samhw

8 ms·

31.
by samhw 4y ago
Really? I read that your comment is wrong.
32.
by samhw 4y ago
Harms like: the aforementioned energy usage equivalent to Eastern Europe, scams wiping out billions on the regular (e.g. the absurd Luna pyramid scheme which collapsed the other week), facilitating vast drug dealing and consumption at huge
33.
by samhw 4y ago
You could do something like "you need to be physically holding the card with your hand", which would complete some circuit. I can't think of many cases where that wouldn't work, except perhaps people who don't take
34.
by samhw 4y ago
> With Hits, its easy for one page to harvest a high Hub score. All that is needed is to outlink to known good pages (authority). Providing outlinks is trivial. Once so harvested, one can direct that flow to a designated page to give it
35.
by samhw 4y ago
> If you check my original comment I gave a simple scheme to attack HITS rank. Sybil attack is a little harder for Pagerank. OK, but how is it harder for PageRank? I can't really see any differences in the semantics of the two alg
36.
by samhw 4y ago
> The HITS algorithm has one drawback that it is super easy to game it. PageRank is not entirely resistant, but its a little more robust. > Create a harvester page that points to lots and lots of popular, high traffic pages on the int
37.
by samhw 4y ago
I think there are two separate threads running through this. One is his academic criticism of their work through the academic publishing process. I hope no one would describe that as 'harassment', irrespective of how much his acad
38.
by samhw 4y ago
It also has a weird emphasis on their personal lives - particularly their gender: > Satrajit Chatterjee, a more senior researcher at Google, used the cover of scientific debate to undermine the women personally, the employees claim. They
39.
by samhw 4y ago
Ah, I see. Well diagnosed, by the way - I did indeed think you were being ironic, and was going along with the joke, as opposed to being antagonistic in the knowledge you were being sincere. To respond in sincere mode: while I don’t think i
40.
by samhw 4y ago
Nah, it's "how many Black, Indigenous, People of Colour do you have who wear glasses and have facial scars from having fallen from a great height while screaming?". If you can't find enough preëxisting BIPOCWWGAHFSFHFFAG
41.
by samhw 4y ago
Hmm, how many bits are you allowing for the 'number'? Also, you need to identify which user it belongs to, as well as - in our case - which device and which sensor on that device. Also, is that ordinary NVRAM? How do you protect a
42.
by samhw 4y ago
Yeah, that's true, actually. As best I recall, I just meant that that is what people use JWT for regardless , and I wanted to convey that the only part doing the useful work there is the 'asymmetric crypto' part. I didn&#x27
43.
by samhw 4y ago
Ah, sorry, that was what I was referring to when I said "Presumably you weren't using it to sign the tokens, if they were surprised the client could access them?". I classed that as too obvious for it to be what you meant.
44.
by samhw 4y ago
I mean, I'd be rather surprised too. What were you using JWTs for, if not asymmetric crypto? Presumably you weren't using it to sign the tokens, if they were surprised the client could access them? And I can't see many contex
45.
by samhw 4y ago
Asymmetric cryptography solves problems of statelessness: i.e. encrypt your sensitive|read-only data with your public key, decrypt it with your private key, beep boop, you can now use your client as a database. JWTs are a whole other unne
46.
by samhw 4y ago
> write code as simply as possible is tautology What? That has nothing whatsoever to do with tautology. It's just a statement you agree with. If everyone else agreed with it, it might at most be a truism or an uninteresting statemen
47.
by samhw 4y ago
I assume they mean "relative to [my idea of how much a company will make when serving that amount of traffic]" - which does depend on the industry they are in, not just in terms of how profitable it is but also its 'user load
48.
by samhw 4y ago
Ah, thank you - I had this thread open in a tab all day, and I'm a compulsive procrastinator (not just some amateur crastinator), hence the intermittent participation! It reads as quite pompous now that I read it back, but hey, I think
49.
by samhw 4y ago
Eh, I think a Master's in English is good (a fortiori) proof that they know how to string a sentence together. I am still absolutely mystified at how they wrote that flatulent nonsense. And I mean truly, genuinely mystified, not &#x2
50.
by samhw 4y ago
> someone let me know they shared my article on here because they liked it so I checked it out. > I didn’t seek this out. Oh, come on . > Ultimately it is compliance - someone called it aggressive compliance, I can't really c
51.
by samhw 4y ago
> I'm assuming this is a genuine question, so I'll answer with my genuine understanding. I'm assuming you're a genuine person and not a weird 8-foot-tall android robot, so I'll bless you with the same provisional
52.
by samhw 4y ago
I suspect, as with other writing I've seen before, that (a) they have no real thoughts about this topic (indeed it strikes me as very difficult for anyone to form a genuine thought about), and (b) therefore they are mechanically chur
53.
by samhw 4y ago
I can't see anything here that's not solved by the simple algorithm "If someone is performing badly, help them. If they still perform badly, fire them." I don't think you need to know about their personal life. Just
54.
by samhw 4y ago
I think you're illustrating that person's point. I'm a liberal, with-the-times person in a liberal, with-the-times city, and I cringe at the thought of ever uttering the words "invalidate someone's lived experience&
55.
by samhw 4y ago
Yeah, I can't stand that about the US. The best supermarket experience of my life was in Croatia, in Zagreb. I asked a woman working there whether they had ice, and she just said "No." (punctuation hers), spun around, and mar
56.
by samhw 4y ago
I think it's probably not a good idea to read comments about your writing on the internet. They aren't sending them 'to you' - you've sought out this discussion - so it's on you if you choose to read people&#x2
57.
by samhw 4y ago
I don't think it's a genuine spam comment, because it doesn't actually mention any identifiable 'opportunity'. I assume it's someone trying to make a point, though God knows what that point could be.
58.
by samhw 4y ago
I think this is quite a good definition. After all, it's a key principle of toxicology - courtesy of Paracelsus - that the dose makes the poison. (Any woman who's had Botox can attest to this.) It certainly seems to be used that w
59.
by samhw 4y ago
Yeah, I don't want to be cruel, in case the author is reading this, but it really is uniquely egregious writing (no toxic positivity here!). The broken-up sentences you mention are. Awkward and mostly grammatically inco. Rrect as a res
60.
by samhw 4y ago
I was joking, with that particular sentence. My point was that there is someone managing the server irrespective, and that there's not a particularly clear metaphysical distinction between 'create my database in this way' a

More ›