traceroute66

7 ms·

1.
by traceroute66 3d ago
The point I'm making is that companies who are serious enough to want to keep their code-base in-house and off the various online repo services are also the kind of companies who are strict about what you can and cannot do with LLMs (i
2.
by traceroute66 3d ago
I very much doubt the problem magically disappears with "newer" pesticides. Afterall, if a pesticide washed off in the rain, it wouldn't be much good as a pesticide .... it would be a very expensive proposition for the farmer
3.
by traceroute66 3d ago
> You don't have to give out your phone number. You can mint an arbitrary "username" and give the username out to people. You are deliberately missing the point. Signal are gatekeeping these new advanced security features
4.
by traceroute66 3d ago
> you can buy Mullvad credits on Amazon That is not the same thing. You buy a Mullvad scratch card on Amazon and you redeem the token string. Mullvad also offer the option to put your card number into the Mullvad website, and I'm su
5.
by traceroute66 4d ago
> How does that work? My gut feeling is that any serious real-world company with a proprietary codebase worth looking at would not be handing out the crown jewels to a third party. License or not. I don't doubt somebody licensed the
6.
by traceroute66 4d ago
> You're giving up transparency for it being harder to game But then if we take that argument to its natural extreme, surely it means people should take the marketing bullshit published in the 100-page system cards published by Anth
7.
by traceroute66 4d ago
Yeah, erm. You should only ever eat fruit skins if the fruit is organic and the skin is clean. At this point I think its safe to say there are hundreds of scientific studies out there telling you why. This is one example[1]. I quote from th
8.
by traceroute66 4d ago
So TL;DR benchmarking in a completely non-reproducible manner ? "Model X performed great, but we can't possibly tell you anything about the code it was looking at apart from it was a large code base from an unknown company".
9.
by traceroute66 4d ago
> What is a more private, usable solution for filtering them out than using a phone number? Since when is giving out your phone number a "more private" option ?
10.
by traceroute66 4d ago
> registering without phone number as a paid option soon Replacing the need to register with a phone number with a requirement to pay is a better option how, exactly ?
11.
by traceroute66 11d ago
Super, thanks. zonemaster added to my bookmarks !
12.
by traceroute66 12d ago
> Netnod.se uses a DNSKEY that is too small on their main domain. Interesting, could you expand on that ? I ran netnod.se through the Verisign[1] and internet.nl[2] and it passes DNSSEC tests ? [1] https://dnssec-analyzer.veri
13.
by traceroute66 12d ago
> We found deSEC to be the only affordable DNS supplier in the EU that complies with state of the art secure DNSSEC. I mean, if your definition of "affordable" is free, then sure. But for the record there are other affordable E
14.
by traceroute66 13d ago
> Main browser: A restricted Firefox Mullvad Browser[1] is an example of just that, ready to go for people in the real world who don't have the time or inclination to mess around with random extensions and `about:config` hacking. Al
15.
by traceroute66 13d ago
> given they've been a bit of a hot mess since the early 2010's-ish No. Oversimplified summary: There was a period around 2010 when the management at the time wanted to follow a more commercial route with various unrelated &quo
16.
by traceroute66 13d ago
> My point is both that it's hard to tell, Its not hard to tell for things like ".uk" or other serious suffixes. It only (maybe) becomes hard(er) to tell for all the vanity ccTLDs that came along in the 2000s. But even th
17.
by traceroute66 13d ago
> but you have to admit that the existence of these SLDs (like co.uk) I'm sorry, what ? Admit ? Confusion ? In the case of .co.uk it has been around since 1996. HN is a technical forum, most people here should be well aware it is a
18.
by traceroute66 13d ago
> What's so dangerous about it? Implying lack of trust in `co.uk` Implying `co.uk` may suffer the same fate at `.name` Complete FUD.
19.
by traceroute66 13d ago
> Nobody owns the .co part of .co.uk. If you buy foo.co.uk, that is registered with Nominet, who are the registry for .uk. Yup. The original statement was dangerous FUD which should be urgently corrected.
20.
by traceroute66 13d ago
> geez, dude, someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning... 5 seconds on wikipedia or google would have stopped them spreading completely dangerous FUD about .co.uk.
21.
by traceroute66 13d ago
> disagree on .co.uk being a problem Nominet and therefore .co.uk has been around since 1996. .co.uk is not going anywhere, and neither is Nominet. The only "problem" is the original poster did not do their homework. I suspect
22.
by traceroute66 14d ago
> I'm able to load a bunch of different models on my little mini-PC with 16GB RAM, but the performance is terrible With all due respect, I'm not clear why you are so surprised ? By your own admission its a little mini-PC with 1
23.
by traceroute66 15d ago
Not a fan of Mr Dyson politically or "inventor" wise. Politically he was a loud backer of Brexit and then disappeared off to Singapore when it actually happened – he moved back two years later, perhaps having seen the bad PR but t
24.
by traceroute66 15d ago
> Tape drives are much simpler Maybe back in the 90's :) LTO-9 increased track density, increased the total number of tracks by reducing their width and increased linear density. The "how" certainly does not sound "mu
25.
by traceroute66 17d ago
This is from 2025. I don't know why someone has seen fit to repost it again in 2026.... I'm guessing they didn't look at the date. And lots of people here are spouting FUD. In the ensuing period, the EU took expert advice la
26.
by traceroute66 23d ago
> If a person off on holiday just had their face burned off I suggest you actually read my post, because its clear you did not. If you had read it, you would have seen the phrase "Of course, if you have a temporary mismatch due to b
27.
by traceroute66 23d ago
I don't follow. You cite three meaningful changes in biometrics: disfigured, loss of fingerprint and retinal issues. In all three cases surely the right and proper thing do to is to get your details updated on the system ? It may even
28.
by traceroute66 24d ago
Please do not attempt to move goalposts. My original comment was quite clearly about businesses, I wrote company/companies three times. I was unaware German Impressum applied to a natural person who is not running a business. If that
29.
by traceroute66 24d ago
> I live in the Czech Republic ....build a website without identifying yourself I am not familiar with Czech Republic law but out of curiosity I asked an LLM: § 435 of the Civil Code (Act no. 89/2012 Coll.) The law expli
30.
by traceroute66 24d ago
> it's a very naive thing to think that it's just "customers/suppliers" looking at who they're dealing with Its still no excuse. Nobody forces anybody to start a business. If somebody chooses to start a busi

More ›