Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | seplox's comments login

> now many people need to consult the manual to figure out how to pop their hood.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but auto manuals haven't included such technical information for close to two decades.


Just checked my 2024 Toyota Rav4 manual, I can confirm it is there.

Page 393.

https://cdn.dealereprocess.org/cdn/servicemanuals/toyota/202...


It's in a section called "do-it-yourself maintenance" that's pretty much entirely just topping off fluids. It doesn't even include instructions for replacing the battery.

Are you sure on your timing?

Just asking coz whenever I try to talk about what computers could already do or when something was invented in the 1960s or 1970s I tend to start with "well 40 years ago..." and then I look at the calendar and notice that it's 2025 and I'm officially old now and 40 years ago was more like 60 years ago.

And my car in 2005 definitely had no such thing and it wasn't a 2005 model.


That article was incorrect when written and has since been retracted. The link now takes you to a rewrite that reaffirms Microsoft's commitment to TPM v2 and that reports Microsoft's current position that they reserve the right to break your computer if you install Windows 11 on unsupported hardware.


This comes across a little aggressive and braggy. Perhaps a better way to write it would be:

> I much prefer reading something that is imperfect but written by a human to something auto-generated. That feels as if we someone would say "I'm busy, talk to my agent instead."


Condescending to someone who speaks your language as a fourth language about their tone comes off as extremely rude and superior. A better way to write this would be:

""


As someone who rage-quit on the third question, I'm going to say that frustration is a likely experience.


If buying isn't owning, then pirating isn't stealing.


Indeed. If I had bought things that were disabled, I'd pirate them with impunity.


Or in other words:

If you submit personal information in your Prompts, it may be reproduced in the Outputs, but no one can tell whether it was you personally submitting the Prompts or someone else.


This was the same premise when AOL released an “anonymized” set of search data and it was easy to find the original people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_log_release


> Dormakaba started selling Saflok locks in 1988, which means that vulnerable locks have been in use for over 36 years.

Ok, my eyebrows are up. Authentication has grown so much as a field since then that I'm having trouble with the idea that this flaw has always been present. In fact, Saflok predates MIFARE Classic by at least five years. Perhaps all will become clear if a full technical disclosure is ever made available, but it seems like the authors are making an overstatement here.

https://unsaflok.com/


Our understanding is that the magnetic stripe version of Saflok (which indeed predates MIFARE Classic) is vulnerable to the same issues, just in a different card format.


Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

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

Search: