Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | ghshephard's comments login

IPv6 resolves that.

Not totally portable. They have built some ctags option dependencies that I'm going to have to futz with in order to get the makefile to run.

    12:58 shephard:c shephard$ make all
    ctags -R .
    ctags: illegal option -- R
    usage: ctags [-BFadtuwvx] [-f tagsfile] file ...
    make: *** [tags] Error 1
[Edit - No "-R" option for ctags in OS X 10.8.5, or in OpenBSD Current - http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi/OpenBSD-current/man1/...

Edit2 - Now, it seems to be breaking on lemon not being explicitly called out in the path during a make:

  lemon filter_dsl_parse.y
  make[1]: lemon: No such file or directory
  make[1]: *** [filter_dsl_parse.c] Error 1
  make: *** [dsls] Error 2
  13:07 shephard:c shephard$



ctags etc I'll split out. effectively there are make targets to make dev nice, and a smaller set just to make the binary. ctags definitely in the former category. thanks for the feedback!


fixed in master

yes, there is an issue open. I have . in my path. will post a diff.


Have you ever watched (heard) someone talking with the mic held between their lips/teeth - you can be a couple feet away from them and not hear them over the sound of the train/bus. It's actually pretty awesome.


Which is really annoying for the people sitting adjacent or across from them. Add more people speaking into their phones and the noise volume tends to go up.


The ethical issue is with regards to people reading all the content supported by advertising, but then blanking out all the ads. Marco's taking the position that, given the risk, and the general intrusiveness and privacy violations associated with advertising, that it's entirely ethical to do so.


Don't you think the bigger ethical issue here is how content providers keep using ad networks that commonly serve as a delivery mechanism for malware?

Reading someone's content without looking at their ads seems like a relatively minor infraction in comparison.


I agree with Marco - I think the pendulum regarding security and privacy has swung too far, and it's entirely ethical to block such code from running on your system.

I think a form of ads that are entirely reasonable (though hard to scale), are the ones that Gruber sticks himself into his DF feed. and, ironically, they are extraordinarily effective - I can probably name, by heart, about 20 of his sponsors. And I've visited, and purchased products from many of them.


And South Peninsula - Getting a Cab in Redwood City, or Cupertino used to be a minimum 30 minute way (Which I never understood - how can it always be 30 minutes, why would there never be a cab 10 minutes away) - and, late at night, Cabs would sometimes just not show up at all.

Uber is typically a 5-10 minute call away during the daytime in Redwood City/Cupertino, and later at night, around 9:00 PM, you can get an Uber in < 20 minutes, which is awesome compared to the way it used to be.


By coincidence, I just did a hackathon in Redwood City this weekend, and on Friday ~11pm I was able to get one at an office park that arrived just after I made it outside from the 2nd floor.

Whatever forces stopped this kind of thing from working before were destroying a lot of value. I know there's always the talk of what cost Uber most be socializing with this service, but even at a 50% fare increase that would have been an extreme improvement over the previous options, so you can't really explain it away as pure cost hiding.


Do you remember if you paid surge pricing? i would guess thats probably the reason. i'm from NYC but am currently in SF. both cities have surge pricing late at night, or when its raining in NYC. taxi regulations artificially depress prices but Uber may have created a fair (?) way of pricing things properly. hence service becomes faster. i'm sure surge pricing creates incentives for more uber drivers to drive at night over time, hopefully it will even out.


Some people don't like the surge - I love it. It means that 100% of the time when I take out my mobile phone, and open up the Uber App, I'm going to get an Uber in a major metropolitan area. I then get to decide for myself whether I'm willing to pay that surge price.

With Taxi's, the decision is taken out of my hands. There are just no taxi's available during rush periods, and I'm left stranded.


"Taxis." In English, we use a plain S for plural nouns.


Apologies. Normally I catch stuff like that when I read it (but quite often not when I type it) - and it's incredibly frustrating to see. I have an increasing tendency to confuse where/were, there/their, its/it's when I type, and I have to insert a 60 second delay before hitting submit and confirming I haven't blown it. Particularly annoying is the use of 's when it's not needed. Thanks for pointing it out.


No worries. Thanks for fixing it.


If you're gonna be so delicate about it, at least get it right.

I think there are a bunch of different ways of pluralizing English nouns. Oxen and geese think so too...


There was no surge. It was ~$7 for an 8 minute trip. (!)


This is a hard attack to defend against - because the person sending the money can also two-factor authentication them.

With that said - internally, there are usually lots, and lots and lots of controls over who/how one can send money, and it's pretty darn rare for someone to be able to "spoof" a request like this without throwing a lot of red flags.


There is a lot of risk going to a compromised website. You are basically inputting potential malware onto your computer, and, if there are zero-days present on your system, handing control of your computer over to a malware author.


Yes, I'm pretty worried about browsing a website with no ads using Chrome on my Linux machine with uBlock origin and Flash disabled.

I think I take greater risks going for a walk in the evening.


A random website? Absolutely, 99.999% of the Web is safe. But we're talking about a site which is specifically compromised with malware.

With that said - "Linux" is safe by being such a tiny population of the community that browser malware generally isn't written for it. In general, I take it as a given that people have deleted/disabled flash and java plugins a long, long time ago.


> A random website? Absolutely, 99.999% of the Web is safe. But we're talking about a site which is specifically compromised with malware.

Well, we don't know that, actually. The info given on the PE site say that the attacker gained access to the server and modified the database. Do you have proof that it's serving up malware to visitors?

In any case, it's an odd situation and an odd response from Project Euler. It doesn't seem like a complicated enough site to get hacked in a mysterious undetermined way.


As a former Netscapee, I'm probably first in line to call foul on Microsoft's Embrace-Extend-Extinguish strategy (See how much damage Active Directory did to Universal LDAP support - ever try and run Outlook/Windows domain on anything but a Microsoft Directory Server?) - but that's an old war. And it's over. The beginning started in 2007 with the release of the iPhone (some such as Benedict Evans might suggest the transition to Web Apps was the beginning, but IE tried to corner that market by injecting Active-X everywhere) and Android. Microsoft failed to release a high-quality mobile solution quickly enough, and the transition to mobile effectively ended the Microsoft Hegemony. The War was officially over with the departure of Balmer, and official declaration of defeat occurred when Nadella wrote off the vast majority of the Nokia acquisition.

In order to compete, Microsoft now has to play on, and support, platforms which it does not, and never will, control.

It's taking a while for me to adjust (16 years?), but I have to say - I really like this new Microsoft, and I'm looking forward to the great things that they are going to do now that they are no longer the Monopolistic behemoth that they were for so many years.


The war is over? As a former Netscapee you might remember the relevance of Microsoft in terms of Web Browsers before IE4.

That's where Microsoft is now with their mobile OS, and it's nearly exactly the same playbook: developer mindshare and one-way compatibility to make their lousy offer become less lousy.

Given that some XAML-in-UIKit stuff is discussed somewhere else here, they may already work on extending beyond iOS, probably hoping to keep Apple busy with eternal catch-up (since they're said to have cross licensing agreements, patent wars are likely out of the question here).


The key difference is, Microsoft was able to leverage their monopoly in one industry (Desktop) to destroy the competition in another (Browsers, though yes, that phoenix did rise from the ashes)

The war is over because Microsoft no longer has a monopoly they can leverage to do this again.

Microsoft is not, and will not be a force in the mobile phone world for the foreseeable future.

Re: "probably hoping to keep Apple busy with eternal catch-up"

You've got the causation going the wrong direction - Apple doesn't have to catch up to Microsoft any more, it's Microsoft that has to play catch up with Apple.

I can't describe it any better than Benedict Evans did, so I'll just share his analysis: http://ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2015/7/8/capitulation


> The war is over because Microsoft no longer has a monopoly they can leverage to do this again.

They're still a force on the desktop and the Universal App model of Windows 10 will help translating that elsewhere.

> Microsoft is not, and will not be a force in the mobile phone world for the foreseeable future.

WinPhone sales catch up with iOS in some European countries. They have attractive offers at the low end to rival Android in less wealthy regions. I wouldn't discount them yet.

> You've got the causation going the wrong direction - Apple doesn't have to catch up to Microsoft any more, it's Microsoft that has to play catch up with Apple.

For now. Just like they had to with HTML on IE4 and Java for a while. At some point, they built a "better HTML than HTML" (XMLHttpRequest still survives) and a "better Java than Java" (at least they saw it that way, and it was enough of a threat that Sun took the legal route, which both Apple and Google can't easily take in this case).

They need the apps, so they provide enough support to make it work. I suppose that through a mixture of superior tools (MSVC), marketing aid ($$$) and Embrace&Extend (P/Invoke, XAML-in-UIKit) they will try to make those apps work better on Windows than on other platforms, no matter if they're written in C#, Java or ObjC/Swift.

Sound familiar to me. Microsoft is the most dangerous when they're hungry, and they certainly are.


Re: "They're still a force on the desktop "

The desktop is increasingly becoming less relevant. It won't go away, but mobile platforms are where the revenue and activity is.

Re: "WinPhone sales catch up with IOS" - That battle is over. It's not even up for debate. There was a reason why Nadella has terminated the Windows "Services and Devices Business." and fired most of the Windows Phone engineers - and that's because Microsoft has been thoroughly and completed defeated by Android and iPhone.

There are going to be lots of places where Windows Phone will still be used, and, in fact, even be a popular choice. But there are also places in the world where Blackberry Phones are still used. But in all the key (and profit generating markets) - Android and Apple have carried the day handily.

By the way - I'm not saying the Microsoft isn't dangerous - they are wicked smart, have tons of cash, and have demonstrated that they are willing to make a significant adjustment to strategy "Devices and Services" to "Mobile first, Cloud First" and fire their CEO to do so.

What I am saying is that Microsoft is no longer in a position to "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish." as Microsoft no longer has the market power to extend important standards and have others adopt those extensions as people are increasingly less likely to be using one of their products, and, more importantly, are increasingly no longer required to use one of their products to get their job done.

To bring this conversation back to the beginning Microsoft has released a translation/recompilation layer that will let people who have written applications for iOS, quickly recompile them and release them for Windows, without having to write much, if any, new code. The objective is to have people write apps for Windows 10 and iOS using this mechanism, because currently, effectively 0% of people are writing first class apps for windows phone (there are, as always, small exceptions, but windows phone basically gets the dregs).

The problem with this strategy, is that now Microsoft is playing on Apples platform - and this further reduces the incentive for people to write native Windows phone Apps. Effectively, this is Microsoft giving up and saying, "If you won't write apps for our platform, as least we can emulate other ones and run those apps."


Depends on your receiver sensitivity and desired throughput. Smart Grids operating at 1 watt dBm with receivers at -98 RSSI routinely have mesh-hops of 5km+ @ 100 kbits.


What does "1 watt dBm" mean. Do you mean 1 dBm (1.3mW) or 1 Watt (30 dBm)? Presumably the former?


Can anyone figure out whether USG is Unix Systems Group or United States Government. (I think we're safe in assuming they aren't United States Gypsum (though, from my trips through Empire to Gerlach, that was the first thing that came to mind)). [Edit - if you read through the entire (epic and wonderful resource) article, United States Government is used where USG might be - so I think we are safe in assuming it is United States Government. tptacek, might be worth introducing the acronym at the beginning.]


I thought it was the US Government.


USG is a fairly widely used initialism for United States Government in some circles.



Applications are open for YC Winter 2016

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact