laughinghan

15 ms·

91.
by laughinghan 6y ago
This isn't a very good argument against parallel construction, because you are able to contest all of the evidence being used in court against you. I don't think arguing against the legitimacy of the investigative means used t
92.
by laughinghan 6y ago
Let's say it does not match what many Americans think of when they hear "socialism". There's no such thing as a "textbook definition" of socialism.
93.
by laughinghan 6y ago
I think a global warming debate could be quite enlightening. I am not a climate scientist, so if I were to discuss global warming with someone else who wasn't a climate scientist, the questions I would be most curious about are: do the
94.
by laughinghan 6y ago
I'm confused. In both Debubble and my vaguely sketched out proposal, you can't be forced into a debate with someone you have no interest talking to. You have to voluntarily start a conversation with them. Surely there is at least
95.
by laughinghan 6y ago
Good point! I have no idea. If someone specifically desires to shout into the void, I don't have any ideas on how to convince them otherwise. However, if they claim they want to actually convince other people to change their mind, mayb
96.
by laughinghan 6y ago
IMHO this largely only solves problems caused by Twitter's idiosyncratic design, and does little for the deeper problems that cause debates to be toxic. Much more interesting would be a debate format in two phases: Phase 1: just identi
97.
by laughinghan 6y ago
That article doesn't actually report an allegation that the incident was "unleashed by Oklahoma police officer", but this one does: https://www.news9.com/story/5efe6166c993e811aef887a0/norman-...
98.
by laughinghan 6y ago
No, your premise is wrong, all major browsers have committed to removing third-party cookies, or have already done so. And after third-party cookies, your IP address is the next-easiest way to track you across sites. that Facebook cookie w
99.
by laughinghan 6y ago
Did we read the same comment? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23553503 It explicitly argues that he's evil because he has a Chinese name and Wikipedia describes him as Chinese-American. There's no equivocatin
100.
by laughinghan 6y ago
Did you read the comment he's replying to? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23553503 It's entire contents is an argument that Zoom is evil because Eric Yuan is Chinese-American. It doesn't say a single on
101.
by laughinghan 6y ago
Your blog is awesome! I'm really glad you commented here, or I wouldn't have found it. I even forwarded your most recent post to some friends.
102.
Model facts, not your problem domain(ruudvanasseldonk.com)
2 points by laughinghan 6y ago|0 comments
103.
by laughinghan 6y ago
That's amazing. Any idea what piece of middleware on your own server was doing that?
104.
by laughinghan 6y ago
That was an example, I was trying to offer chrisseaton a different notion of "similarity". Another example: if 0% of Ruby code works in Crystal unmodified, but for 90% of code the transformation was extremely simple and mechanical
105.
by laughinghan 6y ago
> this basically boils down to TOFU (trust on first use), but the trust does not perpetuate across uses, so it’s more like, TOAU (trust on any use). The trust is ephemeral, the meeting is ephemeral, the ID is ephemeral. For a lot of mee
106.
by laughinghan 6y ago
>> and are also semantically very close >Sorry I super disagree with this. They look similar. Dig into it just below the surface? Start to model it formally? Not at all. I think you're missing the point. If 90% of Ruby code wo
107.
by laughinghan 6y ago
Good point, I'd be surprised if lighting and orientation doesn't overwhelm all other information at this level of blur. But I've been surprised by impressive digital forensics before—what if you can determine lighting and ori
108.
by laughinghan 6y ago
They're not using random noise in place of the face, they're using a 25px Gaussian blur: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23415600
109.
by laughinghan 6y ago
Yes, they are using a 25px Gaussian blur, they are not overlaying a different image on top: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23415600
110.
by laughinghan 6y ago
You should also discretize the pixel colors. Note that if you blur the pixelated region, it'll be just as aesthetically pleasing as the reversible Gaussian blur.
111.
by laughinghan 6y ago
But a bad blur doesn't. That's why your parent comment asks what kind of blur they use. Edit: Turns out it's a 25px Gaussian blur. There's some downsampling beforehand, but not much, and no color discretization. In other
112.
by laughinghan 6y ago
There's another concern—even if I can't usably invert the convolution, if I have photos of a thousand people's faces and one of them is that blurred face, can I figure out which one with high confidence?
113.
by laughinghan 6y ago
Just blur the pixelization and it will look similar to the human eye, but with guaranteed information loss. Note that you should also discretize the colors of the pixels, which otherwise have 24 bits of information each; and maybe 2x2 pixel
114.
by laughinghan 6y ago
Aren't you just talking about the volume then? You could be screaming the most wholesome things about unicorns and rainbows and still be loud enough to be a public nuisance, and loud enough that authorities will have the right to ask y
115.
by laughinghan 6y ago
I've heard that upvotes don't count if they're from people who followed a link directly to the story. And you're not supposed to solicit votes in the first place. Just say "Join the discussion on Hacker News".
116.
by laughinghan 6y ago
Do you have website visitors in Europe or California? If so, you better be documenting what you're doing with those IPs much clearer than "might help finding offenders". Under Europe's GDPR, IP addresses are explicitly c
117.
by laughinghan 6y ago
That's not a counterargument. Nuance doesn't contradict the black-and-whiteness of the situation. Sometimes nuance just means there are many shades of black. The same thing can also harm the same people, or a different set of peo
118.
by laughinghan 6y ago
If you restrict yourself to 2 bad choices, then you can only make bad choices. It doesn't help to label one of them "artificial" and imply the other choice isn't artificial. It is, in fact, not just crude but actually qu
119.
by laughinghan 6y ago
But in the meantime, won't the vendor keep adding more broken devices to the public internet, making the problem worse? The longer it takes for this problem to become public, won't the more harm be caused when it does become publi
120.
by laughinghan 6y ago
Unfortunately, information that helps the good guys get their extensions past the audit check is exactly the same information that helps the bad guys get their extensions in too. This is just an assertion I'm wrong. It can't pos

More ›