Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | jjraden's commentslogin

That link is broken, but this link from the same user seems relevant:

https://bsky.app/profile/grmnygrmny.bsky.social/post/3mpgvo7...


Yeah, they changed their username from grmnygrmny.bandcamp.com to grmnygrmny and Bluesky invalidated all of the existing links to the original posts.

One of the reasons why Bluesky isn't a viable alternative yet to other social media platforms...


Speaking of eyes, Veritasium's occasional collaborator Dianna Cowern (Physics Girl) is doing much better after complications from long covid left her bedridden for two years. It's good to see her up and at 'em.

Her latest video, showing her out of bed and going for short walks, is here: https://youtu.be/vqeIeIcDHD0?si=WoxpqZOuRTWD2XYd


I'm guessing they mean React Server Components, but yeah, it annoyed me too that not only do they not define the acronym, but it appears only once on the page -- the title -- so that it's harder to infer it from context.


Great callout, thanks! Edited. I meant the article more as "if you're already curious about the RSC model and have some LISP background" rather than an introduction to what RSC is, but hopefully spelling it out at least helps with that context.


"Properly" or properly? Quotes imply some sort of caveat, like it actually doesn't do it properly.


BT 3.0, 4.0 and 5.0 have slightly different twaks on that. You could spoof connections in older versions, although the details have slipped my mind.


And what about side channels? It should be relatively easy to link timing to each key pressed, for instance, if not outright extracting the encryption key from emitted signal power fluctuations.

These approaches are not just theoretical, they have been shown to work. And that's assuming the protocol itself is not vulnerable and has been implemented correctly. Moreover, I tend to use my keyboards a long time, making it likely that a new attack becomes possible over its lifetime.


Personal question, feel free not to answer: what is your occupation that someone would find so interesting as to drag over a truckload of RF equipment near your location to try to home in on your 2.4Ghz keyboard, which operates in one of the most saturated frequency ranges known to modern man? :)


Oh, I'm mostly worried about "dragnet" approaches and script kiddies.

I still occasionally use a wireless keyboard to type in a password, but by avoiding these, I also lower the probability of interception.

It makes me most uncomfortable when I am typing log-in credentials to my personal home server, that could be used to log in over the internet.

Other than that, I work at a lab, which sounds like a juicy target for leaving a passive Bluetooth sniffer in a closet somewhere.

I've just played enough with BackTrack (now Kali Linux) in my teens to know that other people may be doing the same.


From now on, the FDIC will insure 100% of deposits because of what they did in the Silicon Valley Bank bailout. From now on, the customers of every bank that fails, along with members of Congress, etc., will pressure the FDIC because of the precedent that was created a week ago. Some argue that it’s a dangerous precedent, and they’re not wrong.


SVB catered to business customers, so the FDIC essentially bailed out businesses. If a regular bank failed with your average-joe customers, I'll wager FDIC won't do anything.

It's always when the rich get screwed, rules get bent. I'll be curious to see when a bank for retail customers get screwed, but I hope it never happens.


SVB had 3% insured deposits whereas the average large regional bank (50-500 billion) is 57% insured. So I suspect if you're a customer at a regional bank in flyover country, you're not important.


Given payroll and other immediate cash needs, there should probably always have been separate depositor insurance for corporations. In retrospect commingling insurance, and insurance fees, for business and retail accounts seems like a bad idea. It would be really rare that an individual needs the immediate cash flow of a business (and if they do they can split it among multiple accounts), so the risk of not insuring more than $250k for a retail account is much lower than the same risk for a business account (for which multiple accounts would cause more problems than for individuals).


Why is it dangerous to ensure that money in the bank is safe? Is it dangerous to guarantee all contacts are valid for their entire term in a court of law too or should we limit them to only being valid for the first 3 months, for example?


> it’s a dangerous precedent

It’s dangerous if unbalanced. Mid-sized banks need more monitoring. And the FDIC needs new assessments on deposits over $250k (I’d argue for three tiers: $3mm, $25mm and $100mm) as well as explicit mutualisation obligations.


If they’re talking about the Jewish observance of the sabbath, it’s my understanding that they’re not allowed to turn on an electronic (or mechanical?) device nor turn one off during the sabbath itself.

Obvious exceptions are made for such things as life-saving situations, the practice of medicine, etc.


Yup


chrome://settings/performance -- you can add sites that should remain active

I don't know how to mass administer this across an enterprise, but presumably it would leverage existing tools.


Wow, that’s a beautiful typeface. Thanks!


I hope you've dumped Lastpass and changed all your passwords [0]

[0] https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/lastpass-cus...


Thanks for posting that comparison. I really wanted to like Liberation Mono, as I'm a big fan of the whole LibreOffice project in general, but I find that, when compared side by side, I actually prefer Jetbrains Mono over the other three.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: