strstr

Gives me some strong cat asking to be let out energy ala [0].

[0] https://pbfcomics.com/comics/sir-leopold/

Not sure what you mean? You could still fine the corporation, or block/revoke approvals.

Unsafe/stupid driving is accepted as inevitable and rarely enforced against for human drivers (outside accidents). Not a good thing, but definitely the reality these days. Tbh, it’ll likely be much easier to enforce rules on a self driving car, since almost everything is tracked and recorded. Every mistake can be scrutinized for a self driving car, in ways that would never be required for human drivers.

This article is making a mountain out of a molehill.

The crux of the article seems to be “wow! If you block traffic it really adds up to wasting people’s time!”. Duh. Lots of things do this, many less valuable than driverless cars.

As an example, Seattle’s drawbridges sound like much more of a disaster than whatever time is being wasted by Cruise vehicles. Sailboats can’t even make it under the Fremont bridge, so every rich dude with a boat blocks traffic (including multiple bus lines) for 10 min when they sail by.

GCE passes through GPU hardware instead of using vGPU. (I believe, but not 100% certain this is universal for all GPU types.)

Wouldn’t this not be carbon capture if the end product is biodegradable? Naively, I’d expect this to be carbon neutral at best.

In 2020 I bought a Netatmo CO2 sensor, since it was cheaper than the alternatives. Not sure how accurate it was, but it seemed accurate enough (450-500 outside).

Live in the PNW with only electric heating/stove/oven. Cracking the window very slightly was enough to keep CO2 relatively low (600-800). Had to crack the window more when the temp is around 70 outside, less when the temp delta is higher (cold or warm).

Eventually ditched the device once I understood how to keep CO2 low. The cloud integration was creepy. I could tell when my wife or I went to bed based on CO2 spiking near the sensor.

Pretty long and haven’t read it all, but worried about a sort of survivorship bias. You’ll see more cards from games that go on longer with the methodology described.

That and some spicy uncontrolled multiple-hypothesis testing.

Seems like a pretty unreliable analysis as a result.

1:1’s are your time to make you more effective via your manager.

Don’t only surface what you did (I view that as the boring back up conversation). Surface what you need. Surface challenges you’ve faced. Surface decisions that are on your horizon. Surface what you want.

Your manager can’t read your mind, but you have 30m to help them act as if they can.

Physical therapy?

Zero-sum assumption and lack of returns on bets seem suspicious.

Betting is a bad deal for everyone in this model (even the rich person) since each coin flip is variance for no expected gain. Kelly betting implies you should bet nothing in this game.

Something with two wheels and a handlebar (bike/scooter).

A better WebMD already exists, and it’s called UpToDate. It’s target audience is doctors, but you can pay ~$20 for a week as a consumer (you can pay less per week for longer also). It’s a great resource, and has a summary of the most recent consensus view on common medical topics. It doesn’t expand pages out with fluff or talk down to you, though it won’t have too much info about assumed medical fundamentals. You can pull the citations and look up the references.

Reading it makes your appreciate why WebMD exists. Not everyone wants to read highly technical medical jargon and read medical papers. But the HN audience probably has a lot of folks that are down to do that, and I strongly recommend UpToDate for those that do. I use almost every time I have a substantial new issue that requires a physician visit.

SGX’s per-chip private keys are the “flag” in Intel’s unintentional CPU vulnerability CTF.

Those keys have been popped so many times.

Reading the original they explicitly state that side channels are out of scope for their threat model. As a result, designed a system that was essentially maximally vulnerable to side-channels (and other architectural issues). It’s really hard to trust SGX as a result. Otoh, if I were in a bind and needed to do trusted computation on an untrusted host, are there really other options that don’t suffer similar (or worse) issues?

Alphaphoenix - high quality science content that doesn’t feel overly simplified. https://youtube.com/c/AlphaPhoenixChannel

Applied Science - impressive reproductions of existing science https://youtube.com/c/AppliedScience

Stuff made here - impressive maker/engineering projects https://youtube.com/c/StuffMadeHere

Explosions & Fire - (and related channels) Home explosives synthesis. Fun explosions. Notable for it’s honest look at how science works (and doesn’t work). Low production value. https://youtube.com/c/ExplosionsFire2

-deleted-

Well, that’s what I get for skimming poorly. They did just slap an off the shelf infineon chip in, so yeah, real EKcert from a legit vendor.

I skimmed and had some wishful thinking that they just made a cheap off the shelf chip do the job of a TPM2 by slamming in an existing TPM2 implementation.

Check out this: https://google.github.io/tpm-js/

Superficially, you should be able to make a fully compliant TPM2 on your own like this (unless I’m missing something). The one gap would be that your EK Cert would have to be self signed.

Used dice, and got very low "randomness" both times (8% and 25%). Hand-rolling got me 70%. Something feels off.

PCI-passthrough support for gaming is pretty niche (I say this having set it up myself), and I can understand vendors not wanting to support it. Those support tickets would be a pain.

Gaming VMs are likely going to die anyway, at least for competitive gaming. Virtualization is just too powerful a tool for cheating. Many anti-cheats already ban it.

The motherboard wasn’t broken per se, you just were trying to split an iommu group apart, which is insecure (and thus unavailable by default).

From what I recall the stagefright vulnerability might be a good example.

Pretty sure this is something specific to “modern” places. I’m on vacation for a few days in the middle of nowhere Alaska and most of these questions are easier to answer for this spot than where I live.

A few are harder “After the rain runs off your roof, where does it go?” (What’s rain? It’s -30f here…). Also the invasive species questions (Do any of them survive?)

Not sure if this is really much different, but superficially it looks like its up ~45% (5.5 billion from 3.8)

I believe tares is the optimal word (according to shannon entropy) from the game’s list.

Identifying a reasonable target runtime can be part of the problem. The longer they’ve been writing software, the more ambiguity I expect them to handle.

If the candidate wants to discuss performance, I’m obviously interested, but if they want me to serve a hint to them on a silver platter I’m just confused.

There’s more to an interview than algorithms (e.g. coding, communication), so it’s not a death sentence.

In the hundred or so interviews I’ve given, I’ve never had a candidate persist in forcing questions along these lines from the very start, even after I have turned the question back around at them. If you force me to give you hints out of the gate, something very weird is going on.

I’d turn that question back around at the candidate, unless it were for a junior candidate.

I’ll give hints if the candidate is struggling, but I won’t just come out and tell them something like this. If they pushed me hard enough at the start, I would tell them and then fail them on the algorithms/reasoning component of the interview.

Bunch of problems like this are in the book "Problem-Solving Strategies" by Arthur Engel [1], I believe even including this particular one. Fun book.

[1]https://www.google.com/books/edition/Problem_Solving_Strateg...

If you check english wikipedia, it lists “Concern” as a type of business structure that predominantly exists in Germany[0]. The word has be pulled into english, but it’s definitely not a commonly used english word, and it is likely pedantically inaccurate in reference to an American corporation.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concern_(business)