Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | whatcanthisbee's comments login

> ES6, Typescript, React

NodeJS didn't make those - they'd be around with any nodejs alternative.

btw, nodejs should provide some "isolated" mode (ie run as user "nobody-projectName-userName" - eg. "nobody-react-whatcanthisbee") and do some appropriate group permissions.

basic linux permissions can do a lot...


can't nodejs run default as user "node-<project-name>-<username>"? ie. run the process as "node-react-whatcanthisbee"?

(or provide option to do so using "isolated-node" versions/flags/etc)

that way, a lot of malicious stuff can be blocked with unix/linux basic permissions

(though spectre/etc stuff will be much harder to catch...)


would continuing to type or holding the keys after/before entering my password help?


Yes. Just hold your fingers over some random keys after inserting the card and wait to enter the pin. And after that just keep your hand over the keypad while you wait for the money.

(I work for over 10 years with thermal cameras and know the limits)


Slightly, as well as removing^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hdeleting characters, but the picture invariably shows the keys used, so it will in any case reduce the complexity of brute force attacks by several orders of magnitude.


If I was an attacker and had easy to recover footage and weird "whole keyboard is highlighted" footage - I would just discard the bad footage.


so is the hardware keys the only answer?


> By the end of March 1st, 2015, all reports and reviews about the documentary Under the Dome were withdrawn from online websites

> The reason of banning was said to be the pressure of public perception of smog and the fear of collective action of the people

it's not 'inability to regulate', but reluctant to regulate. Just make those environmental groups shut up.


isn't it all because there's no election in China?

without elections, why would a gov. official listen to "the people"?


To remain in power? That's why they have propaganda. All governments listen to their people, by necessity. The quality and quantity of this listening varies, but all do.


agreed. But China's "quality and quantity" effectively is "as long as there isn't a bloody riot all over the place" :(

and speaking of dissidents, why would Chinese police operate "execution vans"? isn't that to hide execution of key people, whose news of execution may stir the public?


I sure hope so. But China's wasting its energy on:

- cracking down dissidents (no election - no real 'authority', officials don't have any incentives to listen to "the people"^TM)

- handling local politics (again, no election - same PRC ppl)

- deporting N.Korean refugees back to N.Korea (continuing just because Chinas has been doing so - just like PRC praising Mao for Cultural Revolution that killed millions)


but in US, the pressure-flow goes like this:

step1. public pressures on the electorate

step2. electorate pressures on spying agencies

... and step1 is impossible in China


How many people know about driving the cocain economy by the CIA throughout the 70s and 80s? About project Phoenix? MKULTRA? MKULTRA surfaced after 20y in the making. About the torture assistence in the South America? Now? At that time? How is there any eloctorate pressure on the CIA? Until recently not a lot of people even knew about the NSA, I wonder how there could have been electorate pressure. There is only pressure - even if there is - when some small facts surface like Iran–Contra.


No idea why you are being downvoted.

I will add more:

- where is the pressure to close Guantanamo?

- where is the pressure to como clean with the lies leading to the Irak war?


"- where is the pressure to close Guantanamo?"

There is a lot of it. However, it's countered by the pressure of, "Where do we send those people? My constituents don't want them in our district."


step 2 happens behind closed doors. you can not publish what is discussed, you can not even mention that you are dicussing it. there is in fact no guarantee that step2 happens, at all, or that it has ever happened.


Which means theatre is as good as real reform is at satisfying step 1.


I get what you mean, but your word choice is off. The "electorate" means the people represented by the elected official, not he officials themselves. i.e. the electorate is the public


oh thanks for the correction. /s/electorate/gov_officials


is it related to the term "public servants"?

or stories about gov. employees doing nothing but getting paid?


"cultural relativity" phrase probably wasn't intended to justify "anything is OK"...

so anything is "OK" as long as it has "tradition"? A mafia mob family with a "tradition" in killing ppl around is OK because it's "tradition"?

What's next? Claiming that Nazi killing was a "cultural thing"?


What’s so cruel with the situation is that there are middle paths, for instance the tribe banning members it doesn’t want instead of killing them, and the rest of the society adopting them (like what happens with the Suzuki couple).

It seems like a good compromise, but there is all that “traditions must be protected” mantra, coming from outside these tribes, that brings massive inertia.


Nazi killing was cultural thing, quite literally. Also, they were not independently living group of people killing among themselves, Germans attacked nearby countries. They were threat to everyone else, Nazism was not some kind of cruel internal thing.

That comparison does not work at all, regardless of whether you think tribes should be left to do what they do or not.


I guess it only applies to traditional cultures, which the Nazis weren’t.


Completely made-up and arbitrary though, so the justification is just shifted somewhere else - the "reason" is none. It's like explaining anything with "higher forces", all it is is not explaining anything at all, instead putting the issue under the rug or on the shelve of "stuff we just accept without giving it any more thoughts". Which I think is actually okay depending on the context, since every human does it to a large extend out of necessity. Only when it extends to preventing others from looking deeper does it become a problem. Here it's a problem when it's used to set standards used to justify how to treat different people.

I proofread the Ph.D. thesis of a friend of mine who wrote on transfer of organizational culture. The example was Western companies doing business in countries with a different culture. To cut a very long story short, the conclusion (well-supported by the evidence he had collected) was that instead of accepting the local culture at least in the examples he had looked the ones that succeeded by a big margin were those who imposed their own values from their home organization. The "details" matter of course: What did not work was imposing those values. He found that what worked best was to take a number of core people, bring them back to the country of the source culture and let them work there for a time and absorb the organization's culture (an active process, and that culture must be attractive and demonstrably be successful, or why would anyone want to adopt it in the first place). Then let these people build the new business. Don't give them direct supervision, i.e. no boss(es) from the source organization. Well, there are a few hundred more pages, but my point is that trying to always accept all kinds of cultures as the "best" way is just not true. We humans have "transferred cultures", often by force, for a million years, and in the realm of nature keeping everything as it is, forever, is not exactly a proven success story or how anything works.


[flagged]


Probably because it's a case of Godwin's Law (without justification), and is an over-simplistic and emotive comment that is likely to trigger a flame-war.


So is GP, which is ad-hominem-ish.


How it can be an over-simplitic thing? Is there any room for a valid argument/justification of killing a child (except for "cultural thing" bullshit)?


I find it troubling too, of course, but it is simplistic to not consider it in its anthropological and evolutionary context, and against our own societies' values around euthanasia.

Dr Peter Singer, a prominent and respected professor at one of the world's leading universities, has expressed (and being condemned for) positions around this topic in the western world in recent decades.

I find those positions troubling too and I don't agree with them or defend them.

But it's not a simple issue, and complex, controversial issues like this need to be approached with caution, else we end up in hostile flame wars that benefit nobody.


you're really optimistic...

why would PRC provide a stable "work" and "exercise" routine when it can simply use a death-van?

PRC is wiser to do a quick off-with-their-heads when it wants to shush someone


True, a .22 round is much more efficient then lodging and food


Suicide by multiple gunshots


Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

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

Search: