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

Would that help against a man in the middle that blocks the H3 traffic to snoop the URL when the client falls back to H2?

Every browser requires H2 connections to be encrypted so I don't think a MITM downgrading to it would reveal anything. Downgrading to H1 might do since encryption is optional there, but the proper way to prevent that is to submit your domains to the HSTS preload list so that browsers will always require encryption, regardless of protocol, no exceptions.

> The "Elon process" relies specifically to the goal of getting rid of all dependencies. Musk has spoken extensively about building things from the ground up and not relying on other vendors (in this example complex software dependencies). He says he wouldn't be able to build SpaceX competitively if he had just bought rockets or components.

That I cannot believe. He might have shifted the make-or-buy decisions, but both Tesla and SpaceX do a lot of outsourcing.


> That I cannot believe.

Note the "goal" there. SpaceX's only in flight explosion came after a strut (3rd party sourced) failed on S2, on the CRS-7 mission in 2015. They in sourced that, and haven't had many issues on ascent since then. They've also launched and landed some 500 rockets since then (165 this year) so ... at least they're walking the walk?


Stupid question, but is 404 the real designator of that city, or a pun towards the HTTP error code?

Edit: And what a great read, thank you!


Not a stupid question at all! 404 is the real, official designator (Factory 404) established in 1958, long before the web existed.

The coincidence with the HTTP error code is purely accidental, yet incredibly poetic—because for decades, this city literally could not be found on any public map.


I wonder why 404, any relation to 4 being similar to the word "death" in Chinese?


Yes,4 sounds similar to death in Chinese. But 404 was just a coincidence.


My first guess would be that they at one point decided to use numbers to designate locations instead of names, to make it easier for them to be secret (eg "codenames"). Then at one point someone figured that actually, lets not just thoughtlessly increment the numbers, but pick random numbers between 1-1000 so we add even more confusion. Kind of like Seal Team 6 I guess.


Can you say what hardware could do better? I.e. which kind of primitives do you miss, or would make it easier to develop safer software?


Bounds checking of pointers, C Machine kind of.

Solaris and Linux SPARC since 2015, for example.

https://docs.oracle.com/en/operating-systems/solaris/oracle-...

https://docs.kernel.org/arch/sparc/adi.html

ARM MTE, as another one,

https://learn.arm.com/learning-paths/mobile-graphics-and-gam...


These approaches can only detect linear overflows deterministically. Use-after-frees (temporal safety violations) are only detected with some probability. It's mostly a debugging tool. And MTE requires special firmware, which is usually not available in the cloud because the tag memory reservation is a boot-time decision.


Still better than status quo on most systems.

It is kind of interesting how all attempts to improve security are akin to arguing about usefulness of seatbelts when people still die wearing them.


CHERI, but that's just one example.


Lightning detection. You have a couple of ground stations with known positions that wait for certain electromagnetic puses, and which record the timestamps of such pulses. With enough stations you can triangulate the location of the source of each pulse. Also a great way to detect nuclear detonations.

There is a german club that builds and distrubutes such stations (using GPS for location and timing), with a quite impressive global coverage by now:

https://www.blitzortung.org


Someone compiled a list of blocked domains (by probing different DNS servers):

https://cuiiliste.de/

This is also how, for example, RT is blocked in Germany.


Here: https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/claude-code-best-pract...

claude.md seems to be important enough to be their very first point in that document.


Naw man, it's the first point because in April Claude code didn't really gave anything else that somewhat worked.

I tried to use that effectively, I even started a new greenfield project just to make sure to test it under ideal circumstances - and while it somewhat worked, it was always super lackluster and way more effective to explicitly add the context manually via prepared md you just reference in the prompt.

I'd tell anyone to go for skills first before littering your project with these config files everywhere


> In many European countries this can even reduce the usually robust protections you have as an employee.

Huh, where?


Huh, why would openly complaining about your job to your boss/HR be protected in a "just cause" regime?


Why would complaining reduce existing protections.


Your question makes no sense because nobody said this and if a protection can get reduced, then it's not a real protection, lol.


Reread the comment chain, because I literally quoted a comment saying that repeatedly voicing your dissatisfaction to your boss can reduce the robust employment protections in some countries in Europe.


> I literally quoted a comment

Bold claim considering you left off a key part of the quote.

It's not reducing the protections (change in law). It's reducing the protections you have. The qualifier you left out changes the meaning.


Where is "change in law" coming from? How could it possibly mean that in context?

Of course the meaning is "reducing the protections you have". And I'm challenging the notion that complaining or voicing dissatisfaction could do that in any European country.

Therefore I would like examples of countries where it is the case that simply complaining to your boss has any impact on protections you have.


> And I'm challenging the notion that complaining or voicing dissatisfaction could do that in any European country.

'any' ?

See "cooperative problems" [0], the EU-wide "duty of loyalty" for (not relevant directly here for internal complaints, but paints a bright line), and countless posts on socials of EU people getting let go for complaining in the workplace.

If this doesn't challenge your perception, then we're wasting time.

[0] https://businessindenmark.virk.dk/guidance/employment-and-di...


"Duty of loyalty" is obviously irrelevant here.

"Countless posts of people getting let go for whatever reason" is irrelevant too.

What protections did these people have that did not apply because they complained to their boss?


LOL!

Why did you conveniently skip over the first and primary exclusion for "cooperative problems" and "unfitness", which linked to the Danish Ministry of Employment's site?

> What protections did these people have that did not apply because they complained to their boss?

Is English not your native language? This question makes no sense. If the protection doesn't apply, then they never had it.

As for providing additional context,

1. "duty of loyalty" is something you probably weren't aware of. It sets a bright line, and would surprise people with your over-general view.

2. Dismissing social media posts [0] about claims of dismissal for complaining at the office that would satisfy your request... is bad faith.

[0]https://www.reddit.com/r/WorkReform/comments/vpsbp0/just_got...


“European countries this can even reduce the usually robust protections you have as an employee.”


This (GP) is different than phrasing of parent.


> the federal workforce excluding the postal service (which has actually shrunk, as a semi-private employer) has grown by about 1% per year since 2000

That's less than it seems though, given that the US population has grown with over 0.7% per year for most of those years.

https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/usa/uni...


> That's less than it seems though, given that the US population has grown with over 0.7% per year for most of those years.

So what? Why does government have to grow proportionally with the size of the population? This is not a given in any other organization.


You generally expect the size of an organization to scale with the scope of its activities, especially if its activities include "healthcare" and "building roads."


"Scope of activities", maybe, but there's no inherent reason that has to be equal the rate of growth in the population. You'd hope that government becomes more efficient over time.

Private organizations have profit constraints, and they're constantly striving to become more efficient, cut what doesn't work, and so on. Government has no such constraint.


To compare, Walmart employs over 2M workers, and as efficient as they are, they still need to scale with the size of their business scope. Whether it's a linear scale or a log scale, they need more and more people as they do more and more.

The fact that the same order of magnitude number of people can administer an entire country as the number of people that it takes to administer a bunch of stores is actually remarkable.


The government has become more efficient over time and its size as a percentage of the population has reduced as the population has grown.

Government does have a constraint like that - it has to remain solvent. A government as powerful as the United States has many tricks it can use to do that, but at some point even it cannot do anything it wants.


> Why does government have to grow proportionally with the size of the population?

It does not, and did not:

* https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CES9091000001


I'm responding to the parent's implicit assertion that the government should somehow naturally grow with the size of the population.

Arguing that it historically has not done so only makes my point. Nor is it an argument that government should not be smaller today.


Mandatory: We should build it in space and beam the electricity back to earth using electromagnetic waves. We could collect those using solar cells. And then get rid of the plant and use the sun instead.


Yes - exactly. No need for a Dyson sphere, or a man-made sun - just use the real sun and solar panels!


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

Search: