Recent submissions

Comment · 7 years ago
Comment · 7 years ago
I don't think you read their comment correctly.

They are saying that their is no downside, outside of running foul of laws and regulators, for banks to take money without review instead of flagging transactions as suspicious.

Your response is about additional benefits for them taking the money without questions.

Comment · 8 years ago
It works here. Voting fraud is incredibly rare.
Comment · 10 years ago
They have invested in their tech team which is both infrastructure and expense. How much of the ~$10 billion it's worth is up for debate, but zeroing it's value is absurd.
Comment · 10 years ago
Or they are just underfunded relative to the amount of work they have to do. http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/09/01/49223579...

The Slate Star Codex article fails to make the case that lowering the general regulatory thresholds for medical devices or drugs improves societal outcomes. It makes a compelling, if possibly flawed, case for the EpiPen, but assumes generalizability rather than showing it.

We know the costs of not having something like the FDA. All one has to do is look at the supplements industry and imagine if real drugs were like that.

Oh, you thought you were getting what was on the label? Silly you. https://healthyfoodusa.com/fda-finds-majority-of-herbal-supp...

You thought you'd get something that would help? Silly you. http://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/dietary-supple...

You thought you'd get something that didn't have major unknown side effects? Silly you. http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/817427-overview

Edit:

Also ignored is how the FDA is a major incentive to create something new that both helps with the problem and doesn't generate an unreasonable amount of other ones. If the barriers to market entry are removed, you are putting the informational cost on the consumer. If it's cheaper to fool them than to do the due diligence in development, that's what will be done. And it's pretty clear from the supplement industry that it is cheaper.

Scott Alexander likes to make the future costs of a lack of new medications argument a lot. He has to account for the costs of a lack of new effective medications as well.

Edit 2:

Scott Alexander doesn't try to make the case the FDA is corrupt. He talks about how Mylan uses the court system and lobbies congress. And his point about costs is undercut by a later post he made about coming up with the chairs statistic: http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/08/31/terrorists-vs-chairs-an...

Comment · 10 years ago
Any good research Uni's psych department will have some TMS studies going on over the course of a year. You'll probably have to do a repetitive task and they probably won't be doing any diagnostics (for that you're way better off with a FMRI or EEG study, where they're often happy to share the data with you), but if you're just curious about the experience you can probably get paid a pittance to try it out.
Comment · 10 years ago
Comment · 10 years ago
Comment · 10 years ago
Comment · 10 years ago
That's an absurd proposition. Even if you have an incredibly cynical view of humanity, it's extremely unlikely to be unable to find someone in a government with power who holds any reasonable common position of the general populace.
Comment · 11 years ago
This. Literally every single person who identified themselves as in the security fields that I saw said the researcher went too far.

What's really getting to me is the overwhelming number of responses containing idea that everything that isn't explicitly banned is permitted, despite the recipient saying "No" (even indirectly/without justification) at some point. How to deal with the grey area of consent is something that every adult should know, and it's worrying to me that so many here seem to feel entitled to whatever they can take as long as it wasn't explicitly forbidden.

Obviously FB should update their policy, but at the same time it's important that we as the community use this as an opportunity to learn and discuss where the implicit boundaries are, where one needs clear-cut agreement to proceed.

Consent is sexy.

Comment · 11 years ago
He kept it for a month. That is different than looking at it.
Comment · 11 years ago
Here is what's happening right now:

FB: He's an experienced bug bounty hunter and should know where reasonable borders are.

All the experienced security guys itt: He's an experienced bug bounty hunter and should know where reasonable borders are or at least not pivot/escalate without asking. Also never dump and hold data.

Everyone else: What he did isn't technically against the rules FB wrote, so they are screwing him, despite it also being written that they have sole discretion.

Comment · 11 years ago
AAA games are frequently one platform, generally either PC for UI reasons or locked into a particular console as an exclusive.
Comment · 11 years ago

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton