skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>>Hot take: rapid acceleration and braking are symptoms of bad driving

I might not fully agree with that (that may be what makes it hot take:)

I've been driving 30 years now, which means nothing (I firmly disagree with notion that "driving a long time" is the same as "driving well" or "being experienced":).
I've taken about half a dozen safety driving courses though, and another half a dozen advanced driving courses, which hopefully might count for something - intent if nothing else. I'm trying to always be learning, practicing, paying attention to something when I'm driving - whether observational practices, state of mind, or particular skills in snow or rain etc.

I would call myself a very defensive, occasionally aggressive driver. I don't think opposite of defensive is aggressive, or that safe and defensive are same as slow. I think opposite of defensive is offensive. I try to be acutely aware of the conditions, traffic, situation, and risk - there are few people who are as paranoid about vision obstructions as I am (e.g. kid jumping behind parked car in a residential neighbourhood etc). I also try to be predictable - just like UI/UX shouldn't surprise user, I don't think I should surprise fellow drivers :). I am generally considered by friends and family to be annoyingly cautions, safe, observant, usually slow driver.

But I absolutely positively do undertake rapid acceleration and rapid braking at times, and most of the safest drivers I know do. My experience is that safest drivers are active drivers.

There's myriad different reasons to undertake rapid acceleration and braking, under myriad different circumstances and intents. But I am terrified of the future where insurance and police algorithm put a straight equation sign between them :-/
Interesting.
Thank you for the link.

Browsing through the code, it appears that they have at least opens
sourced many components.

It does not seem easy to "compile" combine them coherently them into an ISO and install.
(ok usb stick, whatever is best these days)

Also surprised to see Java and Scala, Python and C++,
I do think that is cool.
Envy has its uses. It reveals what you want. It's a good thing to know yourself and what you want out of life.
Except many companies respond to the cookie law with a cookie consent popup that violates the law (by making opt-out harder than opt-in).

Could we really have predicted from the "Law of Unintended Consequences" that companies would respond not by tracking less nor by giving people an easy way to opt out, but with a cookie consent popup that is not compliant and also really annoying to their visitors?

This is better explained by business operators being ignorant of the actual law and being ignorant of the UX impact.
Maybe they got word of the Apple - Google deal and this is just a desperate move to capture the market before openAI/chatgpt becomes a distant memory.
I assume they just don't care about exceptions, and just correlate past data to actual claims to adjust their actuarial tables. But to your point, maybe that also penalizes non-aggressive things that result in accidents.
> If a politician wants to raise taxes, wellfare, or nurses' salaries, the opposing arguments are more often than not economic in nature, and rely on the invisible hand.

Interestingly, the arguments for increasing salaries also rest on the invisible hand-like assumptions that higher wages make workers better/happier.

If you want to see arguments on these topics without much or any market based arguments I’d recommend looking into Soviet, Nazi or Maoist writings.
We'll all be on the beach at that point collecting our universal basic income right?
1. Who cares? I use iTerm2, Alacritty and Rio and they all work very well. Programmers don't have trouble installing alternative programs.

2. I remember the XFCE4 Terminal using Ctrl-Shift-C and Ctrl-Shift-V for copy/paste and liking it, no more SIGINT by mistake. But IMO a minor gripe, you can remap keys for copy/paste in most self-respecting terminal emulators anyway.

3. I agree on that but passwordless sudo saved my sanity and I don't care anymore. If I install a virus then I had all the troubles coming and I'll take responsibility. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Thanks. The 7950X doesnt have a non X variant. So it seems the non X variant chips are basically doing the same - giving you lower clocks for lower wattage with an option to tinker at your own risk for pushing the chip as those are not as good as the X variants.
So the problem is that the legislator did not expect companies to be even worse assholes than they already were...?

Laws are not borne in a perfect state; very much like programs, sometimes you need a few versions to see how the system actually works in practice and fix a few bugs. The fact that v1.0 has such bugs is not a good reason to just give up, nor it's an indication that the programmer is bad at programming.
You can track the number of visits without using cookies, but its practically impossible to track the number of unique visitors without using cookies.

The number of unique visitors is a very useful metric (both in itself, and combined with the number of visits).

The EU has made it impossible to track this simple and harmless metric without inconveniencing all users with awful UX.

Under the GDPR / ePrivacy Directive, ANY user-based unique identifer used for advertising, analytics and tracking will trigger the need for consent.

---

General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)

Article 4(1) defines personal data as "any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person ('data subject'); an identifiable natural person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that natural person."

Article 6(1) outlines the lawfulness of processing and states that processing is only lawful if and to the extent that at least one of the following applies: "the data subject has given consent to the processing of his or her personal data for one or more specific purposes."

---

ePrivacy Directive (Directive 2002/58/EC)

Article 5(3) requires prior informed consent for the storage of or access to information stored on a user's device: "Member States shall ensure that the storing of information, or the gaining of access to information already stored, in the terminal equipment of a subscriber or user is only allowed on condition that the subscriber or user concerned has given his or her consent, having been provided with clear and comprehensive information, in accordance with Directive 95/46/EC, inter alia, about the purposes of the processing. This shall not prevent any technical storage or access for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network, or as strictly necessary in order for the provider of an information society service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user to provide the service."
> The issue is that enforcement is slow, not that the law is badly written.

The enforcement/implementation of a law is so deeply entwined with the text that it's deceptive to separate them.

If a law is written in a way so as to make enforcement hard, or if the government doesn't have the resources to quickly and consistently apply it, then it's a bad law because it enables weaponized targeted/selective enforcement of a new law that wasn't present before.
Oh, no. Anyway...
it is pure HN that there's so many people commenting who

1) didn't bother to read the article

2) didn't bother to read any previous articles and so have continually spread nonsense about what the regulations actually required

3) defending all the companies that decided to be fuckwits with barrages of notices to users instead of actually sincerely trying to reduce their creepy nonsense and then - if anything was left that required disclosure - explained it honestly
The thing is, the consequences seem to be very much intended. The consequences of forcing companies to be transparent about tracking, and hopefully letting the users start voting with their wallets as they get annoyed by the omnipresent "We Value Your Privacy"-popups (which is very ironic considering all the dark patterns et al that are used to have users get tracked).

If nothing else, at least now people know just how much they've been tracked. One can only hope that this increased consciousness would help people to choose services that don't track people. For example Hacker News doesn't need tracking cookies nor a cookie popup, and it seems to be doing just fine, even in terms of the law ;)
This is an interesting solution. My question would be, why couldn't they just point a camera out into the street? That would have some more randomness.
it would be horrible regulation if you tell how to comply instead of telling what to comply with.

as written elsewhere (since you obviously didn't read anything) your proposed solution would be just fine. But people opted out of impmenting it that way since it would yield less profit.
You could say the same thing about computers, but you are comfortably sitting in front of one of them. Previously you were probably sitting in a public transportation vehicle.

How do you personally distinguish between "this is an apocalyptic mistake" and "this is a step in the right direction" ?
> Companies could easily avoid any cookie banner. Just don’t track.

Well, then, the EU should've just made _this_ the law.

And we'd have called it the "Just don't track" law.

Rant & Details:

> There is no law for cookie banners.

> What the EU is saying, you need my consent when you want to track me, profile me and sell my behavior off to ad companies.

> or “Look, Why take a chance?” (Remo Gaggi),

This kinda proves PG's point.

Rant: I find it incredible that folks defend the EU by saying things like "There is no law for cookie banners". No, there is a law. The law is reason people think "Look, Why take a chance?" and build crap like cookie banners in. The law is not a bunch of words on paper. It's the institution that incentivizes or punishes people for their actions; thereby influencing people's behavior.
In my understanding, the most important part is to not share user information with third parties. IIUC, Google can use Google analytics data to join your behavior from multiple sites and then use that to serve targeted ads.

The next level is to not store PII unless there's a specific reason in the user's interest (improving site quality doesn't count, logging in does). Therefore, you can see how many people visited a page, aggregates of device types etc. Just not anything that identifies an individual.
As a longtime fan of both VW and Scout I wish I could say that you’re wrong, but VW is already doing the same with their main brand. Their current vehicles, like the Atlas are almost unusable due to poor quality and terrible engineering.

VW was making some of the highest quality vehicles in the world 20 years ago, and now they’re destroying the brand name to pump it for short term profit by tricking consumers into buying cheap to make garbage, because they trust the VW brand.
Thank you for mentioning point 7.3 this as it's a very important, but gets often ignored. I hope that it gets strictly enforced. _It shall be as easy to withdraw as to give consent._

Regarding the link you posted, they have a banner at the bottom saying:

> We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it. [Ok] [No] [Privacy Policy]

My understanding was that such an implicit consent ("we will assume that you are happy with it") is not legal so I find it a bit surprising to see it used on a website dedicated to the GDPR.
>"(obsolete, nonce word)"

Note: 'Nonce' is British slang for paedophile, though did you mean 'nonsense'?
> 15. Not all advice is created equal.

That's for sure....
Well, different people want different things - I'd rather spend a millisecond to click 'refuse' rather than let them track me - out of spite if nothing else. Yes, cookie banners are annoying; the dark patterns within cookie banners (you need multiple clicks to get to the 'refuse' button while the 'accept' button is right there in your face) are even more so. But honestly - screw them.
Terraform can be done programatically? For example, i do start/stop a cloudformation for each $clientId, just as needed.
Yes, I reached out.
> Or you are worn down and no longer care after twenty banners and say yes

This is probably the worst omission from the EU law, no limit to the number of times you can be asked.

I told you my answer last time I visited… but you didn’t like it so you ask again, and again, and again. Every time I visit you ask me. <rage quit>
People expect supply and demand to show its effects immediately, whereas it takes years in some markets due to things like sticky prices in things like wages or overwhelming demand relative to supply and hence underestimating the amount of additional supply needed.
Agree. How much corporate propaganda are people consuming that legislators are seen as wholly responsible for the bad behavior and malicious compliance actions of corporations?

What does it say about the relationship between businesses and consumers that the first response to this bad behavior is to shout "look what you made them do!"

Seemingly it is everyone's fault except the bad actors themselves.
Huh, that’s good to know!

Besides CF, I’ve done it directly in the web console and that still seemed pretty slow (though that would have been a while ago, maybe it has improved).
People don't "give" their information to trackers, it's collected without their knowledge. I don't think most people expect the kind of things trackers collect is being collected.
I've been using computers since I was about 12...long time ago. What I've come to the conclusion is this: the best programs and the best tools are the ones that are lovingly (and perhaps with a bit of hate too) crafted by their developers. The best software ecosystems are the ones that are developed slowly and with care.

AI coding seems all wrong compared to that world. In fact, the only reason why there is a push for AI coding is because the software world of the ol' days has been co-opted by the evolutionary forces of consumerism and capitalism into a pathology, a nightmare that exists only to push us with dark patterns into using things and buying things that we don't really need. It takes the joy out of software development by placing two gods above all else that is mortal and good: efficiency and profit.

AI seems antithetical to the hacker ethic, not because it's not an intriguing project, but because within it seems to be the deep nature of automating away much of the joy of life. And yes, people can still use AI to be creative in some ways such as with AI prompts for art, but even so, the overall societal effect is the eroding of the bespoke and the custom and the personal from a human endeavor whose roots were once tinkering with machines and making them work for us, and whose final result is now US working for THEM.
I worked at Firebase for many years and the concerns with security rules have always plagued the product. We tried a lot of approaches (self expiring default rules, more education, etc) but at the end of the day we still see a lot of insecure databases.

I think the reasons for this are complex.

First, security rules as implemented by Firebase are still a novel concept. A new dev joining a team adding data into an existing location probably won’t go back and fix rules to reflect that the privacy requirements of that data has changed.

Second, without the security of obscurity created by random in-house implementations of backends, scanning en masse becomes easier.

Finally, security rules are just hard. Especially for realtime database, they are hard to write and don’t scale well. This comes up a lot less than you’d think though, as any time automated scanning is used it’s just looking for open data, anything beyond “read write true” as we called it would have prevented this.

Technically there is nothing wrong with the Firebase approach but because it is one of the only backends which use this model (one based around stored data and security rules), it opens itself up to misunderstanding, improper use, and issues like this.
> Everyone's needs would be better served if we could pay for content the same way we did back in the day of printed newspapers.

This is one option. Another is that advertisement goes back to those days: you associate advertisement to a content and to a rough geographical location, and that's it. No personalised ads is still possible.
That's what you get when you try to protect consumer but “don't want to harm business” who are hurting consumers.

Sometimes life really is is fact a zero sum game and you need to punish the offenders in order to protect the victims.
I have 2 saved profiles in my bios, one where the cpu is allow to consume has much current as it want that I use from mid October to mid May and one where the CPU is capped at 65W for the rest of the year.

I do something similar with my GPU, 75% cap in the summer, 105% cap in the winter.
Europe's parliament's site has cookie banner[1]. People saying you don't need cookie banner either haven't worked in companies or are purely driven by ideology.

[1]: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/portal/en
While this is true, the story is independently confirmed, so we can continue discussions on the subject anyway.
> If you have an undeveloped plot of land in a city where land taxes are high, you should be incentivized to either sell that to someone who will make use of it, or donate it to the city to serve as a public park

Why must land goes used? Is the assumption that we must fully utilize every inch of land in a city, regardless of what people living there or the land owner wants?

Building on as much usable space in an already high density area can and has had downsides that seem to get overlooked in this thread. Higher density means more traffic, higher demand on infrastructure and utilities, and the need to bring in even more resources from outside the city and send out even more waste for someone else to deal with (to name a few).

This assumption that taxing land high enough to make sure that none of it is left undeveloped unless the city owns it is begging for runaway problems, unless these other considerations are factored in. Doing so almost certainly means not having the tax, as the goal of more dense development competes with the other concerns.
I have used all distributions. They all have their own pain points. Debian-based distributions are actually the most painless in my experience.
I don't see the relation to the story about VW and emissions. VW broke the law, while the websites are following it.
Maybe we should start calling it the fauxbel prize.
There is no loophole here. If you want to track someone, you need their consent. How are cookie banners a "loophole"?

>Instead through incompetent government employees

Or greedy companies, one of the two...
There were plenty of people 'complaining' about Copilot and there are plenty 'complaining' about Devin.

However, what can you really complain about? Technological progress? We can't just decide to ignore AI. Just to play devil's advocate, if there really were clear signs of this impending distruction, there could be some sort of international agreement to halt progress. Realistically, this will never happen.

> All along, we are incrementally improving AI because it is an intellectual amusement

You're contradicting yourself here. Is it just 'intellectual amusement' if this technology is as disruptive as you claim?
Show me the section of the ePrivacy Directive (Directive 2002/58/EC) or GDPR that implies the "Do Not Track" browser setting can override the need for consent banners / popups.
It is indeed quite complex. I would argue that just the login does not need.

1. There are users who will come to your website with specific purpose or expectation of your service.

2. Then there are users who came to website by accident and might just try out things without understanding what is happening.

The banner recommendation from the lawyers is likely for the 2nd case. The users haven't subscribed to the service with certain expectation or knowledge what is expected from them to service to provide what they want. Or they have zero expectations about the service to provide something for their needs.

For example, the login case, the group 1. probably wants to stay logged in if they came to service with expectation of personal service, which cannot be linked to the person without an account.

Or the lawyers just did not understand your service well enough and just said that put the banner be done with it.
For group 2. it is unlikely that someone did not expect or want to stay logged in all the time, but that is for minority and arguable case whether is fair to assume that.
> The CIA have been conducting clandestine operations in Ukraine from the beginning of the colour revolutions until present day. If your view of Ukraine begins on February 22, 2014, you're missing a huge chunk of the picture - either disingenuously, or through dire ignorance.

Indeed - speaking of clandestine operations, here's how Ukrainian president (2005-2010) Viktor Yushchenko looked before and after Russians poisoned him: https://i.imgur.com/H3R7yF8.jpeg

The poisoning happened two months before 2004 presidential elections. Russians poisoned the prime challenger to their puppet, and boosted their puppet further with widespread election fraud that was later overturned by Ukrainian supreme court.

This is how an actual coup attempt looks like.

> Yes, they do indeed, because the CIA views Europe as an enemy to the superiority of the American people, and performing these kinds of coups is entirely within its purposes as a counter-democratic, sovereignty-invalidating agency.

CIA is not the prime mover in the world and the only reason why anything ever happens. For example, last week the Estonia minister of justice resigned because he had used his personal allowance against established rules by renting an apartment from his wife's adult son from another marriage. While he was aware that he couldn't rent an apartment from a relative (anti-corruption rule), he didn't know that the son would qualify as a relative too under these rules. He fucked up and resigned. This had nothing to do with the CIA, nor do many other things going on in the world. To claim otherwise is to be ignorant of the complexities of the world.

When it comes to Eastern Europe, the CIA is not even in the top three most influential intelligence organizations.
The problems with the current law are:

- no fines for non-compliance (or malicious compliance)

- no legal liability for data leaks of PPI

When businesses believe (correctly or incorrectly) that the benefit of tracking outweighs the cost (annoying users, regulatory noncompliance) they will do it. The fix is to make tracking too costly for businesses.
doing gods work here man, thank you for your work!
Honestly I don't mind them collecting this data, what is really infuriating is the fact they won't share it with me. I would love to know what kind of porn I prefer on weekdays. I think they shouldn't be allowed to track anything with consent or without it unless they share all the data with the subject of spying.

And aside from that, I think it should be much more expensive to say sorry than ask for permission. In my world a firm like facebook should not have any right to exist, they earned it. Fine them to oblivion just like I would get a long time behind bars if I wouldn't do my taxes right.