Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | sh-run's commentslogin

RP2350 adds secure boot and encrypted boot. I am working on a little hardware device for a CTF and selected it as my MCU so participants can't just dump the flash to grab the flags.

As a trail runner it’s been weird to watch. Nike ACG has been putting out some seriously good, cutting edge equipment. Ultrafly is a great shoe, as is the Pegasus trail for road-to-trail they’ve also got some neat cooling tech that I don’t have personal experience with.

Project Oregon left a bad taste in a lot of people’s mouth. It feels like right when they recovered their image with runners they are losing mass appeal.


Runners are not even like 20-30% of the buyers of such shoes I'd wager. Most people buying a cushioned On, Hoka, or Nike running shoe are just looking for a shoe that's comfortable and versatile

I think there’s actually a direct correlation of people wearing these athletic shoes, especially the really expensive fancy ones in public places and actually not being in shape. It’s pretty funny. People who are truly into athletics or generally wear those shoes only in the particular setting i.e. trail running, in the gym, etc., and then switch into normal shoes.

Most runners I know wear running shoes nearly the whole time.

They run in their new shoes, then switch them over to casual use as the cushioning starts to go.

And if you're a really keen runner, you'll have different shoes for each type of training (track, tempo, long and slow) and racing (track, XC, trail, mid distance, half to full marathon). So you end up with a constant flow of "worn but not worn out" shoes. Which you wear when not running...


There's not a direct correlation, but most Americans are not in shape. I run every other day. I use my last years Hokas where the foam and cushioning isn't good enough anymore as my walking shoes and use my current year ones for runs. Can't imagine that's uncommon

Exactly. And there is a lot of other alternatives in this space, check the guides at https://runrepeat.com/

The latest Vomero lineup, the Plus specifically was a MASSIVE hit in the road running community over the last year. Almost every member of my 100 person run club has a pair, some have 5+.

I think they should continue pushing ACG as a standalone apparal brand. they have good designs and could compete with The North Face and Patagonia in the streetwear/outdoor market

I agree with this.

I think they should make a range of climbing shoes to reinforce credibility on this market. Adidas has 5.10 and some pretty serious climbers (Janja Garnbret!) on their books. The competition (LaSportiva, Scarpa) is ripe for disruption.


I have such a love hate relationship with the tech. On one hand, I live on the edge of the mountains and can get away while on-call, set up my starlink and still be within SLAs if I got paged while out of service (weekend pages are fairly rare). On the other hand, I'm an amateur astronomer, for visual astro, it's not a huge deal, but I see how it could be for astrophotography (streaks) and obviously it's a problem for radio.

I live in Colorado, we have a "free-range" law that protects parents allowing their children to play outside unattended. It's a bit sad that such a law needs to exist, but I'm glad we have it here.

In our neighborhood it's very common to see kids (including mine!) outside doing things by themselves. We bike with our oldest son to school (he's 7), but plenty of other parents let their kids bike to school on their own. I think it helps that we live in a city with good pedestrian infrastructure and lots of green spaces. The whole city is better for it and I wish more US cities would do the same. My sister's neighborhood in a different state feels like a very fancy prison, nice homes, but you can't even go to a park without getting in a car.


Why was the law added in the first place? Just not creating a stupid law that prevents such restrictions is enough by default (it's legal unless it's formally illegal)


> Just not creating a stupid law that prevents such restrictions is enough by default (it's legal unless it's formally illegal)

Not practically true at all. Everywhere has child endangerment laws, and I would bet that the vast majority of them can be readily used to prosecute the types of behaviors the free-range laws are meant to protect.


I would assume that the state law protects parents against a city adding a restriction in their municipal code.


I don't like the sound of `--wet-run`, but on more than one occasion I've written tools (and less frequently services) that default to `dry-run` and require `--no-dry-run` to actually make changes.

For services, I prefer having them detect where they are running. Ie if it's running in a dev environment, it's going to use a dev db by default.


I might be misremembering, but the initial core series (core 2 duo/quad) was still a bit behind AMD's Phenom line. Core was definitely better than the old netburst architecture, but I don't really remember Intel regaining dominance until the core i series/AMD FX.

This was also like high school/college for me, so I could be way off.


I'm not a physicist, but I believe that's the exact insight that led to special relativity. It goes something like: If your moving at 1,000kmh next to a jet moving at 1,100kmh then the jet is moving at 100kmh relative to you. Eventually people realized those wasn't the case with light. No matter how fast the observer is, light still moves at 299,792,458m/s. Einstein figured out that if the speed of light is fixed despite relative motion, then time must slow down as you move faster. So from the perspective of a photon no time has passed since its departure.


Sure, 4chan is a cesspool, but what if I start a replacement? How does the UK block it? Do we end up with an allowlist only internet?


That's the thing, one day you won't be able to.

You'll only be able to connect to domains that have been bought with a state-issued ID and digitally signed. If you run afoul of the rules, you'll be taken down, fined, or worse.

The means to publish and consume will be taken from us.

"Trusted" computing. "You wouldn't download a car." "Think of the children". "Free speech allows hate."

Within a generation of complete and total control of communications, we will be slaves. Powerless, impotent, unable to organize, disposable fodder.

1984 is coming.


I've recently had a glimpse of that - buying my first .no domain required me to be registered on the Norwegian population register, and full digital verification. There was even a phone call with the registrar! Some of the other rules are bonkers too [1]:

- Each private individual may at any time subscribe to up to 5 domain names directly under .no

- Each organisation may at any time subscribe to up to 100 domain names directly under .no

[1]: https://www.norid.no/en/om-domenenavn/regelverk-for-no/


There's a reason we in Sweden has a nickname for Norway; "the last soviet state"


Is it wrong for Norway to protect its domain? They don't want the ".no" domain to be the target of "domain hacks" from people who have nothing to do with Norway.

So if you want a ".no" domain, prove that you are Norwegian, the limits are to prevent the kind of abuse we see in most other TLDs (domain squatting, etc...). All that seem reasonable to me. Some countries put less restrictions on their own TLDs, especially tiny countries with interesting TLDs which they see as a revenue source, that's fine too, but to each his own.

If you don't like it, use any of the generic TLDs. AFAIK, Norway doesn't put any restriction on them.


You're right, the Norwegian government can do whatever they want. And yes, the ability to stop domain squatting is a nice side effect. For me though, it was a pretty surprising process, and set of restrictions.

Life is full of tradeoffs and this is no exception. I quite like the .no TLD - I find it lends itself to fun product / side project names. It's just a pity that I'm limited to 5 with the .no TLD :)


The problem is that this causes problems when people then move out of Norway, which is not a need you can predict when choosing a domain. So yes, always choose gTLDs but that doesn't absolve .no from criticism.

The restrictions on not owning too many domains are reasonable if still too lax IMO.


You don't connect to domains, you connect to IPs. You can resolve a domain to an IP however you want. And IPs can be shared or change regularly.

The convention is use DNS to resolve domains and DNS providers play by some rules, but if enough people start to dislike the rules you will start seeing unsanctioned DNS services and the like.

Another option is for browsers to consult a p2p DHT (just use the one for torrents) for a special class of domains (eg. https://[pubkey].dht). This is similar to how Tor does this but in this case you don't need to hide your server location because presumably it's located somewhere where the laws favor you.

IP blocking is a very different type of problem and one that would require hiring China as a consultant. And still be only marginally effective.


What makes IP blocking so difficult, and why would China need to be brought in as a consultant? Does setting up such technologies exceed the capabilities or experience of Western engineers?


[flagged]


What was the point of the age check again?


> Do we end up with an allowlist only internet?

That's the best case scenario. Honestly we'll be lucky if we can even run "unauthorized" software that hasn't been digitally signed by the government on our own computers. Everything the word "hacker" ever stood for is coming to an end.


Right? It's such a foreign form of intelligence to me. I think the paper "What is it like to be a bat" by Thomas Nagel made me realize that I can't even imagine what it's like to be my next door neighbor, let alone a being that has senses that differ from mine. Helen Keller's mind must work in a greatly different way than yours or mine. When I think, it's in English. I visualize things. Smell, touch and taste are never really involved. It's like they are the lesser of senses and yet that's all she had. It's incredible.

Andy Weir in Project Hail Mary and Adrian Tchaikovsky in Children of [Time|Ruin|Memory] do a great job of describing what other forms of consciousness might be like, but still falls flat, I only really think in sight and sound.

What is it like to be a bat? I'll never know.


Blindsight by Peter Watts also discusses what can be intelligent but not conscious. In the current hypefest of LLMs it’s interesting to consider that they may be similar.


I was thinking the same. if there's anything that is what it is like to be an LLM (and I'm not saying that there is - in fact, I doubt it, while supposing that it is a possibility for future machines) I suspect it would be like this, but more so, and inverted: while Keller had some experience of an external world but no experience of language, the entire universe for an LLM is language, without any obvious way to suppose that this language is about an external world.


I think that LLMs might go through the reverse journey, being fluent in tokens (words-ish) and working backwards towards the physical reality we all inhabit.


i think the "problem" here is that for all of human history we have always been able to use mastery of language as a signal for intelligence and competence, of which LLMs are neither. it's possible this is even instinctual it's so ingrained in our concepts of "other minds". so we're going to have to get used to the fact that just using language well isn't enough to prove intelligence, certainly not consciousness.

which then begs the the question, what is the magic ingredient, on top of use of language, that we have that bestows these qualities?

and also the observation that whatever this ingredient is, it must be very difficult to measure or prove which is maybe why we stuck with the crude, but easy to wield, "use-of-language" test for so long.


Available to read online, I read it last year: https://rifters.com/real/Blindsight.htm


"We do not like annoying cousins." Yes, exactly. The, uh, confident fluency of LLM responses, which can at the same time contradict what was said earlier, reminded me exactly of that. I don't know if you've ever met one of those glib psychopaths, but they have this characteristic of non-content communication, where it feels like words are being arranged for you, like someone composing a song using words from a language they do not know. See also: "you're talking a lot, but you're not saying anything."


Hm. The contradictions specifically are a thing I notice in humans that I think are entirely normal[0]. But the early LLMs with the shorter context windows, those reminded me of my mum's Alzheimer's.

That said, your analogy may well be perfect, as they are learning to people-please and to simulate things they (hopefully) don't actually experience.

(Not that it changes your point, but isn't that Machiavellian rather than psychopathic?)

[0] one of many reasons why I disagree with Wittgenstein about:

> If there were a verb meaning 'to believe falsely', it would not have any significant first person, present indicative.

Just because it's logically correct, doesn't mean humans think like that.


The part that really gets ME about that thought, is that those glib psychopaths/sociopaths fill an important role in human society, generally as leaders. I'm sure we can all think of some prominent political figures who are very good at arranging words to get their audience excited, but have a tenuous connection to fact (at best). Actually factual content seems almost irrelevant to their ability to lead, or to their followers' desire to follow.

If that's the function which we can now automate at scale, it's not the jobs the machines will ultimately take; it's the leadership.


I don't think it's that strange. My thoughts and my physical sensations are separate, imaging a different body different senses isn't that much of a stretch. I speak English but I don't think in it, thoughts don't have a language.


I think that this is false, as in intersubjectively not true for the human experience. First, because our physical state has a huge influence on our thoughts, not just their content, but direction, "color."

Secondly, and more importantly, while some thoughts may not have a language (image memories, mental maps), others certainly do, they're narrative. I only speak two languages but well enough (English is my second language) that I can think in both, and often come to a point where I have to decide which it will be for this train of thought.

Shape rotators vs wordcels distinction strikes again, I guess.


Quite a lot of people have no inner voice, others no inner imagery, others no inner unsymbolized conceptual thinking (cf all of Hurlburts research).

We all use very varied modalities of thought! It's as rich as how different we look or how different we cook.


Having no inner voice, imagery, or whatever seems to be poorer rather than richer experience to me. I don't think the existence of deaf people invalidates the importance of music to human experience.


I don't think a deaf person's inability to listen to music with their ears makes them incapable of depth and clarity of thought, no.

I don't think people who aren't hard of hearing necessarily have particularly deep or clear thoughts simply because they listen to music with their ears either. It's very easy to confuse correlation with causation.

(I've specified "with their ears" because deaf people can perceive music through other means than the cochlea + cochlear nerve.)


Nearly every post that uses exclamation marks like this is off-putting. Fake enthusiasm is creepy. There is no way you are enthusiastic about people having no inner voice.


Of course there is. Maybe they are one of those people. I know multiple people who say they have no inner voice the way I experience it and I don’t get it, but yes they are enthusiastic about saying that they can still think perfectly well!


Do you have an inner monologue, out of curiosity? Because I absolutely think in English.


Based on the fact that people speaking different languages can lack basic abstract concepts or reason about them very differently, I think thoughts do have a language or at least often follow a language.

Here's a link to a transcript of a lecture with some very interesting examples: https://irl.umsl.edu/oer/13/

A quote as a sample: So let me tell you about some of my favorite examples. I'll start with an example from an Aboriginal community in Australia that I had the chance to work with. These are the Kuuk Thaayorre people. They live in Pormpuraaw at the very west edge of Cape York. What's cool about Kuuk Thaayorre is, in Kuuk Thaayorre, they don't use words like "left" and "right," and instead, everything is in cardinal directions: north, south, east and west. And when I say everything, I really mean everything. You would say something like, "Oh, there's an ant on your southwest leg." Or, "Move your cup to the north-northeast a little bit." In fact, the way that you say "hello" in Kuuk Thaayorre is you say, "Which way are you going?" And the answer should be, "North-northeast in the far distance. How about you?"


That is a fairly contested topic, and most linguists today don’t believe that “speakers of some languages lack basic abstract concepts”.


Children of Time/Ruin great two books. Highly recommend them if you like SciFi and animal behavior.


The article is one sided, but still mentions that biking is up:

> Despite this, there’s a noticeable rise in biking trips while pedestrian activity is dwindling as a portion of overall trips.

They cite StreetLight Data as their source. Per GCN (which cites the same source)

> bicycle trips in the US have increased by 37% from 2019 to 2022

GCN is obviously also going to have some kind of bias, but the TTI article clearly does as well.

https://www.globalcyclingnetwork.com/general/news/in-the-us-...


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

Search: