Recent submissions

Comment · 1 year ago
Ollama has a num_ctx parameter that controls the context window length - it defaults to 2048. At a guess you will need to set that.
Comment · 1 year ago
Hey Justin - this is probably one of my favourite talks!

https://testdouble.com/insights/the-selfish-programmer

Was lucky to be at the conference when you gave it and it's stuck in my head since. When I'm struggling for motivation or my side projects seem to be just too big I give it another watch.

Comment · 11 years ago
v4 will compile with libsass by default. You can set the TWBS_SASS environment variable to use the Ruby compiler if desired.
Comment · 13 years ago
Comment · 13 years ago
I've had 4 emails in the past month providing information about the phishing emails from my department, JCR and IT services, and despite that a number of accounts still got compromised.

Couldn't agree more about education never actually fixing the problem.

Comment · 14 years ago
Both of them have applied for .search.

> The .search gTLD provides Google with the opportunity to differentiate its Google Search products and services by linking them to a unique gTLD. Google will be able to quickly distinguish new products and services it develops and⁄or acquires by offering them in the proposed gTLD.

> The mission of the .SEARCH registry is to provide a unique and dedicated platform for Amazon while simultaneously protecting the integrity of its brand and reputation.

> A .SEARCH registry will:

> • Provide Amazon with additional controls over its technical architecture, offering a stable and secure foundation for online communication and interaction.

> • Provide Amazon a further platform for innovation.

> • Enable Amazon to protect its intellectual property rights.

Basically, only for their own commercial gains. The other two applicants want .search to be a place for consolidation of search related domains, which seems like an absolute pipe dream.

Comment · 14 years ago
It was specifically mentioned a couple of times in the post-launch press conference.
Comment · 14 years ago
Comment · 14 years ago
Comment · 14 years ago
I thought that he added his public key to the Rails user through his own account settings, which wouldn't give him access to the Rails web admin.
Comment · 14 years ago
Comment · 14 years ago
I think this is related to an issue he opened on Rails[1] which would suggest that GitHub isn't protecting against malicious mass assignment.

By default, if you have an new, create or update_attributes (and more, I imagine) call which changes various attributes based on a hash from parameters (eg params[:post], where you have params[:post][:title], params[:post][:body] etc) Rails allows mass assignment of every attribute on that model, since attr_accessible is not called.

There is a method you can call in the model called attr_accessible that restricts the columns that can be updated through mass assignment, while still allowing for manual assignment of other columns.

An example of this might be a post's user_id, which you would usually want to set to the current user while not allowing mass assignment. Without specifying attr_accessible it would mean that if a malicious user added params[:post][:user_id] to their POST/PUT, the Rails application would update the user_id as per the params value. If attr_accessible had been called, defining the columns that the developer wanted to be mass assigned (say post and title), it would mean that the user_id would not be mass assigned and Rails would log that this was the case.

attr_accessible therefore acts as a whitelist for columns that can be mass assigned. It just so happens that the Rails default is to have no whitelist and allow all columns to be mass assigned, despite the fact that the sensible option is to always have a call to attr_accessible in your models.

[1]: https://github.com/rails/rails/issues/5228

Comment · 14 years ago
I'd recommend not travelling through Manchester Airport then, which have backscatter machines in place and do not allow for opt-out (although this is as-per DfT guidelines). They do only test a random sample, however.

    The Department for Transport has full confidence in the independent assessment 
    undertaken by the Health Protection Agency. We are confident with their assessment
    that the dose from being scanned is far below the allowed levels in the UK and
    does not constitute any unacceptable risks to health
Comment · 14 years ago
Comment · 15 years ago
Much appreciated - it's nice to hear and see others using it. There's a few commits to catch up with on the 2.0-wip branch, hopefully I'll get some updates done and pushed today.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton