harshreality

Surveillance on the internet is challenging to avoid, but internet surveillance and tracking doesn't extend to (outside-of-browser) local compute.

Are you confusing their comments about (paraphrased) "horrible but legal" (up to a point) sites like dailystormer, 8chan, and kiwifarms, with actual blatant phishing sites?

I find it very difficult to believe they won't remove sites involved in clear phishing or malware delivery campaigns, if they can verify it themselves or in cooperation with a security team at a company they trust. That's different from sites that are morally repugnant and whose members spew vitriol, but aren't making any particular threats (and even in cases where there are clear and present threats, CF usually seems to prefer to notify law enforcement, and then follow court orders, rather than inject themselves as a 3rd party judge into the proceedings).

kwatts_effective [kJ/s] * heating_time_minutes [min] * 60 [s/min] * COP = 4.184 [kJ/kg/K] * (T₁-T₀) [K] * gallon_capacity [gal] * 3.785 [L/gal] * 1 [kg/L]

6.6 kW, for... COP 4, T₁-T₀ = 30 [K] (lower value for warm climate), allowable 30 minute heating time, 50 gallon capacity. A cold climate could double that power requirement, or alternatively double the heating time.

It's a signal of disgust and rebellion against modern evil that companies do — they abuse attention, data-mine, etc. The clippy mascot represents something that, in contrast, may have been dumb and annoying, but was not actively evil. "Clippy just wanted to help."

(Land-constrained, as in, when buying two equivalent lots and building half-height buildings becomes less profitable than building a skyscraper or supertall, due to massive demand for high-floor views, combined with sky-high nearby lot prices.)

Point of trivia: apparently there are terms for each 100m of height: Lowrise -> Highrise -> Skyrise (Skyscrapers) -> Supertalls.

The repo as I and many other people cloned it has the first commit ("first commit", not "initial commit") at Oct 12 23:20 Z, and the "done" commit at Oct 15 19:37 Z.

A likely explanation is that pixelmelt squashed both commits at or after they put up the blog post, but didn't force-push the rewritten history to github until it hit HN and blew up.

Color printed books are expensive, but I think he chose the premium color print option rather than the standard color print option. You can try it out: https://kdp.amazon.com/en_US/royalty-calculator { pages: 432, dimensions: 7.5"x9.25" } Roughly $18 for basic color and $36 for premium color (which probably also means heavier, higher quality paper).

Amazon takes 40%. Barnes and Noble Press takes 45% for self-published books, and their printing costs are within a couple dollars. Compare to typical retailer+distributor costs of >50% while authors get <15%.

The economics of retail print publishing and logistics don't seem to work out at higher author royalty rates. Authors who don't want to give up 40% of list price always have the option to handle printing, shipping, and accounting themselves, selling on ebay or from their own website.

(to clarify, I wasn't talking about any git-specific hashes, just regular sha2/blake2b hashes of python, json, and font files. However, the two sha1 commit hashes in the git history match as well.)

That would provide a closer-to-original version of the ebook, rather than just a visually similar one.

That any of this is necessary at all is absurd. Hats off to anyone with the patience to bypass Amazon's DRM rather than giving up on the Amazon ebook ecosystem entirely.

It's not even a question of whether, in that particular case, AI will displace some forms of human labor, even if that causes a macroeconomic crisis where society needs to figure out a better way to operate in light of new AI-driven economic realities.

It's a simple question of whether internet bots are causing economic inefficiencies and mis-allocation of resources in the classical sense.

The bad bots, discussed in the article, are. AI scraping bots are not. All it takes to see this are all the mentions of fraud in this HN thread. Bad bots are, at their core, fundamentally fraudulent in how they interact with sites. That fraud is compounded into how companies realizing the extent of that fraud react: by hiding or lying to investors and boards, because the fraudulent bot activity has significantly altered market perception. Nothing about pure scrapers is fraudulent, regardless of whether their ultimate goals are good or bad for the economy or humanity, if that could even be known.

"Bad bots" would be ones that primarily support grift. They siphon money from advertisers, or get other people to waste advertising $, or game product listing metrics so that the bots' owners products get better placement, or so that other manufacturers' products get worse placement. They're not creating any new value; they're removing value from the economy by causing bad allocation of resources.

Sure, icons on the desktop, or just about anything in a file/app explorer window, require a double-click by default, because the lineage of the main desktop area is just a file explorer window without the window decorations.

I think it might be about stakeholders wanting the web to "feel" more native and interactive. Double-clicking to "go" feels too much like you're interacting with the web as if it's a file browser. They want it to feel more immediate?

In principle I'd prefer the consistency of double-click or double-tap everywhere, but I'm used to adjusting based on context. Wouldn't double-tapping annoy everyone who primarily uses mobile devices?

Even for phishing, doesn't it count for something that TOTP prevents asynchronous phishing (collect credentials on a fake site, try them in batches later)?

AI watermarking is adversarial, and anyone who generates a watermarked output either doesn't care, or wants the watermarked removed.

C2PA is cooperative: publishers want the signatures intact, so that the audience has trust in the publisher.

By "adversarial" and "cooperative", I mean in relation to the primary content distributor. There's an adversarial aspect to C2PA, too: bad actors want leaked keys so they can produce fake video and images with metadata attesting that they're real.

A lot of people have a large incentive to disrupt the AI watermark. Leaked C2PA keys will be a problem, but probably a minor one. C2PA is merely an additional assurance, beyond the reputation and representation of the publishing entity, of the origin of a piece of media.

As planes, they were terrible when introduced a decade ago, and mediocre now.

Too much functionality was promised too soon without adequate project management. Instead of modularity being the design philosophy for the NGAD, and shoehorned into the F-35 during production, it should've been the design philosophy for the F-35A/C from the start.

Too many compromises were made to make the three variants share a similar design despite radically different missions.

The F-35B should never have existed.

The parts commonality numbers say it all. Initially projected to be 70%, but when it neared production the actual commonality figure was 25%. I haven't seen that broken down, but I bet the F-35B is a large part of that.

That's not any more true.

1. Almost all physical libraries, including at universities, had shut down, and IA's efforts were to compensate for that. Supply of previously-purchased-for-public-use books had dried up overnight.

2. Normal 1:1 lending was not observed, but DRM was still applied. No books lent during that period were usable outside of a narrow window, without the end user intentionally circumventing the DRM which is a distinct crime and isn't trivial for the average computer user.

3. IA entered into dialogue with major academic publishers before implementing the emergency library. They published an opt-out address on their blog. That wasn't as visible to all publishers or independent authors as it probably should have been, but everyone knows if it had been opt-in instead, authors and publishers all would have reflexively refused, despite the unique situation. Mainstream publishers and most authors simply do not care if people can't access library books for a month or two. They would ban libraries if they could. They're so high on their intellectual property rights they think those can't be relaxed no matter what.

4. As far as I know, all NEL books were scanned PDFs, from donated library book collections. Casual readers don't read scanned books for entertainment. The idea that this significantly displaced kindle purchases, for instance, or lending of real ebooks from local libraries, needs a citation.

There's plenty of additional background here: https://blog.archive.org/national-emergency-library/

Eliminating uncertainty about whether a concert will sell out may be the primary reason.

Net ticket prices might be dictated by the performers and their agents, and the ticket agency might not have the ability to raise prices unilaterally, at least not by enough to stop scalpers.

There's another factor, or side-effect, that might be missed in explaining why an artist or their agent won't set prices higher, even when the artist has a history of having concerts sell out and tickets scalped: scalping is a symptom and sign of scarcity, and scarcity drives interest.

They probably want to set prices as high as possible while still having a high probability that tickets will sell out and make concertgoers panic-buy.

If an English variant is in your Accept-Lang: headers, I'd hope YT wouldn't auto-translate English titles.

The other thing that Google might properly use is account-specific language settings. But if they're using GeoIP as has been suggested, I agree they're doing it wrong.

From what I understand, it's affected by two things:

1. The regulatory side, driven by the size and complexity of the plane. That in turn affects potential number of passengers and typical hiring arrangement (pay-per-seat vs charter vs personal use). If you google best single-pilot aircraft, you'll see things like the hondajet, pilatus pc-24, and citation cj2/3/4. Nothing larger or more complex than that.

2. Insurance requirements for particular flights. If you're hiring out a plane to carry other people, you need a different kind of liability insurance. That insurance might require you to have two pilots even for a small plane (like a stereotypical primitive prop plane, or a previously mentioned small jet like hondajet or citation cj2/3/4) that might in other situations be legal to fly with a single pilot. Or, for someone like an executive with hefty personal injury insurance, that person's insurance might not cover them if they fly in a plane with a single pilot.

That's not to say that all "for hire" flying requires two pilots. Consider small prop planes for sightseeing, or skydiving, or island hopping the Caribbean. Unless something's changed recently, you won't have two pilots for those kinds of flights.

The reason I brought up personal insurance for passengers: CitationMax (certified ATP pilot who flies his parents around in their private jet) on youtube has mentioned that his father's personal/executive insurance requires him to fly with two pilots. Even when they had a cj3+, they added a contract pilot when his father was onboard. Now they have a citation longitude, which is large/complex enough that it can never be flown with only one pilot, even if no passengers are onboard.

On South Korea, you might want to consider this chart instead: https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/KOR/sou...

KOR's Fertility rate has been under 1.25 for two decades. It follows then that "stable" population can only be the result of three factors:

1. Pushing the population curve out through longer lives;

2. Immigration;

3. Time-effect offsets of the fertility rate; for instance, if it's the projected fertility rate of females born in a given year, it would take roughly 20-40 years for the fertility rate to have its effect on the population curve.