Recent submissions

Comment · 10 years ago
Your argument reads to me as "people kill people not guns".

Yea I know, morale is a difficult topic these days.

Comment · 10 years ago
Comment · 10 years ago
Why do you misquote me?

Yes, it might be useful for some folks - it's really bad for others. People have died because of oppressive regimes targeting dissidents that way.

Comment · 10 years ago
No it isn't. Blocking encrypted calls for millions of user _disables_ safety for exactly those millions.
Comment · 10 years ago
This case is a brilliant reminder to anyone working in deep packet inspection/blocking/filtering tech that your work negatively affects the safety of millions of people in such countries at once.
Comment · 10 years ago
Comment · 10 years ago
Looks like it is piping the queries over to scholar.google.com - getting only timeouts right now though.
Comment · 10 years ago
So it looks like this needs (from EU perspective) another round of lawsuits to get this overthrown again - since the oversight by the US DoC is laughable.
Comment · 10 years ago
Who had their first website online back then in 1996 as well?

raises hand

Good memories... Claris Home Page!

Comment · 10 years ago
That is not only unethical that is also illegal in some countries.

Also, this is the reason why you should have FB platform a) turned off and b) disallow that your friends "bring your data with them when they use apps".

Comment · 10 years ago
Comment · 11 years ago
What's next with these corporate shizzles? Do I need to pay a cent each time they detect me just looking at their buildings?
Comment · 11 years ago
Yes. And there are tons of other startups and probably also YC companies involved in heavy scraping, aggregating and selling that information to other folks.
Comment · 11 years ago
Well, with all the previous relevations we've seen about various 3 and 4 letter agencies, we should have marched long ago.
Comment · 11 years ago
Thanks for all the insights about the Tomahawks. What OP is refering to is cheaper, smaller and therefore in much more numbers deployable fighting drones. Each and every anti-missile site, be it fixed or portable has it's limits on what they can defend against.

I also assume that OP was refering to drones that could go through current missile defence systems because they can't be easily identified, neither visually nor with radar.

Yes, we (or at least you guys in the US) had them in the form of expensive, capable systems, but not at a smaller, cheaper or whatnot scale.

Also, can't Tomahawk launches not be detected by a some signatures they emit? I assume that modern mil space radar systems are able to do that.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton