Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | Chu4eeno's commentslogin

Why do you view the judges as some superhuman unassailable truth oracles?

Your view is extremely dangerous, tbh., and rather anti-democratic.


Where did you get that from my comment? I simply said it's an incredibly difficult task for the public to rate judges.

Honestly, most judges are horrible. A vast majority are ex-prosecutors and are chronically biased against defendants' rights in criminal cases.


You can click on the docket button and see the entire thing...

Criminal court dockets don't include the discovery or the oral transcripts of each court hearing. They tell you almost nothing except the number of continuances that have happened.

I take it you don't believe in the "jury of your peers" either?

The thing with a jury is that there are motivated experts on both sides explaining the technical details in a (hopefully) easy to understand way, a judge to help ensure fair play, and an appeals process as an escape valve.

Where are any of those safety measures here?


Considering the accuracy of journalists in general (contentious subject, but the studies I've seen seem to confirm the gell-mann amnesia effect to some degree), I'd say AI Overview isn't bad at least.


This is the point I should have made. You've got more intelligence than the average human professional in the same role would give you.


... and annoying casting from `sockaddr` to either `sockaddr_in` or `sockaddr_in6*` while you pass around a socklen_t.

10 years ago I was all gung-ho about IPv6, but it's annoying at every level.


Why are you casting to sockaddr_in/6? The whole point of that system is that you can just pass around the sockaddr* without even needing to have a definition for sockaddr_in or sockaddr_in6. All of the socket API functions accept sockaddr*, and if you need to get the IP or port out then you use getnameinfo(), which also takes sockaddr*. There should be little reason to ever cast to either of those types in normal use. (I can think of one or two cases where you might, but they're not common.)

Having to deal with the separate socklen_t is mildly annoying, but you can just make a little struct that holds both.


Having 2 sockets for loopback or multiple interfaces is a huge pain


Bind to '::' and you can get v4 and v6 traffic on one socket.


Not on all OSes. And it's not all good to have one less socket, there are still issues with people not expecting v4 traffic on a v6-capable socket, like described here:

https://radar.offseq.com/threat/ipv4-mapped-ipv6-addresses-t...

If you want to handle two protocols, it is not unreasonable to use two sockets.


Doesn’t work for loopback (you have to listen externally )


It works fine for me on NixOS (Linux), with a recent kernel version and no weird config options - or at least I think so.


considering it has things like a turnstile "handler", I'm assuming it attempts to abuse the free chat interface.


I hope you're not 100% serious.

Otherwise you should switch to haskal since it makes logic errors and bugs mathematically impossible.


according to anthropic's red team not even the secret claude stuff they're holding back is able to weaponize vulnerabilities without simplifying (disabling mitigations etc).

so we might be lucky that the LLMs are able to find the vulnerabilities before they are able to weaponize them, giving defense a time window.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: