practices can be found illegal. As I tried to explain above, HN is free to have a rule which says "Don't solicit upvotes&quot
857.
by buran77 5y ago
It's only naive because you chose the naive interpretation, based on sentiment and you not understanding the massive difference between laws and a company's rules . Until you understand what they are, and who decides if rules a
858.
by buran77 5y ago
Who said anything about laws? Apple's rules are no different from HN's rules. And for that matter, your house rules. They're arbitrary decisions to the liking of the respective party. They just have to not be against the law
859.
by buran77 5y ago
> Put like that, it sounds reasonable to me if fines start at a low level (regardless of the public's opinion of the offender). The real reason fines are never crippling is because they would not be paid, there would be endless back
860.
by buran77 5y ago
I find the easiest way to make the TV dumb is to reject every EULA and ToS I'm presented with. Basic TV functionality can't really be disabled (not without making the device unfit for the purpose it was sold), and any further coll
861.
by buran77 5y ago
You're right but as I said above: > they just hardcode some IPs or DNS in which case PiHole would be of no use. At best you could create a NAT port forward to redirect DNS requests to the PiHole, assuming it's not DoH. The idea
862.
by buran77 5y ago
They probably wouldn't be allowed to disable the basic functionality of the TV, at least not without marketing it as "online only TV", which wouldn't look good (your internet may fail, or you may want it in a place witho
863.
Google: We put YouTube TV in the main YouTube app. What now, Roku?(arstechnica.com)
2 points by buran77 5y ago|0 comments
864.
by buran77 5y ago
Don't forget that the "Move fast and break things" motto was born out of the software world. So claiming something is a software company works both for and against them in this case. Think of Heartbleed to understand why havi
865.
by buran77 6y ago
> On the contrary, electricity gris has to follow very strict rules The electric grid is regulate as such, to define the acceptable ranges. ISPs are regulated differently but the law still defines acceptable ranges for their service. The
866.
by buran77 6y ago
Meh: > The one caveat is that today all ISPs advertise their plans as "up to" a certain speed very prominently in all marketing material. I literally started how describing something as "up to" [ostensibly a range] is
867.
by buran77 6y ago
I touched on this point in the comment right above yours: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27005552 TL;DR version: This should be dealt with in the law.
868.
by buran77 6y ago
> I would love to see this fantasy world There's no need for condescension especially in this case. I live in that fantasy world where I get exactly what I pay for. It's not a guarantee that every country has the same consumer
869.
by buran77 6y ago
This is why the law is there. In many countries the advertised speed has to be within a certain range of the average, or hit that speed a certain percent of the time. So 800-900Mbps average, or hitting 1Gbps 60% of the time could very well
870.
by buran77 6y ago
My friend, there are very few things that we can describe precisely, from a legal standpoint or even for technical specs. It's all about "ranges". And the higher the precision and the guarantee, the higher the price, or the c

More ›