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

In the software development / security world, someone reporting a vulnerability to you is one of the greatest things one human can do for another.

I've been burned in the long past when trying to be helpful to an activist. The accuracy of information provided was never a consideration.


> In the software development / security world, someone reporting a vulnerability to you is one of the greatest things one human can do for another.

Depends on context. When it's a knowledgeable user reporting the issue, you're right.

What I mostly encounter are for profit "security researchers" who try to profit on fear and/or misunderstanding.


Yes. As someone who spent years on the receiving end of these, I'd change my original post to be about "real" vulnerabilities, not the results of automated scans.


Unfortunately something like 90% of "vulnerability reports" are some guy in India running an automated scanner reporting something that isn't actually a vulnerability and demanding $1,000+. This creates a ton of noise in the system both for legitimate security researchers and the people stuck managing vulnerability disclosure programs.


Yes, it's a very logical part of a tariff regime, and tariffs penalize domestic manufacturers without it.

But wow, are tariffs (and other micro taxes) disruptive on getting things done efficiently.


I have the problem since weeks. An electric device made for me with billing isnt in the catallog of regular stuff or whatever and now they need to figure out what it could be because my description is not enough -.-


You mean this fixes the first order effect that penalizes domestic manufacturers, assuming correct information. It does not solve it, there's second, third, fourth, ... order effects. And there's no rule those are smaller than first order, in fact, they're almost universally more.

Domestic manufacturers are still disadvantaged by having to pay tariffs for materials used for the product, but not present in the final product. And foreign manufacturers still don't. If used in machines (and used up), used in mining (and used up), used in transport, used in energy production, ...

These costs are very large, especially because specific materials are often not available worldwide, or have large differences in quality due to availability of tiny amounts of additives for alloys or compounds. These things do lead to very large differences in quality, and thus in value. You can't model that as a government, it's just not going to happen.

There's no way to fully analyze an entire economic chain (especially when almost everyone involved has a financial incentive to sabotage you doing that correctly, and that includes foreign governments). You'd think this wouldn't have to be explained to either Americans or especially a supposed "defender of capitalism", but here we are.


>But wow, are tariffs (and other micro taxes) disruptive on getting things done efficiently.

Well, that depends on what you are getting done.

If your objective is solely to get a product done, the most efficient way is probably going to involve terrible salaries plus ample disregard for the environment and human life. Anything else is going to be disruptive to that end.


I mean...they're still punished by tariffs with these changes, but they're also punished without them.


So the important bit here is that the guns failed drop testing. And that's bad.

The rest of the article seems to misunderstand FMEA style "write down every conceivable bad scenario in the universe, how bad it is, and then what you have done to stop it", and then spins this as "look at all these horrible known issues they knew about". I hope a jury doesn't view it the same way, because it would be an epic bad for safety everywhere if engineers writing down a list of bad things to avoid and mitigate was forbidden by company lawyers.


The important bit is that the guns failed drop testing and then Sig Sauer updated the design to fix the issue.


Well, and then didn’t recall them - instead favoring the ‘voluntary upgrade’. And apparently even those ‘upgraded’ under that still have this other, even bigger issue.


At that point, we're talking about different things than the FMEA mentioned in the headline.


As others have pointed out, this is primarily due to the American Civil War when the Medal of Honors was given out much more freely than today.

Here's the breakdown on more recent conflicts:

WWII, 625 total recipients, 13 Irish, 2.1%.

In the Korean War, there were 152 Medal of Honors, 3 given to Irish, or 1.9%.

In the Vietnam War, there were 271 Medal of Honors, 13 given to Irish, or 4.8%.

There were 36 Medal of Honor medals given out in the wars in Iraq and Afganistan. Of these, 3 are marked as Irish on that page, or 10.7%.


Well don’t leave me hanging, what are the numbers for the civil war?

Edit: according to gpt5 1522 were given out with roughly 10% or 150 were given to the Irish.


That figure from GPT-5 seems to be slightly off, according to the Irish Times: “At least 258 Irish-born soldiers have won the Medal of Honor since its inception. Of those, 148 won them during the civil war – 14 in one day when the Union Navy raided the Confederate port of Mobile, Alabama, in 1864.” https://web.archive.org/web/20250504103715/https://www.irish...


Yes, the GPT5 numbers are specifically about the Civil War so at 150 it was really close to the 148.


I carefully drew a lion fish. Turns out only 37% odds of being a fish. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lionfish)

Fun idea, fun site!


Don't be fooled by the headline - that's neither the authors words, nor his opinion, but an editor trying to bait viewers.

The article itself is good, and worth a read.

You can read the full article on the author's own substance here. https://walkingtheworld.substack.com/p/is-it-euro-poor-or-am...


For camping in humid summers, it's amazing how much difference a power bank and little fan can make. A little electricity goes a long way.


Tell that to a real homeless who typically as to be very creative to even just charge their phone. If they have one.


My guess is that the people who are paying $13 each way for a 30-minute commute are paying orders of magnitudes more than that in taxes already.

Also, given that this is not a huge number of people, relative to public transportation in NYC, it would probably not make much of a budget increase.


As almost every other commenter here has said, this is just a bad article in practically every way. It's quite possible that the problem isn't smart phones, but this article completely fails to show this.

Even the suicide data that they decide is the proper measure of mental health, and according to them proves that teens don't have a problem, shows a 2x increase in teen girl suicide.

I'm going to so something I almost never do, and flag, since this is just bait. I would love to read a case for this with a better argument however.


Market cap doesn't equal what people have purchased.

See this classic from 2015:

https://medium.com/signal-v-noise/press-release-basecamp-val...


  In order to determine the valuation of companies, Bhatnagar typically applies the following formula: [(Twitter followers x Facebook fans) + (# of employees x 1000)] x (total likes + daily page views) + (monthly burn rate x Google’s stock price)-squared and then doubles if it they’re mobile first or if the CEO has run a business into the ground before.
Beautiful.


I remember this one! Already 10 years ago, wow.


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

Search: