qualeed

16 ms·

181.
by qualeed 1y ago
What child is going to choose to ignore millions of dollars? But true, that is an option I suppose.
182.
by qualeed 1y ago
> inserting himself into their lives at all is disrespectful. Keep in mind that he's inserting himself into their lives to give them millions of dollars. Between these two choices: 1) Durov doesn't say anything, insert himself
183.
by qualeed 1y ago
Yes, of course! I'm not implying that what Meta did here is okay. Meta is in the wrong. Just emphasizing that if a phone number is on a business website, it doesn't make sense to call it private. I would expect a tech-focused publ
184.
by qualeed 1y ago
> a private WhatsApp phone number that a property industry executive, James Gray, had posted to his website. > Gray's number is posted on his business website Private? Or posted to his business website? You can only pick one.
185.
by qualeed 1y ago
> question whether they really know what they’re doing or not It's precisely because they know what they are doing that there are of these suspicious lack of features, dark patterns, etc.
186.
by qualeed 1y ago
Appears to be 2025-06-19T07:51:27+00:00
187.
by qualeed 1y ago
Why would he? He donated his sperm. Presumably the children are growing up with their own families. It's not very typical for a sperm donor to be involved, or even be aware of, the kids born from the donation.
188.
by qualeed 1y ago
What do you mean? What would go wrong and how is it relevant whether they met him or not? I wish someone gave me $100MM, that'd be great, even if I didn't know them.
189.
by qualeed 1y ago
> The other techniques you mentioned also suffer from some drawbacks. Of course, which is why I never implied that they don't have drawbacks. Just that the drawbacks of this method, in the context of privacy and tracking, are much
190.
by qualeed 1y ago
> That aren't detectable? Of course. How do you detect or protect against when the FBI/NSA/three-letter-agency has a warrant for your cellphone (or Google, car, local coffee shop cameras, Ring cameras, credit card, etc.)
191.
by qualeed 1y ago
> ask 10 people what Juneteenth is only 1 would be able to do better than: "something to do with freeing the slaves". That shouldn't be considered a naming failure. It's an education failure.
192.
by qualeed 1y ago
Noise is not the only thing I mention, it's just one of many reasons. The fact that it is so easily gamed by bad actors is another compelling reason why it wouldn't work in the courts and is a poor tracking technique. Primarily th
193.
by qualeed 1y ago
When the wind blows, a photo doesn't get faked, but these particulates will move to areas you haven't been to. Faking a photo, convincingly enough to pass forensic scrutiny, requires skill, time, and equipment. Faking the results
194.
by qualeed 1y ago
> Still great for tracking people though. No, no it isn't. Cameras, license plate readers, air tags, phones, literally just stalking someone, and that sort of thing is great for tracking people. They are easier, vastly less prone t
195.
by qualeed 1y ago
Sure. My point isn't that this isn't a biometric or something. My point is that it is the weakest biometric, full of noise, constantly contaminated, easily forged with no skill set or technology required, with a very high fals
196.
by qualeed 1y ago
This requires action by someone else (who also risks leaving behind evidence). The airborne stuff just spreads by itself. To far more places, far quicker, all the time .
197.
by qualeed 1y ago
> Fingerprints are still used in forensics, because the odds that it is forged are lower than an actual possibility that it is real. >Same for DNA then. There's a world of difference between cloning a fingerprint/planting D
198.
by qualeed 1y ago
Even as a big privacy advocate, I don't see much reason to be especially concerned. The fact that the DNA can be carried off to locations you've never physically been to pretty immediately puts a stop to any use in court and usefu
199.
by qualeed 1y ago
> I'm not claiming interrupts don't exist I thought you were confused because you said " hardware interrupts (whatever that means) ", and put it in scare quotes? > so locked down that all phones of the same model&
200.
by qualeed 1y ago
> "hardware interrupts" (whatever that means) Hardware interrupts are a standard part of computing. (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrupt#Hardware_interrupts ) " Android also inherits the inter
201.
by qualeed 1y ago
> Statistics can also include: Map name, player transform on the map, keyboard and mouse events, GPU utilization, audio playback events, etc. These are all very high information time domain signals that can be correlated with the same fr
202.
by qualeed 1y ago
> Computation isn’t likely prohibitive when [...] I think this might be in reply to my first comment about scaling? If so, I just want to clarify that I was thinking more along the lines of scaling the customer service/ban appeal s
203.
by qualeed 1y ago
> If someone at Valve had taken 10 seconds to review my stats It seems super reasonable when it's a one-off thing for your own account. When you think about making it into policy and scaling it up to 1000s of interactions, it quick
204.
by qualeed 1y ago
It doesn't actually say it anywhere, so: CRDT = Conflict-free replicated data type. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict-free_replicated_data_...
205.
by qualeed 1y ago
I'm curious what you mean by "modern", because History has been showing garbage for closing in on 2 decades now at least (Ancient Aliens is like 17 years old).
206.
by qualeed 1y ago
Non-algorithmic feeds are a good thing. That sums up my feelings. When that changes, or it gets plastered in ads, my feelings will be "well that was good while it lasted". Until then, I'm choosing not to doom say about it.
207.
by qualeed 1y ago
Okay, if they do that, I'll be sure to say "that sucks". Until then, I'll be happy that millions of people can get non-algoirthmic feeds.
208.
by qualeed 1y ago
What type of feature, and how would they prevent other projects? I'm happy that there's a non-algorithmic feed in a Meta app. I think that's good for society. I'm not focused on how this means Meta will be the fediverse
209.
by qualeed 1y ago
> How is this positive reinforcement They are doing what I think is a good thing so I said "good". > you’re so excited I'm not "so excited". I'm offering a not negative opinion. Weird, on an HN topic ab
210.
by qualeed 1y ago
Sure. I'm also familiar with positive reinforcement. If/when they start touching the reverse-chronological feed with algorithms I'll call it out. Until that time, I'm happy that it's a non-algorithmic feed and will

More ›