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

The text he wrote makes a lot of sense under that prompt because that prompt provides the frame under which to read it. Knowing the prompt makes it obvious that his general observations happen to apply to Germany and he wasn't aware of that before moving there. He's just polite by not spelling it out.

The real issue for non-publication is the one he cites: "additional reflections in a more personal and light-hearted tone". This matches the general type of content in Zeit Magazin. They weren't looking for a scathing criticism of societal ills but some entertaining piece that goes well with the other easily digestible articles.

And as a German I have to say: He's bang on.


Commenting on such a broad and general theme as the article does feel useless. Bureaucracy yadada, people standing on an empty street light... sausage is ok.

Doesn't speak the language, claims the people are not free. How shallow.

There are more interesting models to build here. More interesting art to create. But hey it provoked me. Like most modern media, it made me a bit sad.


>And as a German I have to say: He's bang on.

>Here, at a deserted street, people stop dutifully at a red light. Not a car in sight.

This made me chuckle as I remembered a German friend who passed a red light on a bike at 3am at a deserted street in a German college town and got fined 150 euros by an out-of-nowhere cop car.


Happened to me in Death Valley, in the very hot middle of nowhere.

I came from a dust road and did not fully stop on the stop sign for the main road through the valley, I had only slowed down and then made the turn.

Out of nowhere there were park ranger lights behind me. I still don't know if they were cloaked or if they teleported behind me, I don't know how I could possibly have overlooked them. Everything flat and nothing anywhere, suddenly they are there.

I don't remember if I had to pay or if it was just a warning.


His text contains hardly any new insights about Germany, and I suspect that this was the real reason for the rejection.


Just out of curiosity: How exactly do you imagine Germany looked like pre-WW2?


Rest assured, he's also trying that route. That mastodon article links to parliamentary requests for clarification of aforementioned quote. In article 1425 he responds (google translate):

"We know that social media and encrypted services are unfortunately largely is used to facilitate many forms of crime. There are examples on how criminal gangs recruit completely through encrypted platforms young people to commit, among other things, serious crimes against persons. It is an expression of a cynicism that is almost completely incomprehensible.

We therefore need to look at how we can overcome this problem. Both in terms of what the services themselves do, but also what we from the authorities can do. It must not be the case that the criminals can hide behind encrypted services that authorities cannot access to."

[...]

"I also note that steps have been taken within the EU towards a strengthened regulation of, among other things, digital information services and social media platforms. For example, the European Commission has proposed a new Regulation on rules for preventing and combating sexual abuse of children."

[...]

"The government has a strong focus on eliminating digital violations – it applies especially when it comes to sexual abuse of children – and supports the proposed regulation, unlike the opposition."


Asking somewhat obscure hard data (like a date) from a LLM is pretty much futile even without knowing anything about LLMs: They are smaller than all the factual knowledge in the world so a lot of it won't be there. If it answers, it's probably a hallucination.

The current offerings of OpenAI and Anthropic can be asked to support their claims by for example reaching out to the internet and citing reputable sources. That improves the answer quality for questions like this immensely and in any case they can be verified.

Also the question asked is spurious: It appears there never was a release date for this particular SKU given by Cisco. The whole series (Cisco 1000 Series Integrated Services Routers) was released on 06-OCT-2017.

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/routers/1000-series-in...


That is kind of doubtful. The video clearly shows a small puff of smoke presumably above the ejection port when he fires the gun for the first time. The Welrod and its modern descendants have a bolt which is locked in position when the gun is fired and it has to be cycled manually. Thus no gas would escape the gun at the ejection port when the gun is fired.

It is more likely that this is a semi-automatic pistol which will not cycle properly for one reason or another and the shooter has to manually complete the cycle by racking the slide.


"The bottom line is that arsenic is a heavy metal, like lead, and all heavy metals are dangerous and carcinogenic."

Gold, iron, tin are are all "heavy metals" and are certainly not carcinogenic or dangerous.


I remember from a video of Cody's Lab that metallic gold is safe, but oxidized gold is toxic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold#Toxicity But it's very difficult to oxidize gold, and even gold the salts try to go back to the metallic form, so most of the times it's not a problem.


Those are not considered heavy metals in toxicology.


I guess Iron Maiden should rebrand as Cadmium Maiden


That's their point. Heavy as in "has some gravity to it" is an unambiguous term in all other sciences except toxicology.


Go ask an astronomer what a “metal” is :)


Mentioned in the article, the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 has an interesting history. It came about due to the work of Harvey Washington Wiley who used healthy volunteers to test and document the effects of then used preservatives like borax and formaldehyde. The volunteers were called "The Poison Squad". There's a PBS documentary about them: https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8jbub8


> Turbo Pascal was in the running with assembly language for my favorite language to program the IBM PC in the 1980s.

Teaching myself programming as a kid in the late 80s I encountered the limits of BASIC and then Turbo BASIC pretty soon. Everyone I knew was dabbling in Turbo Pascal but for some reason I can't really recall I rented K&R at the local library and went for Turbo C. I got an incredible amount of mileage out of that decision.

Learning x86 assembly was par for the course back then. Everything was so slow and that was the way to get everything out of the machine. I even remember me going to some length dabbling with the timer for the CPU hogging DRAM refresh cycle to squeeze out the last few percent of CPU power that poor 8086 had. Basically moving away from the conservative settings towards a point where the DRAM was just not becoming "forgetful".


I saw Pascal on the VAX (sucked) in school before I really got into Turbo.

I saw C before I started using Turbo because I had a C compiler for the 6809 using this Unix-clone OS

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS-9

on a TRS-80 Color Computer and I was checking out the K&R C book and also the AT&T UNIX manual from the public library a lot: I had a project of implementing many of the "software tools" such as wc for OS-9 as well as developing tools compatible with ones people were using on CP/M bulletin boards like

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LBR_(file_format)

and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQ_(program)

(Now I tried that last one in Microsoft BASIC and boy the bit handling was painful)


OS-9 was a gateway for a lot of good developers. Constrained (8/16-Bit) enough to make you think but having a lot of the tools and ideas from mainframe/Unix world.


It was part of the strange CoCo experience. The CoCo had a superior CPU in that the 6809 was a great target for conventional compilers (as opposed to the 6502 which would drive you to virtual machine techniques like UCSD or Wozniak’s SWEET16)

Yet the 32 column text size was worse than the already bad 40 cols common on micros. It did not have the great audio of the C64 but the shack sold numerous upgrades like the Orchestra 90, you could even pack in four upgrade cards with the multi-pack. It was insane how many upgrade you could buy (like a digitized tablet, many kinds of dot matrix and letter quality printers, speech synthesis oak). Disc drives cost more than the Coco but they were way faster than the affordable 1541 that C64 users had)

I had a DEC printing terminal (with an acoustic coupler modem on the side!) and a TRA-80 Model 100 attached and could log in with three user sessions. I had a UART for one serial connection, the bit banger was fast enough for a printing terminal!

My Coco 1 starting burning up power supplies so I got a Coco3 which had 80 col text and a real windows + mouse experience for OS-9 but the third party software situation was terrible so I got a 286 machine in 1987, a time where I see Byte magazine is overrun with ads for PC clime builders. I got the money from a consulting project I did, I was told years later how much value my project made and should have asked for enough money to buy a 386.


> Physical access to the computer meant ...

... game over. That's one well understood fact back then as it is today. Where's the security nightmare?


It is a security nightmare by today’s standards, and was hard to secure back then as well.

Apple devices provide a good exemplar because of their significant investments in security, but it’s not the only company making devices about which you can say physical control is no longer an absolute proxy for logical control.

Take for instance an Apple silicon Mac (or for that matter an iPhone). Generally speaking you could steal it from someone but without the credentials it’s more or less a brick.

Apple silicon Macs in particular have firmware that requires certain base actions to be authorized with the password of the “Owner” account, which is (typically) the first user account created on the machine. Without that, it will just stare back at you.

Are there vulnerabilities that could enable a bypass? Probably. Are those in the hands of any given evil maid or thief? Exceedingly unlikely.


That was in fact one of the promises of IPv6: Restore the network of peers where every host is in principle a server and a client and communication between peers is unhindered unless a policy is enforced saying otherwise (on the machine, on a firewall, etc.).

> having a public address is actually a security and privacy risk.

Services can be turned off or a firewall instructed not to pass traffic from the internet (by default). That represents exactly the same attack surface as having a service enabled and nobody being able to get to it from the internet because of NAT.

The privacy risk is mitigated by RFC4941 "Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6". Granted that does not deal with the (delegated) prefix staying the same and when there are only one or very few users in that prefix, some individual behavior could be inferred. Because of that at least in Germany we have the peculiar horror of getting the IPv6 address and all delegated prefixes changed on every redial. That eliminates all privacy concerns while also continuing to make residential internet connections useless for hosting any services.

Anyway. The internet is already way down the road of functioning only as the delivery conduit for a few cloud / service providers mediating all user communication and access to content.


> in Germany we have the peculiar horror of getting the IPv6 address and all delegated prefixes changed on every redial.

This is oh so very German.

In normal times it is massively overkill. I have to wonder if, heaven forbid, the things these sort of German things are meant to mitigate come to pass again if they will make any difference or if they are a largely symbolic act designed to demonstrate ideological opposition to such things.


This seem to be common. My RSP (ISP) only offers a fixed IPv6 address/prefix on request -- otherwise they will just allocate one out of their pool as they do for dynamic IPv4 (although both dynamic IPv4 and IPv6 is fairly sticky so normally DHCP/PPPoE connections will get the same address previously used as long as it hasn't been reallocated). I personally have a static IPv4 address and a static IPv4 address/prefix from my RSP for my home network.


Got the same here in Norway. I've had the same dynamic IPv4 address from my ISP since I moved here over 6 years ago. I get a new IPv6 prefix every time the line goes down, modem needs reboot, moon is full etc.


My IPv6 prefix changes several times a day with no apparent reason.


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

Search: