XMPPwocky

Why does it matter how well-written it is? Shouldn't it just matter if the points are valid or not?

Ignoring the fact that the value of the use of atomic bombs against Japan is heavily debated to this day...

Can you think of anything that might have changed from 1945 to 1981 in terms of geopolitics, such that the use of nuclear weapons by the United States might have led to some sort of global thermonuclear war? In other words- and, excuse me, I'm not very familiar with the history here- was there some other nuclear "superpower" that was around during the 1980s which could, quite easily, destroy all major American population centers, and by all indications would if the U.S. used nuclear weapons against it? And did this other superpower develop its nuclear capability before 1945, or after 1945?

And might there have been some difference in the power of nuclear weapons between Fat Man/Little Boy and those deployed in the early 1980s? That could also make a difference, here.

Any insight here would be greatly appreciated- otherwise it sounds like a really dumb idea to discourage using nuclear weapons against Russia in the 1980s, and I don't know why anybody might want to make that harder.

What would you estimate the ratio of, say, the highest award ever granted in the US for damages due to personal injury to the CIA's annual budget is?

Scientific notation is OK.

SECURITY ERROR

This comment by /u/XMPPwocky cannot be displayed because of a security problem with your device. If this error persists, reinstall your operating system or replace your device.

Technical details: "An enclave could not be verified due to a problem with its digital certificate" (E_BAD_ENCLAVE_SIG).

Logging info:

Local: Success (monotonic counter 5 increment OK)

Remote: Success (200 OK in 0.113s)

> The NYU app scraping modality could easily do the same thing

So could any browser extension with the ol' "read and modify your data on \*" permission. Or any browser. Or any third-party Facebook client.

There is a difference between being technically capable of doing a thing and actually doing the thing- especially in cases where the software authors are well-known and relatively easy to hold accountable. To say otherwise is a little bit goofy!

What's annoying is there's no real reason it has to be harder to stream through an FPGA- it's largely just that the ecosystem and FPGA vendor tooling is so utterly garbage that installing it will probably attract raccoons to your /opt.

Also note Xilinx's next-gen parts have dedicated VLIW "AI accelerators" (full hard CPUs!)

Annoyingly, there are 3 major related limits for Intel mobile CPUs- thermal, power (both an instantaneous, absolute max limit and a set of "okay you can use 25W for up to 5 seconds but then have to stop" limits), and current.

Within that envelope, the CPU can boost up to its max turbo frequency when needed.

Why would it be related to the Cortex A72? It's just going to have a bus coming off it, right? It's got no idea what PCIe even is. The problematic bit would seem to be the PCIe controller/root complex on the SoC.

Ceilings, and (knowing when satellites are passing overhead) when things need to be under ceilings.

Do you? The skills involved in VR and exploit dev don't necessarily mean you're good at opsec.

> The climate has been changing for thousands of years, people used to live on the bottom of the North Sea. You would be able to walk from mainland Europe to the UK.

In the winter, my house was cold. In the summer, it became hot. The next winter, it got cold again. Now my house is on fire. But it's fine, because it's just becoming hot again. The temperature of my house is always changing, you see.

> The best experts basically all rely on subsidies for their livelyhood.

What's a good neutral source you'd recommend, then?

> Furthermore, we can only measure and calculate properly for a couple of decades.

Says who? And measure and calculate what?

> And finally, don't you see the biblical theme of your message?

what

Do you apply this same reasoning to people whose housing, food, and healthcare are all put at risk if their employer decides they don't like them?

Seems like you're concerned about what's mostly a hypothetical when done by the state today- but probably hundreds of millions of people in the US alone are being coerced to do things they don't want to under threat of losing the exact things you're worried about. And in a lot of cases, what's one big thing mitigating that coercion? The very social safety nets you're worried about!

Yes, that's what I said, and why I was asking!

What does the OpenPGP format bring to the table, BESIDES HAVING A COMMONLY AVAILABLE IMPLEMENTATION IN GNUPG?

Have you looked?

Right, so why talk about the standard when you mean, specifically, GnuPG?

If you want an explanation of why GnuPG is dangerous for anything besides email, let me know. But parent post was very specifically NOT about GnuPG- it was about OpenPGP.

What does OpenPGP bring there? At least GnuPG has the benefit of being a tool that's present on many system and which is capable of verifying signatures.

If you're not using GnuPG, you can pick any format you want! What does OpenPGP add? Everything I can think of is a negative.

What is a good non-email use case for the PGP format?

Sorry- my argument must have been very easy to misunderstand.

My point is that the marginal cost of a hobbyist user, who receives no support, is approximately zero. At no point did I say developing Fusion must have been cheap or easy! What I was trying to say is that those costs are unrelated to the number of hobbyists using the software- Autodesk does not need to hire extra engineers to let me use Fusion. (Support is the big catch here- but I don't expect support from a free tier!).

This is distinct from, for example, a mass-produced bicycle- there, yes, you still have NRE up front (design, hopefully testing, molds/tooling...), but a significant part of the cost of each bicycle is related to the cost of the input materials plus labor. That's not the case with software! With software, practically everything (again, support aside) is a sort of NRE- it's a fixed cost, no matter how many copies you make. Thus, if you somehow definitively knew that a particular customer will not pay for your software, and that their usage of it has benefits for you (greater adoption, the chance to convert them (or their employer) to a paid user later, etc) it would make sense to allow them to use it without paying- the cost to you is ~0 (mostly just bandwidth), but the benefit is non-negligible.

This is not true for a bicycle. If somebody cannot pay for a bicycle, and I am manufacturing bicycles, it generally doesn't make sense to give them a free bicycle unless I'm getting something else out of it that's worth at least as much as the cost to build one additional bicycle - i.e. the cost of parts and labor. But note that the cost to design the bicycle is not part of the calculation there- because it doesn't depend on how many bicycles I build from that design.

The distinction between rival and non-rival goods is very interesting, and I don't blame you at all for not understanding it. It can be counterintuitive!

Does that make more sense? Again, sorry if I was unclear!

I can't find that comment for context- wouldn't a commercial license be paid (and home-use might be, too, considering they split it out from "free")?

One thing I want to point out here is that (books aside), paint and bicycles are physical, rival goods- there are only so many bicycles, and creating a new bicycle means significant resources and manpower need to be used.

F360 is not that- if Autodesk somehow magically knew whether an individual was willing to pay $500/year for a subscription, there'd be little reason for Autodesk not to give everybody who can't afford it F360 for free.

Take somebody like me, for example. I am not going to buy a F360 subscription. But I want to learn CAD. (I'm familiar with OpenSCAD...but also familiar with its limits.) Previously, I was torn between FreeCAD and Fusion; now FreeCAD is clearly the best option for me.

So now I'm going to have FreeCAD experience, not Fusion experience. And any designs I release will be FreeCAD files, not Fusion files. And if somebody else happens to ask me for CAD help, I can't help them if it's Fusion, but I might be able to if it's FreeCAD. And any bugs I run into in FreeCAD, I might help fix.

This seems clearly worse for Autodesk than a world where I picked Fusion because of their hobbyist-friendly licensing. Not much worse! But worse.

The choice for me is not between paying Autodesk and not paying Autodesk. I'm not paying $500 annually no matter what! The question is whether Autodesk lets me use Fusion for my hobby/personal products, at no cost to them, or whether they push me towards a competing ecosystem. The latter seems like it makes everyone worse off, at least in my particular case- that's what makes this so disappointing.

Which generation? Is that based on survey data about beliefs about intellectual property law in different age groups, or is it more of a hunch you have?

FPAAs don't really exist as products you can buy, as far as I know (unlike FPGAs, which are a very mature technology to the point that I suspect there's nontrivial (say, >5%) odds the average HN reader owns something with a FPGA in it somewhere.))

> There is a long term correlation with solar activity(CME's,Sunspots,Solar flares) that can attest for large climatic swings of the past.

Based on 2020's level of solar activity, would you expect it to be hotter or colder than it actually is?

Because from what I've seen, you'd expect it to be colder.

Which means something else is causing the temperature rise.

So why bring up solar activity at all?

Thanks for the answer!

"That worked great"- what's "that", here? It sounds like you're implying that he tried to listen to protestors and address their grievances, and so was driven out of his home- is that roughly what you meant?

If so, what are some of the ways he tried to address those grievances?

This is not the same thing as me saying "that is good and I'm glad it happened", to be clear! Just ... if he didn't actually do what the parent post suggested, I don't see how that response is relevant.

The interesting thing about this argument is it's independent from whether or not the protests are justified. If there's riots, well, only option is to start moving in and dispersing the crowd. If you appease them, they'll just ask for more.

In light of this, would you say the same thing about the treatment of protestors in Hong Kong? If not, why not?

AFAIK, the mechanism of action of paper surgical masks, and cloth masks, is not by catching particles of that size, but primarily by catching larger droplets and by disrupting forward airflow on exhalation. So their usefulness for smoke would seem questionable.

Where are you getting this stuff about Windows from? Everything I can find says it's because of BIOS limitations, nothing to do with Windows; see https://www.devever.net/~hl/usbnkro , for example.

Is that something you know to be true, or something you heard from the companies?

Remember, there's a history of just this kind of stunt with these particular actors. So, personally, I'm very wary of taking their statements at face value!