Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | zeagle's commentslogin

Simplest example: a driver could probably disable attentive driving checks by pasting a script in from a web search in a few minutes. Nothing like an inattentive 3750 lbs weapon.

A driver could also install a little machine that turns the wheel slightly at regular intervals, to the same effect.

Yeah and they could hire a professional driver or a engineer and IPO for billions a life sized driving AI powered crypto robot too. Look, like clearly google + ctrl-v scripting or running an one click deployment exe on your computer on a whim is different than physically ordering/picking up something and then installing it into a vehicle?

Of course they're different, but you're trying to argue that the former takes objectively less effort than the latter, and it doesn't. One or the other may take less effort depending on who you are and what you know.

I've heard multiple people claim an ankle weight on the steering wheel is sufficient for hands-free driving.

Actively combated by Tesla as they detect it also. They actively apply patches to try and detect things like this and block it.

Which would get you in trouble if you were to be pulled over by the police at any moment.

Exactly. Look at something like the Sony XM5s that have a defective design that breaks in a light wind. There a class action against them for the crap they pulled and refusal to warranty. Not that I’m bitter at them or anything.


Nothing new here then. Back when I used to DJ some 20+ years ago, people would complain back then that Sony headphones would constantly break on them.

Meanwhile I had Sennheisers and they could take an absolute beating and still work fine. While also being plastic and cheap looking in comparison to other brands in the same price packet.


Yeah, I had a pair of MDR-V700 back in the day, and they broke in about 2-3 years max, without any abuse, just randomly.

I gave them to a friend who "quick-fixed" them with a screw at the pivot point, but they lost all their flexibility after that. He didn't mind because he was using them solely for drumming, but I couldn't use them anymore.

That being said, I have had some nasty experiences with Sennheiser's IEMs as well. Had to send 2 of them in warranty within a year, products that were in the 300-600 euro range back around 2010!


I would imagine battery life would be poor vs an eReader. In case you seek the same: I used a boox onyx (12"?) and OK overall. Issues IMO were the display is very fragile & did it in in the end despite a case and pocket in the bag, color was a bit of gimmick, most importantly the resolution was not good enough read journals/PDFs/stuff like the guardian weekly via libby crisply without zooming in... but the rest was decent. I switched to a kindle scribe I got for 1/3 the price after but it can't read the guardian or anything like that unfortunately like an android tablet. So just a bulky eReader with meeting notes there. If it even just showed my daily calendar I’d be happy.


This is pretty impressive! I'm always impressed with what one can 3D print to fit commercial products into a previous case! Modifying to fit the larger webcam module, battery in that way was neat too. Does the display connect via framework's cable without modification? I have an old motherboard running headless I was thinking of resurrecting but if I need to hook up a USC-C display.


No, most people recognize a government isn’t reflective of individual people and are kind. If anything you’ll be more likely to be let in on the road if you are in the wrong lane assuming you don’t know where you are going. Having said that I wouldn’t wear/sticker political messaging, namely Trump and MAGA given current realities, but really of any type.


> but really of any type.

I've never understood why somebody behind me on the road would care at all about what my political views were anyway. I guess I get it during an election, maybe (in a grammar school "inventor contest" which happened to be during the 1980 US presidential election, I invented a bumper sticker sleeve that attaches to your car, so you could swap out political bumper stickers after your candidate lost. I didn't win the contest.) But in the end I don't really understand putting any sort of social signaling of any kind on my cars, though it seems hard to avoid even by just the kind of car you drive.

Closer to topic, I've always thoroughly enjoyed my trips to Canada, and can't imagine why people think "it's just like the US, so why bother" as seems to have been expressed ny some in this thread. I somewhat recently drove up to Roberval, Quebec from my home in New England, and it was absolutely nothing like the US. I find the rural Quebecois very odd, refreshingly direct, and enjoyable to hang out with.


I'd take that election atmosphere and then recognize Canadians are living in a charged environment with cost of living/quality of life/economy changing and uncertainty. Many Canadians see Trump & his with the de facto support he has (in that nothing has been done about it despite posturing) as a threat and root cause of much of it. Not all of that's true or due to him or the US. But it means nobody down there will meaningfully protect Canada with his threats/economic war if they can't even block his domestic chaos. Folks are happy to see other folks and appreciate visitors but they also recognize a threat. Just like in America. So agree why publicize foreign political views.

Perhaps in the white vs black experience lens that most of my US friends seem to see every world conflict through to relate to their own history (wild conversations about Middle Eastern politics there being racial), it's like wearing something racially inflammatory to the wrong neighbourhood. If one's blowing $$,$$$ on bespoke fly in tourism you can probably get away with it with a polite topic change as tourism keeps food on the table, but park a Trump sticker on a residential street I'd be surprised if even in the nicest neighbourhood there isn't some damage to it. Likely from a teenager goofing off with friends in the current environment.

To the second individually most Americans are nice in my experience, if you are seen as a person and not anonymous in the crowd. I've had a family member get a rifle leveled at them for stepping over a property line in the US where clearly they weren't seen as a fellow human... what can I say to that or the normalization of it.


Is it different on Windows from MacOS? I have AI features disabled on firefox 148.0 and my options on an image are a reasonable list of Open Image in New Tab, Save Image As..., Copy Image, Copy Image Link, Email Image, Set Image as Desktop Background..., Take Screenshot, Inspect Accessibility Properties, Inspect (Q) and two related to extensions that are my choice (Block Element..., Bitwarden). For links I get the Open in (...) options. If I enable AI features I get one extra menu. And very niche to disable print.enabled so you can't print from your browser?


I mean why wouldn’t they? All their IP was scraped for at their own cost of hosting it for AI training. It further pulls away from their own business models as people ask the AI models the questions instead of reading primary sources. Plus it doesn’t seem likely they’ll ever be compensated for that loss given the economy is all in on AI. At least search engines would link back.


Those countermeasures don't really have an effect in terms of scraping. Anyone skilled can overcome any protection within a week or two. By officially blocking IA, IA can't archive those websites in a legal way, while all major AI companies use copyrighted content without permission.


For sure. There are many billions and brilliant engineers propping up AI so they will win any cat and mouse game of blocking. It would be ideal if sites gave their data to IA and IA protected it exactly from what you say. But as someone that intentionally uses AI tools almost daily (mainly open evidence) IMO blame the abuser not the victim that it has come to this.


I'm not blaming the victim, but don't play the 'look what you made me do' game. Making content accessible to anyone (even behind a paywall) is a risk they need to take nevertheless. It's impossible to know upfront if the content is used for consumption or to create derived products (e.g. write an article in NYT style etc.). If this was a newspaper, this would be equivalent to scanning paper and then training AI. You can't prevent scanning, as the process is based on exactly the same phenomenon what makes your eyes see, iow information being sent and received. The game was lost before it even started.


That is a good question. However, copyright exists (for a limited time) to allow for them to be compensated. AI doesn't change that. It feels like blocking AI-use is a ploy to extract additional revenue. If their content is regurgitated within copyright terms, yes, they should be compensated.


The problem is that producing a mix of personalized content that doesn't appear (at least on its face) to violate copyright still completely destroys their business model. So either copyright law needs to be updated or their business model does.

Either way I'm fairly certain that blocking AI agent access isn't a viable long term solution.


> Either way I'm fairly certain that blocking AI agent access isn't a viable long term solution.

Great point. If my personal AI assistant cannot find your product/website/content, it effectively may no longer exist! For me. Ain't nobody got the time to go searching that stuff up and sifting through the AI slop. The pendulum may even swing the other way and the publishers may need to start paying me (or whoever my gatekeeper is) for access to my space...


That’s a perspective I hadn’t considered. Although the whole thing stinks of middlemen extracting all the profit between producers and consumers e.g. ag sector by the laws won’t catch up or even force integration. Thanks!


There is definitely a middleman question.

The bigger question is business model vs value-add. Copyright law draws a very direct line from value-add to compensation - if you created something new (or even derivative), copyright attaches to allow for compensation, if people find it valuable.

Business models are a different animal: they can range from value-add services and products to rent-seeking to monopolies, extracting value from both producers and consumers.

While copyright law makes no mention of business models, I don't know whether that is a historical artifact since copyright is presumably older, or a philosophical exclusion because society owes no business model a right to exist. I would suggest the existence of monopoly-busting government agencies argues that societies do not owe business models a right of existence. Fair compensation for the advancement of arts and sciences is clearly a public good, though.

Tying it back to the AI-in-the-middle question, it's yet another platform in a series of these between producers and consumers, and doesn't override copyright. Regurgitating a copyright (article, art, whatever) should absolutely attract compensation; should summarizing content attract compensation? should it be considered any different from a friend (or executive assistant) describing the content? And if the producers' business model involves extracting value from a transaction on any basis other than adding value to the consumer, does society owe that business model any right to exist?


Until recently I had a 4gb ram 80gb ssd+2tb hd VPS running debian in a Montreal data centre with a real use 700 mbit pipe to my city with a budget provider for the equivalent of $80USD/year. When fio speeds were slow they moved me to a less crowded server. I gave it up as don't need it and moved my personal sites back to NFS for peanuts a year and services to my NAS. The pricing, offsite storage for my backups, Canadian sovereignty, lack of perceived complexity with a big provider was all attractive. I'm a physician with a tech hobby and last serious tech work was in the LAMP days with perl and php. Trying to think of learning about AWS and screwing up usage based billing was daunting!


Yeah, don't try AWS. I tried it once and now I'm stuck with $0 bill emails coming each month that I can't stop.


A few months ago I was going through my secondary email and noticed I was getting a $0.01 monthly bill from AWS.

Having not used AWS for years, I logged in to check it out, navigated through the Kafkaesque maze of their services until I found what I was looking for:

A lone S3 storage bucket, with one file, "Squirrel.jpg". A 200kB picture of a squirrel that I uploaded 8 years ago and can't remember why.


> I was getting a $0.01 monthly bill from AWS.

I wonder what the cost to AWS was for keeping track of that and running your CC. There's no way they made money off you / that 12 cents/year cost them *at least* 12 cents to collect every year


That's funny. I kept getting a -$100 bill from a credit card for a few months after closing it. Eventually called them and suggested they can send me a cheque instead of a bill next time for similar reasons...


IIRC the CC they had on hand had long expired and they never actually managed to charge me for these minuscule amounts, which is why I didn't notice it for so long.


My vps provider bills in $5 blocks


That should be below the threshold for AWS’s free tier. I have more than that in S3 and I’m not being charged a cent.


AWS did some weird security thing and it invalidated my 2FA. I can't login to my account to update my expired card.

I have $6 in charges and so now my account is locked. Lol. Fuck off AWS.


> Trying to think of learning about AWS and screwing up usage based billing was daunting!

One of the hard rules we learned pre-pandemic was that services attached to usage based billing should really exit on error. It's a lesson I'm keeping in mind working with agents and routing (and the main reason I'm local-first).


Canadian here, could you share the name of the provider? I'd love to move to something more local and just need a basic small vps for a simple apache host. I know of a couple providers but never talked to anyone actually using one.


I did a detailed review of a few Canadian VPS providers last year.

https://lukecyca.com/2025/canadian-vps-review.html

Last year, I moved from DigitalOcean to FullHost (their Vancouver datacentre) for hosting a small SaaS and a bunch of personal projects. It's cheaper and FAR better performance.


Thanks! I'll check it out!


It was ServaRICA as someone else suggested. It was a Black Friday hybrid VPS deal from a few years ago, looks like they still have comparable stuff on their site. For the cost I would generally assume anything important needs to be duplicated in case the company folds or a fire unless you pay them for such a service. (I don't have any vested interest in suggesting them.)


Thanks! Nothing important, personal site with the source stored in a git repo replicated to a few places, so them folding would just be a minor inconvenience.


They're probably talking about ServaRICA. They post deals on LowEndTalk.


Thank you!


That sounds a lot like a newspaper subscription. I subscribe to my local (physical) paper once a week for this reason.


Modern-day patronage is kind of different from a subscription. It's a lot like a "pay what you want" subscription model, but people seem a lot more generous when you express it as a "donation with early access to premium articles" rather than payment for goods and services.


That's really fair. I think of my donations and support and usually higher than I would want to subscribe for!


Yeah, as long as you remove the "for-profit" part, it's essentially that. Once it's a for-profit business, it perverses the incentives, and it'll be a race to the bottom or a race to see what subscribers can survive the highest prices, which is exactly what we wanna avoid :)


Non-profits don't really stop any of that. Plenty of non-profits are after perverse incentives to gather as much money as they can to just pay higher ups more money, and use the non-profit status to pay employees less.


Maybe there's a third way. What about a company owned by a "perpetual purpose trust" - i.e. a trust with a defined purpose that is legally binding. It's the only shareholder, so no extracting value and all profits have to comply with the trust's bylaws in how they are used. Patagonia (US company) is one example of this; it's profits are legally bound to go toward environmental causes.

Bosch and Zeiss in Germany are comparable - they are Verantwortungseigentum (Steward-Ownership).


This is the business model of The Guardian:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Trust_Limited


That sounds kind of like a B-Corp, innit?


That's a third-party certification that can be allowed to lapse, not a legal or legally enforceable status.

https://www.bcorporation.net/en-us/certification/


> Plenty of non-profits are after perverse incentives to gather as much money as they can to just pay higher ups more money

Where is this specifically, in the US? Usually the laws of the country prevent this, since they're you know... Non-profits... But wouldn't surprise me there are a few leftover countries who refuse to join the modern world.


The US has this problem. There aren't really rules on paying executives as much as you want, or having bonus structures based on fundraising, as long as the board okays it and considers it as contributing to the mission. It is non-profit because it doesn't pay out profits to investors. This is a large way corruption happens in the US, ie a lot of those "X politician foundations" pay modest amounts of money to some cause, but a large percentage of the donations go to the executive as a salary for running the corp, the executive is the politician. Its a big shell game.


Yeah, seemingly a local problem rather than a problem with non-profits, unfortunately :/ Hope things get better over there over time!


What country do you live in and can you link to the laws regulating nonprofit employee pay so that we can compare and use them as a model?


You just find the optimal point for the most people if it's for profit.


I think that only holds if company ownership is not close with company leadership. Is a "subscriber owned" newspaper model possible? Like how co-op stores are at least nominally owned by their customers.

I could also imagine a system in which a local newspaper was actually run as a public utility by an independent corporation, but explicitly chartered and subsidized by a town/city/county.


I doubt that's true in practice, although I know many capitalists know that to be true in theory.


For someone who runs a small personal website and uses LE to secure this + some web exposed services, could you explain how this is different/better than acme-dns-certbot?


Let's Encrypt is a single point of failure.

WebPKI also suffers from an inability to properly do delegation. It's not possible for me to create an intermediary certificate valid only for *.mycompany.com

If I want to use WebPKI, I have to either expose every host inside my company to everyone (via CT transparency logs) or use a wildcard certificate. And wildcard certs allow attackers to impersonate anything within my domain, if they get access to just one host.

X.509 technically supports name constraints ( https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5280#section-4.2.1.10 ), but its implementation was inconsistent. In particular, some implementations did not apply it to the Common Name. Fortunately, Common Name is on the path to deprecation.


CT logs do allow enumeration, but avoiding that is just security through obscurity. WebPKI is intended for publicly-accessible hosts, so hopefully you already have some kind of firewall in place to protect them! If you want to avoid enumeration of internal-only hosts: just use your own self-signed root cert. CT logs are a crucial part of protecting against rogue CAs, so don't expect that to go away any time soon.

With ACME most of the delegation issues have pretty much been solved. Publicly-accessible hosts can easily get a cert - if and only if the domain resolves to that host. Want even stricter enforcement? Nobody's stopping you from writing an ACME proxy which only forwards requests from known-good hosts to LE & friends.


> CT logs do allow enumeration, but avoiding that is just security through obscurity.

Well, yes. There are also other issues, like rate limits. Some companies have hundreds of thousands of hosts (some virtual) and requesting certificates for all of them might be problematic.

> If you want to avoid enumeration of internal-only hosts: just use your own self-signed root cert.

This becomes increasingly problematic, as browsers start relying on DoH/DoT, or making it more difficult to enroll custom root certs.

> Nobody's stopping you from writing an ACME proxy which only forwards requests from known-good hosts to LE & friends.

I actually tried that. LE uses multiple viewpoints to resolve the challenges, so you need to open your internal DNS resolvers/HTTPS to basically all the world. Or play with the horror of split-horizon DNS.


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

Search: