hurin

24 ms·

181.
by hurin 12y ago
> Keep your pranks on the right side of legal, or get burned. Understand the CFAA and when you are in violation. Because the problem is clearly the "evil hacker jason" and not the ridiculousness of the laws in which severity of
182.
by hurin 12y ago
I'd very much like to have some more information about how the article author gathered this data - are these all master branches of said projects, numbered releases? How does the data account for variation in development procedures (e.
183.
by hurin 12y ago
It's been argued about a lot - with far brighter people unable to come to agreement than the author of this blog. The reason the linked article in itself is quite worthless is because it trivializes the question from philosophy of math
184.
by hurin 12y ago
> Actually I just realized they didn't appear to be narrowing down the number of people with outstanding warrants by residency - is it just the aforementioned statistic (see my other comment) or is there data on the number of those
185.
by hurin 12y ago
The DoJ report is significantly better reading than this low-quality article http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-release... Maybe this should be submitted instead of the linked article?
186.
by hurin 12y ago
> I'd say it's more likely that this is a complex problem, and will take a bit of time and computing power to work through... It is a complex problem - but amazon has a serious advantage over other sites that have to deal with
187.
by hurin 12y ago
There should be very obvious ways to identify "review bots" - especially given that reviews are tied to an amazon accounts purchase and browsing history. That they don't have an efficient algorithm for this sounds more like t
188.
by hurin 12y ago
She didn't need to consent. Once she did it's probably all fair game.
189.
by hurin 12y ago
Is it a question of whether they were compensated or whether the art was used commercially? i.e. if a private pilot takes a friend along and the friend later sells said pictures to a magazine.
190.
by hurin 12y ago
You're saying every pilot whose flown a small Cessna where a passenger writing an article for a magazine took a photo or two was commercially certified? " In general, whenever we receive a complaint about an unauthorized UAS oper
191.
by hurin 12y ago
Yeah the article sucked, I think people just upvote because it's Bill Watterson in the title.
192.
by hurin 12y ago
> How else would a machine do it? I think in this case the machine is fed human input directly, instructing it what to modify - it is not "discovering" a subject. So presumably it's output range is limited by the set of hu
193.
by hurin 12y ago
Some of these are clearly computer-generated in a way where the human has done most of the work. Take “In truth, I’d love to build some verse for you To churn such verse a billion times a day So type a new concept for me to chew I keep a
194.
by hurin 12y ago
If your shell has completions the difference is usually not very noticeable.
195.
by hurin 12y ago
I think one of the problems with git command-line from an ease of use perspective, is that it emulates the underlying structure. Therefore until one acquires an understanding of that, even simple things (that have easy plain english express
196.
by hurin 12y ago
> Not to argue the basic concept, but in this specific case, AFAIK, it's very arguable whether "people are innately evil" might have been proven. I definitely was not implying that a statement like that was (let alone eve
197.
by hurin 12y ago
The problem wasn't well formulated, since it didn't clearly define what can or cannot be done to the decompresser based on knowledge of the output file. But consider a more strongly formulated problem, where you must provide the d
198.
by hurin 12y ago
(2001) tag?
199.
by hurin 12y ago
One off-hand and inappropriate comment is not sexual harassment - and does not justify a witch-hunt (to which people on the Internet are so often inclined). I'm sure the reasons are stronger if she left the company on account of them (
200.
by hurin 12y ago
It's difficult to achieve some kind of objectivity. Of course no one wants to believe that they are innately bad or easily coerced into doing terrible things to other human beings, so it seems like it would be very natural to expect
201.
by hurin 12y ago
The rather strong verbal comments aside - I think this is almost certainly correct. Polygraph tests are notoriously inaccurate - where as for something like terrorist threats the number of real positives you are interested is probably in th
202.
by hurin 12y ago
If the validator causes the blockchain to fork while its coins are locked in bond, all of its coins are destroyed. This means that as long as you sync your blockchain with the network periodically you never have to trust a central checkpoi
203.
by hurin 12y ago
Please, Please, stop publishing articles in these ridiculous 600 pixel text widths. The other 73% percent of my screen is there for a reason.
204.
by hurin 12y ago
Or it could have been linked somewhere public? It's far-fetched to think that you'd be able to prove that someone seeing this gist is malicious. Github clearly states Warning: Secret gists aren't private.
205.
by hurin 12y ago
So how is the IP address of someone that has viewed or crawled said secret Gist relevant anyways? Someone crawling a website is not probable cause (even if there is a single IP address which can be traced to specific machine, which is highl
206.
by hurin 12y ago
Murakami is one of those authors that has good enough style, culture and influences that at first they come of as quite profound, and at the same-time are pleasant to read in a way that say Kafka or Dostoevsky are not - then about half-way
207.
by hurin 12y ago
Does that paper constitute admissible evidence in court? If so this is very dubiously legal and borders on blackmail. Although it's probably more likely that you can't sign away or admit guilt without correct legal procedure, and
208.
by hurin 12y ago
And the prize for the best go code is... A bunch of books about learning go!
209.
by hurin 12y ago
That document which you sign presumably stays confidential between the retailer and you (i.e. a perspective employer won't see it). The article also states that: If someone started to take the course and paid for it—if they change the
210.
by hurin 12y ago
> You don't get to determine guilt. But this deal does not involve determining guilt either (in any legal sense), they are merely signing an obligation to take a course.

More ›