Y
HN Search
Hacker News Search
new
|
comments
|
top
|
jobs
lucideer
searching PlanetScale…
1.
▲
2.
▲
3.
▲
4.
▲
5.
▲
6.
▲
41 ms
·
751.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
> That is _extremely_ convenient. I'm open to having my mind changed but I have not really experienced this extreme convenience in practice. The vast majority of things I plug a HDMI cable into either don't have speakers or
752.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
Forget all the other pros/cons - MST makes it worth any industry & consumer effort alone.
753.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
Fair
754.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
I mean... isomorphic code isn't unique to Clojure & is how many JS/NodeJS apps work...
755.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
> There is zero functional difference This isn't true though. There's may be no functional difference for the receiver/merger/maintainer but there's a large difference for the submitter - this kind of approach
756.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
> Pay €1-10 per month for no ads or consent to ads. This is explicitly and very clearly called out as illegal in Article 7 (4): > 4. When assessing whether consent is freely given, utmost account shall be taken of whether, inter al
757.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
Throw ups are different to tags but I still don't think that explains how graffiti is distinct from mural, unless you're trying to say all graffiti is unsanctioned, which... isn't really the case.
758.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
Is graffiti always text? I know it's common but I didn't realise it was a rule. What about something like this https://maps.app.goo.gl/oCbe2DZW1vqyXJ2h9?g_st=ic
759.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
This seems like a separation that's a little too clean to fit reality. Does that hard line of distinction really exist? Certainly there are clear examples on both ends of the spectrum, but here's some closer to the boundaries of y
760.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
Those examples have some similarities, but - while they had their contemporary detractors - they were, for the most part, formally educated participants in the art establishment of their times. I'd liken it more to the works of Henri R
761.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
I'm not sure if this kind of parody is against HN guidelines per se, but it's less common here than, say, Twitter, and as such is usually customary to add some indicator like "/s" or similar.
762.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
> these are distinct forms of street art Can you elaborate on this? I've always thought a mural was just a type of graffiti?
763.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
> we’re all quite aware that AI will play an increasing role in our lives (in & out of the office), but maybe AI mainstream adoption will take longer than we anticipate. What do you think? Sadly I think you've contradicted you
764.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
Mine does too but the differentiation still helps a lot with enforcing the contextual difference. He at least knows when he picks up idle conversation that he's not being directly prompted: he's just likely to use it to anticipate
765.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
WFM. Requires consistency, ymmv if you rescued an adult
766.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
I know for dogs baby talk can be useful to separate your communications, ensuring dogs only react when you're directly addressing them, and not when you bring up keywords in idle conversation on unrelated topics. Not sure if this kind
767.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
> if customers keep showing up? Presumably this is the qualifier that answers the question? That's a fairly large "if".
768.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
Was this comment written by Stockton Rush's ghost?
769.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
> Are you arguing that zoning, red-tape, and generally anti-development politicians and voters aren't the fundamental problem here? Minus the leading language (as I presume these so-called "anti-development" politicians
770.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
That's a nice long reply - I'll try and keep my response a bit shorter. You (and many many of the replies in thread) have taken the initial topic (kiosk escape -vs- parental controls) and are defending their definition as a seriou
771.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
> I still thought it interesting I don't know why you've been downvoted to oblivion but I DO find this thoroughly uninteresting. I am however interested in why anyone WOULD find it interesting.
772.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
> Are you suggesting that privilege-escalation attacks are not security risks? Nope. What I'm suggesting is that threat modelling is important. If attack vectors were classified equally based on technicalities we would have infini
773.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
Only in the US. Plenty of "rapeseed oil" on the shelves here in Europe.
774.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
> there is nothing wrong with viewing users as potentially adversarial There is a world of difference between considering users adversarially (social engineering is the most common threat vector bar none) and considering kiosk escape a
775.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
> This could also be considered ... I agree but you've very appropriately used the word "could" here. The gp bemoaned Google not prioritising this issue as a serious security concern. Whether it could theoretically be cl
776.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
One can absolutely make an argument for a great many risks to be classified under security concern: there are certainly more than just these two. Doing so is simply reductio ad absurdum. To expand on this, we can if we choose classify all p
777.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
> sometimes, just sometimes - it is also to do with protecting organisations from careless or malicious users. There are two cases where this is true: a user intentionally sharing internal access with external malicious actors, or a us
778.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
> Google's increasingly cavalier attitude towards security is concerning: > [3 bullet points unrelated to security] Security is a field related to protecting device-users from malicious actors. Your 3 examples all fall broadl
779.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
You're technically correct but to put it more succinctly, canola oil is "food grade rapeseed oil". So for any intents & purposes in the context of a conversation about consumers consuming food products, all rapeseed oil i
780.
▲
by
lucideer
3y ago
> The state shouldn't need to build houses (in fact it doesn't; it just uses your tax money to pay private companies to build houses). It should just make the building and zoning rules simple enough that it's possible to
More ›