Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | slashdave's comments login

DeLoreans are rare (only 9,000 were built).


> I know the graphics chip is better.

Graphics? We used these machines with 9600 baud serial terminals.


I am not sure about the 360’s terminals, but some terminals could display graphics via sixels. Konsole and xterm are capable of showing them in the present day if you run a terminal copy of word perfect.


The 360 was pretty big in high-energy physics. The numerical libraries used at the time (KERNLIB, some of which found its way into BLAS) were all written within the limitations of FORTRAN 77, something that was not needed for the VAX.


> you already have permission to do all the other things

Of course. The problem is that a 3rd party agent can now use your permission to do what it wants, and you will be none the wiser.


You're already trusting that third party agent on your own computer. If VSCode itself was malware then it can do anything you can do, including sshing into remote machines and running commands behind your back.


No -- when I ssh somewhere I am NOT giving them (the server) permission to run code on MY computer. When I vscode-remote somewhere then I AM giving them (the server) to run code on MY computer. You don't expect visiting a website to give the website permission to edit your local files, and so similarly some people might expect that if they are remote-editing with vscode they are not giving the remote-server permission to edit their local files either. Best to be aware!


VSCode is opensource. Remote ssh agent is not.


VSCode is not if installed with binaries.


Are you saying that the VSCode binaries are not built from the exact source that is available? Or that the opensource license doesn't apply to the version of VSC that is distributed via binaries?

I'm using VSCodium myself anyway, but I'm also installing it from binaries (precompiled packages), as is the case with most opensource software I use.


What's that got to do with anything?


that you can theoritically audit vscode code, but not ssh agent code...


Does that have anything to do with SECURITY?

The train of logic has run way off the rail in this thread.


How does it differ from just logging into that machine and running code?


VSCode remotes can execute code on the connecting clients, so a pwned remote server can pwn your local machine.


I mean, yeah, technically true - although you would connect in untrusted mode if you didn't trust the machine where you were editing code. At that point it should only be slightly more dangerous than opening a web page from the remote server.

So yeah, if you don't trust the remote machine then I agree - you probably shouldn't use it. But I don't really think that's the use-case they had in mind.


In that it's like THAT machine is also logging into your machine, and running code there...


Who is denying long COVID?

https://recovercovid.org


https://bmjgroup.com/flawed-body-of-research-indicates-true-...

Less so now, I agree. But there has been a denialist tendency just as for ME


Dare I ask: what did people do before the internet existed?


In person networking, it still works and the ratio of signal to noise has only gotten higher post-internet.

SW/Hacker types have this on easy-mode compared to other industries because of how many professional / enthusiast groups we have floating around in every city. We do our jobs outside of work for fun. That's doesn't work for an accountant. Companies seem to vastly prefer recruiting from these events and they get you past the screens. I've never once not gotten the interview emailing or name dropping the event / company rep I talked to.


The internet but not the www existed when I started out. Cover letters were handwritten, the CV was typed and the lot was posted or delivered by hand.


My first job was from an ad in the local paper, I sent a copy of my resume via mail with a covering letter and my home phone number. Also agents were actually useful, they were a hub where employers went to look for people and the agent had a list of people looking for jobs.


> Why does Apple keep insisting that I want anything to do with them after I bought the device?

Um, because that is what their customers are asking for?


> users may never want or need

Are you assuming that Apple did not perform a market analysis when implementing this feature? I think that is unlikely, considering the effort.


Apple follows the law. First you need to get the Chinese government to respect those rights. The only other choice is to stop doing business entirely in the country.


A choice many companies have made. Apple is in China to make money, which is what a corporation is set up to do. My point is them claiming the moral high ground of a human rights defender is utterly laughable bullshit.


> for some reason

It's directly tied to features they provide in their photo app. This is hardly obscure.


Why make it extremely hard to disable? Photos is hardly a system level app


A clearly marked option in the settings menu is "extremely hard"?


Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

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

Search: