306 karma · joined April 5, 2009
> Obviously, I am deeply disturbed by these allegations. While significant context is missing from the incidents reported by The Information, I deeply regret ever causing anyone to feel uncomfortable. The fact is that I have been privileged to have worked with female entrepreneurs throughout my career and I sincerely apologize to anyone who I made uncomfortable by my actions. There’s no denying this is an issue in the venture community, and I hate that my behavior has contributed to it.
I wouldn't be surprised if Binary released an updated statement in light of this new apology and indefinite leave.
Specifically: The most important principle on HN, though, is to make thoughtful comments. Thoughtful in both senses: civil and substantial.
The test for substance is a lot like it is for links. Does your comment teach us anything? There are two ways to do that: by pointing out some consideration that hadn't previously been mentioned, and by giving more information about the topic, perhaps from personal experience. Whereas comments like "LOL!" or worse still, "That's retarded!" teach us nothing.
Yes, it's the company that owns Jeep. The company that has a demonstrated the security flaw. How different automakers responded to different security issues isn't related to this article or discussion.
> Also, note that my point - that auto makers mostly ignored Miller and Valasek, according to the article - would not include senators (unless said senators build cars, of course).
Senators may not build cars, but they can (and are trying to) force auto makers to take security seriously.
The argument in this comment chain has been whether this problem could get the attention it needed without such a dangerous publicity stunt. The fact that automaker and lawmakers were convinced to take action by less dangerous demonstrations shows that this stunt was not necessary.
"Second, Miller and Valasek have been sharing their research with Chrysler for nearly nine months, enabling the company to quietly release a patch ahead of the Black Hat conference."
"WIRED has learned that senators Ed Markey and Richard Blumenthal plan to introduce an automotive security bill today to set new digital security standards for cars and trucks, first sparked when Markey took note of Miller and Valasek’s work in 2013."
Specifically, "Claims that the NFL is using a tax exemption to avoid paying the tax due on these revenues are simply misinformed. The confusion arises from the fact that there is one small part of the NFL, unrelated to all this business activity, that is tax-exempt: the NFL League Office. The league office is the administrative and organizational arm of the NFL and does things like write the rules of the game, hire referees, run the college draft, negotiate the collective bargaining agreement with the players, conduct player safety research, and run youth football programs."
jspthrowaway2 was paraphrasing other comments on this page. When this article was newer, all of the top comments where about how terrible the design is. Here are some direct quotes from other comments on this story:
> the fact that this person is trying to promote this exact idea makes me ill
> I'm crying. Why is this the #1 story? And how can a person with such a hideous looking site give design advice?
> We're supposed to take design advice from a site that looks like a car accident? No thanks.
That being said, making an account is suprisingly easy and has its benefits.
> Co-founders Jerry Guo and Michael Waxman like to joke
> that Grouper is a Y Combinator-funded startup.
They're not actually claiming to be funded by Y Combinator. Betabeat's headline didn't mention YC either.The thing is, if the courts allow for the honeypots then people who want to download things that they DO have the right to a copy of can also be fined. There are plenty of freely (free as in both beer and speech) available works that people download via bittorrent. If Titan Media has masqueraded their porn as something that is freely available would you feel the same way?
I believe that the fitness function used for evaluating build orders does this. It is very difficult to accurately evaluate how good a specific strategy is at a specific point in time, especially when you have imperfect information about your enemy. The code used to decide which build orders survive almost certainly used heuristics.