skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
GenAIPot - The first generative A.I Honeypot v0.6.5 has been released.
featuring stable version, auto documentation updates and bug fixes.
This release also introduces a new NFT page and integrates CodeQL for security enhancements. Contributions from new developers are acknowledged in the release notes, marking a significant step forward for the project. Full details can be found on the release page.
> Society just accepted that bad actors could do this and solved the root problem instead.

You ... do not read much about history, I guess from this.
They were created by humans; therefore, "artificial", or "manufactured". Just because there is no practical way to distinguish them from the ones that appeared naturally doesn't mean they weren't created artificially.

"But this is a purely philosophical difference then!" Yes, it is. Humans still take such silly differences into an account, consider e.g. replicas of artwork made by the original artist themself. Are they genuine? Debatable!
They can but keep in mind there are a variety of different types of color blindness and varying severity.

For me close colors on a red / green scale are difficult to differentiate. If I enable accessibility features, it will make every photo look incorrect. iOS has an excellent option to adjust the degree of color filter. Mine is set to tritanopia (blue/yellow) the only about 5 percent intensity to give me a good balance.
Similar story here, with similarly disastrous impacts on my GPA. There was something magical about that time - technology was moving so rapidly and access to information was exploding. It was all so very early that it seemed like anything was possible for an aspiring computer nerd with a good computer and a fast internet connection.

Of course, it was also really unevenly distributed. If you were on the "have" side of the equation - i.e. in a setting like a college campus, already working in the industry, or in the right IRC channels, with access to modern hardware - you could hop along for the ride and it felt like anything was possible. Otherwise, you were being left behind at a dramatic rate.

Overall things are better now, because so many more people have access to data and resources online. It's trivially easy to learn how to code, information is readily available to most of humanity, and access to good quality internet access has exploded. But I can't deny that it was kind of amazing being one of the lucky ones able to ride that wave.
I read this article and was confused. Lot of asian countries already provide digital identities, its not some utopian impossibility. I often carry only my phone out of the house. Sure its convenient, but there are downsides as well.

You have to maintain infra for two major mobile oses (which you have no control over with apple and google as the gatekeepers). You also stifle innovation in the mobile space (ultimately the government will only produce an iphone and an andeoid apk).

Identity theft via scams is super easy. You dont need to stsal devices you just nred to convince ppl to hand over their identities.

Along with that there is the whole cybersecurity nightmare which Ive frankly found government agencies world wide the least competent in handling.

Finally while digitisation makes processes easier, governments also tend to become lazier about servicing corner cases. Lets say for some reason you dont have some information for a form or need some special assitance woth a process, earlier you would be harassed by incompetent officials, but with sufficient fervor youd be able to get the job done. Now, with automated systems you will never be able to get help cause there is nobody to help you.
That website is just blank for me. Edit: Even on multiple browser.
Let's not fool ourselves by saying we're purely profit driven. Our industry argues about code style (:
They're talking about a very similar idea as the article, that the early internet is disappearing as everyone moves to new stuff.
Some countries have more than 1 timezone so it's not really accurate
This is what I preach to my kids. Get to work, live at home, save everything and invest. There is a huge difference between kids attitudes these days and those of the gen-x crowd. I loved my first jobs, they were so fun and people treated me very well. My children have dipped into the work force a bit and found it very nasty and hostile across various industries. My son trained as a machinist. A job that is very well suited to him. He asked for PPE (respirator, gloves) at his first job and was educating himself on the chemicals used in his area. After incurring chemical burns and respuratory issues he had them put the labels back on the barrels and again requested PPE. They threw him out on his ass, but not before attempting to humiliate and denigrate him. He is traumatized now and seeking disability benefits from the government. I don't have much to stand on when trying to convince him to keep trying.
That was not my intention at all. My concern is groups who do that kind of red team testing on open source projects without first seeking approval from the maintainers risk unintentionally poisoning a lot more machines than they might initially expect. While I don't expect this kind of research to go away, I would rather it be done in a way that does not allow malicious contributions to somehow find their way into mission critical systems.

It's one thing if you're trying to make sure that maintainers are actually reviewing code that is submitted to them and fully understanding "bad code" from good but a lot of open source projects are volunteer effort and maybe we should be shifting focus to how maintainers should be discouraged from accepting pull requests where they are not 100% confident in the code that has been submitted. Not every maintainer is going to be perfect but it's definitely not an easy problem to solve overnight by a simple change of policy.
I don't really get why this is a TUI. Any time I actually hack on this sort of stuff, I'd rather have the outputs (eg. symbols, ELF sections/segments, strings, ...) directly on stdout so I can then further filter stuff or otherwise process it. Especially strings!

The only part of this tool that seems to merit a TUI is the hex view...
Ground fill is counterproductive on the signal layer.

If you accidentally get the return path on layer1 or layer4 instead of the designated layer2 or layer3, you've created noise.

Power+Signal / GND / GND / Power+Signal is about consistency and braindead-easy tracking of return paths. The return path for layer1 is always layer2. The return path of layer4 is always layer3.

Keeping track of both the forward signal (or power line) and the reversed return current (which was electrically induced onto the nearest reference plane) stops working if suddenly you have random reference ground-fill planes on the layer1 or layer4.

DO NOT put GND on layer1 or layer4 if you're doing this methodology.

---------------

Beginners likely aren't working with a hot enough circuit where thermal dissipation is an issue. If you do have thermal dissipation then I guess thermal ground on layer1 and layer4 ties with thermal vias will be needed.

In practice, the thermal resistance across the PCB cross section is better than beginners expect anyway. Thermal conductivity is just one attribute, the other attributes of heat movement are distance and cross sectional area.

So the shape favors you up and down the PCB. Yes the fiberglass has worse thermal conductivity but you win on shape.
That sounds like it was very much by design and nobody wanted those logs to survive
It does matter because ultimately you'll have deploy correct code to production.

A comparison of how easy or cumbersome it is to write production grade apps between frameworks is much more valuable.

Otherwise we are back to comparing TODO demos.
> Don't try to solve future problems.

This. The problem is people stay at a job for 2 years. You can't properly see how the software evolves in 2 years to know that the things you're imagining might be needed have never been needed. Software tends to change in fairly predictable ways. If it suddenly changes in a new direction, your market has changed and the old solution isn't going to work well anyway.
I mostly use Golang, but you could do Python or NodeJS if you wanted. I would probably prefer Deno since node's HTTP functionality is a bit low level.

Getting all the way to 0 dependencies can be tough depending on what you're building, and maybe not worth it. But it's a great feeling when it happens.

What's more important than how many dependencies you import is the quality of them, how well they fit your project (using a high percentage of the library's functionality is a good sign), and the total number of transitive dependencies.

One thing I do sometimes is using git submodules for dependencies. It's annoying to work with, but that friction helps me avoid importing too many things on a wim. It also encourages me to use dependencies that are self-contained.
I know, they aren't the first to use it, but I still appreciate the pun.
I'd like to add a perspective that might not resonate with everyone, based on the famous quote: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." I sometimes adapt this to say: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a scam."
Don't just swipe the "less-than-ideal design decisions" under the rug
Study shows most Amazon beef and soy demand comes from Brazil – not exports
Falcon 4 Dynamic Campaign Creator, 25 Years Later [video]
Yeah, I believe it was that.
no shit, I lol'ed at the "tool that lets you judge the strength of your wifi"

thats pure snake oil.
I like this proposal to add a "purpose" field to the cookie header. This could allow consent settings at the browser level, preventing all these pop-ups.

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/httpbisa/Mp-DjtBk-sfdQ...
Nice, but the AGPL-3.0 license makes this tough to use. Would love to see a MIT alternative if there is one.
I think you're coming at this from the wrong angle, but the 2-year delay is really only applicable to users that want to compete, or in cases where the startup goes under or in a bad direction. For most users, the freedoms under Fair Source align pretty closely to Open Source, e.g. read, fork, modify, redistribute, etc. with the non-compete caveat. Users can absolutely use the latest version -- unless they're competing, but most users aren't competing and don't plan on competing.

The difference is that all users also eventually get the proprietary features, unlike an Open Core project under AGPL + commercial terms. I do think Fair Source is a better model than Open Core, at least in most cases, because of this alone. So I guess, would you rather: 1) never have the proprietary features, or 2) have 2-year old proprietary features? I know what I'd prefer, and from a simple continuity perspective, I know which is preferred by users.

Like I said, I'm not saying AGPL is bad. I just don't like how it's used in startup-land and I think there are better, more honest, options now.
It's very easy to make PHP safe, certainly now that we've passed the 7 mark and we have internal ASTs. Even when using eval, it's beyond trivial to not make gross mistakes.
I’m confused by how pushing to new branches would work on GitHub (or is the point that it doesn’t…)?
Are you able to change the branch of a PR from `v1` to `v2` without making a new PR?
It’s like what copilot could/should be if Microsoft was even remotely competent at software.

No LLM is smart enough to implement novel features in a complex repo, but the inline autocomplete alone is leaps and bounds more powerful in its editing / diff capabilities, and smarter thanks to Claude and additional context.

Never going back to vscode + copilot.

That said, cursor blew up so many of my keyboard shortcuts, making it a pain to revert all of their stupid commands they try to stick on common shortcut combos that cause chat windows to pop up in random places. Chat windows suck and waste time because LLMs are brain dead if they try to come up with things themselves as opposed to just copying your existing patterns. Cursor will update and re-nuke a bunch of the un-fucked settings and commands, making it a pain in the ass.

Still leaves Microsoft’s stale tech demo in the dust. They dropped the ball after so much investment and let copilot rot in an embarrassing state. Cursor really highlights this.
Yes, fixup commits are a good way to approach this, though I don't personally like them, though. I think Sapling's "absorb" command which works on an underlying SCCS weave to automatically absorb changes into the relevant diff is much more elegant. It prompts you with an interactive UI. (For me, it sorta falls into the same space as rebasing a series that has multiple branches on it. You need --update-refs for that. Because otherwise it's like, why am I, the human, doing the work of tracking the graph relationships and manually punching in the commits, and moving the branches, and doing all this bullshit? Computers are good at graphs! Let them handle it!)

There is also a `git absorb`, but it isn't as robust as Sapling's implementation[1].

Really the problem isn't interactive rebase or not. It's mostly a problem of the UX of the review tool itself more than anything, and the kind of "cycle" it promotes. I mentioned it elsewhere here, but fixup commits for example still won't solve the problem of GitHub showing you diffs between baselines, for example, which can absolutely ruin a review if the baseline is large (e.g. you rebased on top of 10 new commits.)

I do have problems with Git's UX beyond this, but the original post is mostly a gripe about GitHub.

[1] There is an example in this GitHub issue that captures the difference between the two underlying algorithms: https://github.com/martinvonz/jj/issues/170
> Well, PayPal has real people on the phone, and, actually

And? They're just as useless and won't tell you anything.
I surprised an 18 year old, intelligent and fairly tech savvy, when I showed him the share>find on page search function in Safari. Figured everyone knew that, or at least he and his demo would. No idea how wide spread it is, anecdotal etc.
Your strawman is on fire.
Me very interested in this too.
All good points. I would say that it's a fairly outlandish scenario where you are (i) close enough to the device to listen to the caps whining but (ii) can't measure actual voltages within the circuit (which could be a lot more informative) and (iii) can't just listen to the audio output of the device directly.
Actually, under engineering is a common thing as well. It leads to systems that once they are implemented are hard to modify. Typical symptoms are people trying to hack around that. Or designers sacrificing necessary complexity in favor of an elegant look.

If you've ever had the discussion whether the name field is 1 text field or 2 text fields, that's what's going on. "I don't care about first name last name, we just need a single name field, much more elegant". Fast forward a few months ... "hey can you auto-magically split that name field in first name, last name".

No kidding, I've had to sit a PM down on at least two projects where that happened and explain to them why that was a silly idea. In case you are wondering, there's a good reason why most apps and sites use two fields: splitting automatically reliably is not possible and as soon as you want to address somebody by their first (or last) name in e.g. an email, invoice, etc. you need both fields. Another classic mistake here is that the first name and last name are two words. They can be multiple words. Both. And two fields is actually not enough for some names if you really want to cover everything. There's also salutations, titles, middle name, maiden name, etc. It's a mess. But you can usually get away with using just first & last name. Just one example.

It's the famous Einstein paraphrasing of making things as simple as you can; but not simpler.

The issue with over engineering is engineers getting carried away with edge cases that in practice aren't relevant. Like trying to build a super scalable web platform for a thing that has maybe a handful of active users. Optimizing a thing that only takes a millisecond in a request that takes half a second. Nice but your problem was somewhere in the 499 other milliseconds. Obsessing over the one in ten thousand users that might want feature x used in some weird way, etc.
stealing it and having an exploit to unlock it
What are you basing that off of?
AI written spam comment
Maybe folks were waiting for someone else to make the internet better for the many when it’s now that group itself who could.
You can add it to a prediction market. Though you won't make good money if everyone else also thinks it will fail.
It did. I'm not sure AI has this energy. We quickly skipped the "early tinkering" phase of AI and jumped straight to the annoying "let's put this technology into everything" stage like the blockchain craze of ~2018+. Perhaps the difference is how "top-down" AI has been. Most of the push has come from massive companies trying to get people to use it instead of people finding it organically.
SQLite support?
When writing it inline, I like this approach. I like even better when these things have names. Something like `std.time.s_per_day` or `time_utils.s_per_day`. Then in the one place they're defined, use a pattern like the above to make them easy to reason about.
I tend to use git submodules to vendor into ./lib. It's rather clunky to work with, but once you know a couple commands it works pretty well. As a bonus, GitHub pages recursively clones submodules automatically. If you're using ES modules, you can host a site with no build step (ie github actions) directly from your main branch.
That's the reason I wrote, that I wouldn't mind, if (and only if) the upwards direction also happens and why I wrote, that "something tells me" that that wouldn't be the case ; )
> so wouldn't it be better to put power/ground on the outer layers and keep signals in the middle?

Signals must never cross a break or split in the plane they're referencing (usually 0V or ""ground""). This creates huge EMI problems. Your proposal would have signals on layer 2 crossing a split in the ground plane on layer 1 (that split caused by power traces).

Some interesting material on the subject:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYUYOXmo9UU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QG0Apol-oj0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySuUZEjARPY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RyBCnowLsI
This sort of all-or-nothing thinking isn't helpful. DNS points you to a server, TLS certificates help you trust that you've arrived at the right place. It's not perfect, but we build very trustworthy systems on this foundation.
Linux took quite a path getting to its current threading implementation. Before NPTL[2], there was LinuxThreads[1], before that, I'm pretty sure threads were userspace only.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LinuxThreads

[2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_POSIX_Thread_Library
Well, this one is storing spinners POWERED DOWN... So it's petty much a slower data wiping service :shrug_emoji
Exactly what it claimed to be: An alpha/beta test for a game.
When vim plugins change the effect of K, all they're likely doing is setting keywordprg¹. You can do the same yourself, fex to display info on the commit under cursor you'd use "setl kp=git\ show". You can write little script wrappers to fetch whatever custom resources you want, or you can up your game by writing vim commands so that you can use a count prefix to influence behaviour of the fetch too.

¹ https://vimdoc.sourceforge.net/htmldoc/options.html#'keyword...
Unless a beginner plans to sell a design on the public, there is no EMC (compliance) issue.

Maybe EMI crosstalk. But WIFI and BT are supposed to eminate out like a radio and jump across boards. That's the point.

---------

USB is a matched impedance differential pair. Are beginners really running high speed USB differential pairs down their circuits today?

Because that's a really.... Erm.... strange.... definition of a beginner. IMO anyway.
Could you explain what "state-sanctioned" means here?
I don’t remember who said it but there’s a quote about communications protocols that goes “it’s not finished when there’s nothing left to add, it’s finished when there’s nothing left to take away”. I use that a lot in discussions with my teams.
My sarcastic self would say because lawyers became lawyers to earn good money and have social standing. Not to be benevolent to society.
Don’t dodge the question: Why not?
Surprised no one mentioned ForgeFed [0]:

> ForgeFed is a federation protocol for software forges and code collaboration tools for the software development lifecycle and ecosystem. This includes repository hosting websites, issue trackers, code review applications, and more. ForgeFed provides a common substrate for people to create interoperable code collaboration websites and applications.

It's based on ActivityPub [1], the same protocol that powers Mastodon [2], Lemmy [3], and Pixelfed [4].

[0] https://forgefed.org/

[1] https://activitypub.rocks/

[2] https://joinmastodon.org/

[3] https://join-lemmy.org/

[4] https://pixelfed.org/
I love the attention to detail, like the broken ASCII art logo in the header image :).
It's not an either-or. When the company's doing badly financially and something needs to change, the mechanics of figuring out what needs to change involve a lot of executive judgment, which is not necessarily correlated with facts on the ground as the members of specific orgs or projects might see them.
If you've ever looked into buying a fast food franchise you've maybe noticed that Taco Bell's are really expensive to franchise and startup. I'm guessing it's why we don't see saturation of them like we do Mcdonald's, etc. I don't think the expected yearly profit (generally around $100k/store) is any better either but they do have really high margins compared to others.
It's already like that in countries like Denmark. A lot of people just walk around with just the phone, use apple/google wallet or MobiePay for payment, app for drivers license, Public Transport app slowly gets rolled out. Most of it is secured by 2fa from MitID.

You would also need to steal their fingers / faces.

But AFAIK for everything you can have a physical backup.
Wonder how long until people get desperate enough to steal phones and the owner's thumb...
>It felt very set apart from the real world, in a very counter cultural way.

We hate the internet today because it became mainstream.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September
"I am, of course, referring to what in Latin America is often called “the first 9/11”: September 11, 1973, when the United States succeeded in its intensive efforts to overthrow the democratic government of Salvador Allende in Chile with a military coup that placed General Pinochet’s ghastly regime in office. The dictatorship then installed the Chicago Boys—economists trained at the University of Chicago—to reshape Chile’s economy. Consider the economic destruction, the torture and kidnappings, and multiply the numbers killed by 25 to yield per capita equivalents, and you will see just how much more devastating the first 9/11 was." - Noam Chomsky

https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/noam-chomsky-responsib...
As has been demonstrated many, many (many, many (many many many many many...)) times: there is no such thing as computer security. If you have data on a computer that is connected to the Internet, you should consider that data semi-public. If you put data on someone else's computer, you should consider that data fully public.

Our computer security analogies are modeled around securing a home from burglars, but the actual threat model is the ocean surging 30 feet onto our beachfront community. The ocean will find the holes, no matter how small. We are not prepared for this.
If we want back the old internet we must build it. Create your own website, link to those you like, get in contact with the people running them. Mine is mglz.de, check out the link collection and get in touch about linking between sites :)