Ajedi32

Yes, attacking uninvolved third parties seems like a great way to pressure them to end the war, if by "end the war" you mean joining it on the other side and helping finish you off.

Traditionally that has been how countries tend to respond to military attacks on their soil. Iran's only saving grace seems to be that they're too ineffectual to pose any actual, serious threat to countries like France.

This has been Iran's strategy throughout the entire war. Them attacking France isn't any less rational than attacking, say, Qtar, or blockading non-US ships bound for non-US countries transiting the straight of Hormuz. They can't really fight back against the US directly, so instead they lash out indiscriminately against anyone or anything that's even remotely friendly to the US.

My not-even-all-that-new car just locks automatically shortly after you close the door, so there's nothing to "forget".

If building a gas turbine for the data center can be done quickly, then building a gas turbine to expand grid capacity can be done just as quickly. (Barring any poorly thought out, unprincipled regulations that would affect one but not the other.)

This is why it's important for government to be built on principles and law, not merely on popular opinion.

From a principled perspective, your neighbor shouldn't get a vote on what you do with your property, except to the extent that what you're doing directly infringes on their own property rights. (I emphasize directly. Noise is a valid complaint. "You're competing against me in the labor market." is not. "You're increasing demand for water in my area." is debatable.) Reducing the whole thing to a popular vote bypasses any such principles of freedom and instead institutes rule by the tyranny of the majority.

It's simply not realistic to expect the entire world rewrite its entire technology stack from scratch, starting at the transistor level on up every time there's a new industry innovation in security or performance.

LLMs might make this somewhat easier, but you're still going to have to deal with backwards compatibility and legacy systems. Completely eliminating the use of architectural cornerstones like x86 or HTTP or even PHP across the entire industry isn't going to happen anytime soon, let alone overnight, especially if the only argument for doing so is "we could design this better if we implemented it from scratch".

If you want access to the whole internet and not just part of it, it has to be "one size fits all users". (At least with how the internet works currently.)

The root certs may have signed other intermediaries that are still trusted.

Is the increased value coming from you? Or from the tool they purchased to improve your efficiency?

A dump truck driver doesn't necessarily get paid more than a taxi driver, just because he's hauling more material. It's all about the value you personally bring to the table, not the value of the tools you're using, unless it's a tool unique to you.

If the overall efficiency of the economy improves, "the same amount of money" can afford more things. You don't get a bigger share of the pie, but the pie gets bigger.

If you also want a bigger share of the larger pie you need to be one of the people driving its growth, merely being employed by one of the many competing companies that is purchasing more efficient tools from a third party vendor does not qualify.

Nothing's crossing the border in this case other than information. It's more like a guy on the French side of the border shouting over to a guy on the Swiss side, and the French government trying to regulate what the guy on the Swiss side is allowed to say in reply.

Regardless of what analogy you use, the point is that the company isn't in France, it's in Switzerland. It doesn't make sense for it to have to do anything to comply with French law, even if it's interacting with someone who happens to be in France.

They wouldn't be providing services in France, they'd be providing service in Switzerland to people from France. No different than if someone from France traveled to a bagel shop in Switzerland for a bite to eat. If France wants to make it illegal for French citizens to communicate with a foreign business in Switzerland, I don't see how it's the business's responsibility to enforce that.

> OpenAI did not lead this

Again:

> as part of our Patch the Planet initiative

To elaborate:

https://openai.com/index/patch-the-planet/

> We are introducing Patch the Planet

> [...]

> we will be partnering with HackerOne and Calif who are helping us take our efforts further with vulnerability triage, coordinated disclosure, and additional focused vulnerability discovery efforts

Calif found the vulnerability while working under an initiative lead by OpenAI, using publicly available AI tools developed by OpenAI.

> Calif identified a critical flaw using GPT‑5.6 Sol as part of our Patch the Planet initiative

They found a vulnerability and reported it; isn't that a good thing? Are you suggesting it would be better to just not look for vulnerabilities, hoping that if nobody knows they exist, they can't be exploited?

I thought that logic had been widely discredited in the security community long ago.

Hmm, yeah maybe they tried to add pipeline exports to that figure without realizing the figure already included pipeline exports? Pretty boneheaded mistake if that's what happened.

Other possibility is that that Kplr article you linked is outdated; it doesn't have a date listed on it so it's hard to tell. The graphs do go up to September though so it can't be that outdated...

Kpler is a commercial data broker, not a political institution; they have no incentive to lie to their customers. Where are you seeing the article double counting ship transfers? The article doesn't try to do any math, it just cites Kpler. If 8.5Mb is current pipeline capacity, is it possible there could be other overland shipments making up the remaining 1.5Mb?

Something's not adding up. Surely demand for oil is not so inflexible as to sustain such greatly increased prices at pre-war levels of supply, right? Has demand for oil increased since the start of the war for some reason? Or is there another factor beyond the Iranian blockade now driving the entirety of the reduction in supply? The Russia-Ukraine war?

I wish there were a way to filter links and reshares out of my feed completely.

Yes, if you're okay with doing away with the concept of zone delegation beyond the top level domains, you can make proof of ownership a lot simpler and just validate directly with the registries.

If you want to keep zone delegation, your proof of ownership PKI is going to end up having to solve many of the same problems DNSSEC tries to.

And the thing is, once you have a secure, automated way for websites to prove ownership of a domain, the necessity of trusting a bunch of third party CAs to validate that information for you starts to become questionable.

Yes. That would fall under the "some kind of similar PKI" category I mentioned, as you'd still need some kind of PKI to secure the RDAP connection. (Perhaps that PKI could be simpler than full DNSSEC, but it would have to solve a lot of the same problems.)

I don't see how you can have actual "proof of domain ownership" without secure DNS, or some kind of similar PKI. Right now they don't check for proof of domain ownership at all, just whether you have temporary, de facto control of the DNS record or the network it points at. This usually works well enough, but won't do anything if a MITM attack occurs on the server side rather than the client side.

So is the real collusion here the fact that an index like that exists? Why are prices set by a centralized index rather than just normal supply and demand? (Genuinely asking; egg markets are far outside my area of expertise.)

So after the surge in prices from normal market forces, they tried to keep prices up by placing high bids on eggs that they never intended to actually purchase. This briefly worked, then the market re-asserted itself and prices cratered. Now, after the fact, the justice department is investigating the bidding shenanigans. Is that a fair summary of the situation?

I guess the thing I'm confused about is how bidding above market rates for eggs didn't just result in these companies being stuck with a bunch of eggs that they grossly overpaid for? How did the scheme actually work?

Yeah, checking from multiple perspectives is a good idea, but still ultimately a band-aid over the top of a flawed system. A properly engineered solution would need to ultimately come down to cryptographic proof of domain ownership (whether through DNSSEC, or something similar). Even RPKI still seems a little too indirect for my tastes (it fixes BGP attacks but potentially leaves the door open to other forms of domain hijacking).

Maybe in practice this is good enough, but the security nerd inside me rebels at how sloppy the whole thing feels.

The problem here is that one side of the political debate now uses "hate" as a synonym for "political opinions I disagree with". The political rhetoric has gotten so out of control that it's making it difficult to have a civilized discussion about anything, even topics that aren't inherently political (like a freaking flying car that does 0-60 in 0.8s!).

"No it's not sad, <I disagree with his politics>." really just proving GP's point imo. Imagine if you couldn't post a thread about Microsoft products on HN without republicans feeling the need to jump in to talk about how much they hate Bill Gates for his donations to Kamala Harris's campaign in 2024. It's really tiresome.

People are able to make a lot of money there because it's a great country.

The "pin to a wall" part uses fans, not the cold gas thrusters. It can probably stay there until the battery runs out. The gas thrusters are only needed if you want to go 0-60 in .8s (with the Thrust version), or if you want to fly (with the Rocket version). Probably those only last a few seconds before the air tanks need to recharge.

I don't think it works like that. I can't just write "By reading this comment, you have agreed to pay me $100." and expect that to be legally enforceable unless you explicitly agreed to a contract to that effect in advance before reading the comment.

I could write "If you don't agree to pay me $100, I reserve the right to block your future access to my comments." (Which is what a ToS is.) But that's not a license agreement.