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

Up next: nuclear data center Zeppelins in the cloud!

Innovative new air cooling: instead of using lots of tiny fans to move air through the servers, we simply use 2 big fans to move the servers through the air!

And while we're at it, we'll completely disrupt the existing Zeppelin market that depends on expensive helium for some reason. We use daring, innovative hydrogen technology, enabling a massive cost reduction!


the term zeppelins needs to be used more often.

love this idea, where do i mail my money to invest!!!!!


This is future technology my friend. They only accept payments in crypto, tulips or SpaceX stock.

> I wasn’t particularly worried about parsing CSV files. That’s a solved problem.

> Detecting primitive types is easy. String. Number. Boolean. Date.

... the rabbit said confidently, staring down the oncoming lawn mower.

> I honestly thought the viewer would take a weekend.

> Display rows.

> Add scrolling.

Burma Shave?


If you have a few hours to kill, the Youtube Channel "Another Boring Topic" has a multi part series on the "rise and fall of the IBM PC". The comparatively short Part 1 is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Er8wcWsG7sE

The Channel has similar video series on OS/2, VisiCalc, Microsoft Excel and early Windows (far from completion). The videos are generally very detailed and well researched, often contrasting accounts from different source or even reaching out to people involved.

The already slow pace of the channel has slowed down a lot. In an update video a while back, the author has announced that the background research for the IBM PC led down an unexpectedly deep rabbit hole and his script eventually spiraled into an unfinished book that will now probably turn into a two-parter itself.


> ...on Mac, for example, it’s simply Option + Shift + Hyphen.

Fedora with XFCE here, but last I checked on Windows, it worked exactly the same over there: With a Chinese IME installed, tap shift to switch input language, shift+hyphen produces a double em-dash: ——, likewise, shift+6 a double elipsis: ……

You encounter those a lot in simple, machine translated Chinese, along with literal translations of "not X but Y", "not just ... but also" and similar sentence constructs that are common in Chinese. I suspect that's how a disproportionate amount of that ended up in training material in the first place.


While I know about the DSKY, I keep wondering if they were the first ones, i.e. inventing that way of entering data into a computer and others copied it later on, or if it was a already a more widespread and known pattern and the AGC copied it.

I know that other machines existed that used a similar system. I recall being asked, circa summer 2009 or so, to set up extensions on a quite old PABX that was configured that way.

The PABX was a huge electrical box full of giant PCBs stuck into a backplane (S-100 or maybe something proprietary?). I didn't get a good look tough, the box was mounted under the ceiling, directly above a desk with a terminal that you used for configuring it. There was a binder with laminated, typewritten cards, documenting "verbs" and "nouns" that you entered into a numeric keypad. As said, it worked like the Apollo DSKY, but the "display" was single slot that you had to squint through at just the right angle to make out faint numbers on a mirror, aimed downwards at some back projection thingy.


I guess very few around here remember the minor fuzz about this from a few years ago? The Linux Kernel Project became their own CNA (CVE Numbering Authority). A CVE is now slapped onto practically every bug fix that is back ported to a stable kernel, resulting in a flood of CVEs.

A blog post about this, published at the time: https://sigma-star.at/blog/2024/03/linux-kernel-cna/

The title is editorialized (i.e. the OP made it up), the link simply goes to the kernel CVE mailing list archive.


It's malicious-compliance CVE filing. Other interesting coverage of the issue by Risky Biz, https://news.risky.biz/risky-biz-news-the-linux-cna-mess/.

Given the broken nature of the CVE process, see for example Daniel Stenberg of cURL fame's frequent comments on this, I'm undecided whether this is a good thing, a bad thing, or a bit of both.


(Email the mods to clear up the editorial title problem; footer contact link.)

Your post advocates a

    ( ) technical ( ) legislative (X) market-based ( ) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)

    ( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
    (X) Mailing lists and other legitimate uses would be affected
    ( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
    ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
    (X) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
    (X) Users will not put up with it
    (X) Microsoft will not put up with it
    (X) The police will not put up with it
    ( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
    (X) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
    (X) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
    ( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
    ( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for

    ( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
    (X) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
    ( ) Open relays in foreign countries
    ( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
    (X) Asshats
    ( ) Jurisdictional problems
    (X) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
    ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
    (X) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
    ( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
    ( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
    ( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
    ( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
    (X) Extreme profitability of spam
    (X) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
    ( ) Technically illiterate politicians
    ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
    (X) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
    ( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
    ( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:

    (X) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical
    ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
    ( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
    ( ) Blacklists suck
    ( ) Whitelists suck
    ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
    ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
    ( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
    ( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
    (X) Sending email should be free
    (X) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
    ( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
    (X) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
    ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
    ( ) I don't want the government reading my email
    ( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:

    (X) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
    ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
    ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!


Nicely done! For completeness, this refers to a 20+ years old meme that went around, specifically related to why anti-spam solutions would not work. [0]

[0]: https://trog.qgl.org/20081217/the-why-your-anti-spam-idea-wo...


Well, the angle is kind of important here. The company gets their name in the news, they have a reasonable explanation why they were scraping around, and we end up with a story about innovative tech company whiz-kids who made a funny discovery, while it was the webdevs on the other side that goofed up.

Imagine a private individual just scraped the website (or simply clicked 'view source') for no reason in particular and then told people about it... They'd be labeled an uber-haxxor, face a civil lawsuit asking for ridiculous damages while being threatened with a prison sentence over CFAA violations. Hell, that might even drive some people to suicide.


Unfortunately we don't have to imagine

"In early October, Renaud discovered that Social Security numbers for teachers, administrators and counselors were visible in the HTML code of a publicly accessible site operated by the state education department..."

"Yet despite the fact that officials within the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education initially wanted to thank Renaud for uncovering the flaw... [Governer] Parson labeled the reporter a hacker and called for criminal prosecution."

https://missouriindependent.com/2022/02/11/prosecutor-isnt-p...


The fact that an egregious case happened once, decades ago, is probably not sufficient grounding to act like every bit of equally trivial “hacking” always results in massively disproportionate law enforcement response.

Sucks it happened. But we all know that is not the typical scenario.


> But we all know that is not the typical scenario.

Back in the day, you could read a stories on Slashdot practically every other week that usually went something like this: Company/institution does something stupid, somebody finds out, tries to be a good citizen and tells them. The organization then throws a tamper tantrum in the media, fires the legal department on all cylinders, screaming "hacker!" and throwing the book at them. The most egregious cases usually happened in the US, the CFAA happens to be a particularly strong book to throw.

People eventually got the hint and either talked to the press instead, or organizations like the CCC (at least in this part of the world) and let them deal with the organization and not talk to them directly.

At least in my perception/memory, it started improving over the 2010s, but stories like this are now starting to pop up again in recent years. I guess we have a new crop of computer enthusiasts who need to learn the same lessons again.

Of the top of my head, the CTF group in Malta comes to mind who gave a talk at (last years?) CCCongress. A badly worded E-mail asking about a bug bounty resulted in several arrests, house searches and ultimately a presidential pardon (https://timesofmalta.com/article/pardon-issued-students-lect...).


>But we all know that is not the typical scenario.

Eh, it's typical enough that most cyber security researchers are cautious. The laws around 'hacking' can be rather stupidly written while judges and juries aren't the smartest bunch.


Yep. I remember a similar story as GP described from a friend back in 2008. The site he was working on that wasn't linked to yet was suddenly indexed after he checked out what it looked like in the fancy new "Chrome" browser that Google had just released, causing some moderate panic on his end.


> The next hard drive was an order of magnitude larger than the old one, and so on.

Ah yes, the good old "old PC" folder that you would find on pretty much every Windows PC that used to have another "old PC" folder inside it somewhere, possibly inside an "external HDD (old)" folder :-)

Until the PC (or the HDD inside it) died surprisingly, people didn't have backups, or the backups turned out to be burned CDs that were scratched up and/or sat on a sun illuminated shelf for years.

I was at a class reunion a few years ago where it turned out, I was somehow the only one who still had (digital) photos from early-to-mid 2000s.

> ... even more ephemeral as people started putting data in the cloud where it will eventually be wiped when the accounts stop being paid or lost when the company goes under.

Or the photos they upload gradually degrade in quality as the company repeatedly plays with re-compressing stuff to squeeze more space out.

People have observed old (10+ years) photos on Google Drive to start getting blurry, having weird artifacts, color banding, etc... IIRC there was an article posted on HN at one point with some particular egregious examples. Techmoan also mentioned this in a video some time ago, commenting that the same thing happened to old YouTube uploads of his from the 2000s.


Hehe, I used to create a folder as some variant of "Old" and move everything in my downloads folder into it once or twice a year, and with a lesser frequency my documents. At one point when I realised this had got about 10 levels deep, I switched to yyyy-mm format directories instead of nesting them.

I also used to back up other PCs to each other somewhat regularly, and sometimes I'd end up with those files back on the original PC in a backup of another. Fortunately, when I switched to borgbackup on Windows as well [1], this massive reduplication of files became a solved problem.

[1] borgbackup doesn't officially work on Windows, but I run it in WSL which does reasonably well for all the files I really care about (i.e. the stuff I've made). When they have particular unusual characters in the filenames, it throws up a warning for that file every time, but otherwise seems fine. I've never bothered investigating whether those particular files restore to the correct filename, because I know I've also backed up the zip file those files have come from and it's just accidental that I've backed up the extracted files as well.


I still have a bunch of these called "FromOld".


Same! It's in Dropbox now. I found the source from the very first code I got paid to write, back in 1998. I was 14, and mostly self-taught. One of these days I'm going to run it through static analysis and see how many security holes there were.


Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

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

Search: