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

I disabled this 'feature' a while ago when I saw it on Twitter and forgot about it. However, recently I noticed that Twitter has been able to bypass the setting and was showing me my email under the Google option in the login provider list. I couldn't find any way to disable it.

It uses an iframe scoped to Google and I'm pretty sure that Twitter can't access my Google account data unless I select the login option but still, feels really creepy.


Amazon Kids+ is also a really good option for younger kids. Got a large number of games for a few pounds a month.

All the games are ad free and IAP free.


Yeah, we tried going to iPad for our kids but it’s so full of free to play junk.

Even with Amazon Kids, though, the games are still their free to play selves without purchases, so I still see these games where dopamine hits (get coins!) are a main mechanic :(


Apple Arcade has a bunch of good games without any of this junk (there are some “+” versions of some of the f2p games like Jetpack Joyride but lots of other good stuff).


Yeah I'm confused by this article. I've got a Virgin Media TV box which used 25w while on standby. Maybe I'm doing the math wrong but:

25w * 24 * 365 = 219000w or 219kw per year.

At my current electricity rate that's £39.42 per year at a very minimum just for the TV box.


The math is right but the units are messy. Watts are already energy/time, which is correct for the 25 W figure, but the 219 should be kWh/year.

25 W * 24 h/day * 365 days/year = 219000 Wh/year = 219 kWh/year

Which makes me notice that 1 kWh / year = 1000 Wh / year = 1000 Wh / (356 * 24h) = 0.117 W. So you can quickly estimate that a device with x Watts of constant consumption will have you paying for roughly 10 x kWh in electricity a year. With electricity costs on the order of 20 cents/kWh, that means a rule of thumb is "double the wattage, that's how many $ it'll cost you to have it running all year".


Your math is right, if you're not recording at night then you can switch it off at night (we switch one of ours off at night on a timer)


A good approximation is that 1W of power for a year costs you one Dollar (or Euro) per year.


I use DNS66 and have done for a few years. Works really well with Chrome on Android. If you frequently use a VPN it means you need to remember to switch it back on.


Did she need to do anything after clicking the link in Discord or was the exploit completely automated?

My kids have just started to get in to Roblox, not bought anything yet but I expect it'll happen soon enough.


From her story, she clicked a link that starts with `wrww-roblox.com` and seems nothing happened. She went about her day, slept, and found out that her account was empty when she wakes up.

The person might have been following her around for a while and some of her rare merchandizes had started attracting unwanted attention. She says she had been playing with the person for a while, and she missed the link that was NOT Roblox.


So that's the c6g and c7g but x86 instances are still on c5. Will AWS ever release an x86 computing instance again or is this just a sign that x86 has reached peak performance on AWS?


(29 NOV 2021) "New – Amazon EC2 M6a Instances Powered By 3rd Gen AMD EPYC Processors"

https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-amazon-ec2-m6a-instance...

"Up to 35 percent higher price performance per vCPU versus comparable M5a instances, up to 50 Gbps of networking speed, and up to 40 Gbps bandwidth of Amazon EBS, more than twice that of M5a instances."

"Larger instance size with 48xlarge with up to 192 vCPUs and 768 GiB of memory, enabling you to consolidate more workloads on a single instance. M6a also offers Elastic Fabric Adapter (EFA) support for workloads that benefit from lower network latency and highly scalable inter-node communication, such as HPC and video processing."

"Always-on memory encryption and support for new AVX2 instructions for accelerating encryption and decryption algorithms"


Missed this one too. Awesome, thanks.



I missed this. Thanks!


Yeah, that part confused me to. I'm pretty sure that if I bought a stolen xbox from some guy on a street corner and the Police find me with it, they'd not throw up their hands and say "oh well, I guess you own it now, on your way".

I assume there is a specific legal quirk with property ownership.


I believe the 'quirk' here is that the fraud was able to get property ownership updated with the Land Registry, so the new owner is the official owner of record.


Sounds to me like in the UK you cant truly own land if the government can just decide it belongs to someone else.


> cant truly own land if the government can just

This is mostly how private property works in practice, everywhere.


In civilized countries, it requires a specific decree or order by some government body, possibly after appeals.

Not just random clerk writing a line in a book when random stranger comes and tells they own a piece of land and are going to sell it.


> it requires a specific decree or order by some government body

That person is a random clerk

> possibly after appeals

I can 100% gaurantee that this case goes to court (if it is not settled to the now previous owners satisfaction).

I also suspect that the original owner will come out on top, by likely more than the 150k that their 'house' was worth.


Only thing I can think of is eminent domain. Here it using it requires either a specific decree by the national government (as in, the prime minister), zoning plan approved by the elected municipal government, or in some limited cases, apparently involving electric power lines, an agency. The owner is to be informed of the proceedings before they take effect.

The random clerk does not get to do write off your property belonging to someone else, unless your elected representative had a change voice an opinion in a proceedings where a clear public decision by the elected representatives to specifically take away someone's property was made.


Pretty much true everywhere.

It’s not like you can take anything with you when you’re dead, owning materials is really just a societal construct no matter which way you slice it.


Possession is a physical/real property of the universe.

Ownership is a legal abstraction/construct.


Being allowed to possess something (instead of being drug off kicking and screaming by the cops) is also a societal/legal construct.


It is a societal/legal construct brough up from the historical experience (eg. if a caveman built himself a hammer, they possessed it as long as they took good care of it).

We've redefined what "taking good care of something" means for things you possess, and we made elaborate social/legal constructs to clearly define boundaries of possession.

But this is present even in the animal world, even when it comes to "property" (wolfs mark their territory, so do lions, bees go back to their own hives, etc).


>Possession is a physical/real property of the universe

This assertion immediately falls apart on consideration IMO. Even in simple, controlled circumstances like football, the meaning of "possession" is subject to mutual agreement (i.e. "rules").

You could take some particular definition of "possession" as "natural" or otherwise axiomatic. This is not unheard of, but I think it's a trick of misdirection to place it in the domain of the "physical/real" when it is plainly a political matter.


Interesting point,

I wonder if we will ever have a future where cryogenic freezing works and allows people to own land after they are temporarily dead.


> Sounds to me like in the UK you cant truly own land

Can you name a country that behaves differently?


Yeah, you don't truly own land, you pay property taxes, etc.

It's more like you lease the land :)


Possession is 9/10ths of the law, and the gov’t likes to claim possession of all real property in it’s borders in some way or another


So the Land Registry is at fault? Good luck...


Interesting side note. That's true for property, but not for cash.

Cash is legally considered fungible. So, if someone steals a bunch of cash and buys something from you with it, even though that specific cash technically belonged to someone else before theft, it can't be reclaimed even if they can prove it.


I'm aware of this, but I do wonder what happens if, rather than using the stolen cash to purchase goods, the thief gave away the money? Either to friends, a random homeless person on the street, or to registered charities. Would that be still considered unreclaimable?


idk. Maybe buy a random thing from them for an absurd amount?

Or just make it rain on so many people that it's effectively impossible to get it all back. The power of decentralization.


No. If you bought it, you own it. The thief now owes the original owner damages. This is true in the United States and I assume England since it's old common law stuff.

It's why thieves try to steal and then turn over immediately.


No, that’s not correct in the US. If you buy stolen property unknowingly, it can be taken away from you.

Had my TV stolen, it ended up in a pawn shop. Luckily, I had receipt and serial number. There was some paperwork and court order but pawnshop had to return TV to me.


Yup, that is also why there are laws against Receiving Stolen Property [1] in the US. This is defined as:

>>According to general receiving stolen property laws, it is a crime to accept or purchase any property which you believe or have actual knowledge that it was obtained through illegal means, such as theft. However, receiving stolen property is its own separate crime and thus should not be confused with the similar criminal acts of theft, robbery, or extortion.

[1] https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/receiving-sto...


Knowingly receiving stolen property is a different thing.


The quirk is that in the UK you’re not a free man but only a subject and in the end the crown owns everything and now fuck off, filthy peasant, before the king sends his men.


This is true in practice pretty much everywhere governments exist though, it's not really a monarchy versus republic thing. The stick is no less painful if it's called "society's stick" rather than "the King's stick" if the government of the day decide to beat you with it.


Is this really different than any other country? Any government (at least in uncontested territories) can come in and tell you to fuck off, and there's really very little you can do about it.


Quite the opposite. You ask the state to use their monopoly on legitimate use of force to enforce your rights in accordance to law. What you imply is a failed state. The state must maintain the legitimacy of that use to maintain consent of the people, that or it slides into far less prosperous configurations.


Being in a far less prosperous (in a meta sense) configuration is surprisingly not as big a deterrent as one might expect, especially if you are making them angry or the official involved would get far more prosperous (in a direct, concrete way) along the way.


Kings and queens have been overthrown and replaced too, so I do not see any difference there either.


I think that when CF say unlimited bandwidth they really mean it. I manage a domain on the business level plan for a domain and I pushed over 1PB through it in January. Not a single complaint from CF and no sales calls pushing enterprise tier.

They haven't clarified their file operations costs yet though. That could get pricy but will more than likely be cancelled out by the egress savings for most use cases.


Not saying your experience isn't true, but I've heard horror stories of accounts being disabled for using too much "non-HTML" bandwidth, even on business level ($200/month) accounts (at the single digit TB level). The limits seem to be arbitrary and ill defined.

CF may be great technically, but I personally wouldn't use them without an enterprise agreement in place. Bandwidth should be cheap, but cheap does not equal free.

Unless I had an enterprise agreement in place I'd rather work with a vendor that has a well defined usage-based pricing. I have a low appetite for risk, and usage-based pricing aligns incentives properly IMHO.


Yes, you are right that an enterprise agreement is probably the safest approach and it's definitely something we have looked into since the beginning of the year.

In our case, one of our games DAU went pretty crazy last Christmas which resulted in a huge increase in players (who all need to download hundreds of MB of data). Maybe if it'd continued for many months the situation would be different and that angry email from CF would have eventually arrived.


Yeah, that's why I haven't dared put them in front of my B2 buckets, even though they have the Bandwidth Alliance.


> I personally wouldn't use them without an enterprise agreement in place

That would depend on the use case I'd assume.


How long ago was that?


Came across these 3-4 years ago when I was doing research on whether CF would be viable for a previous company.


Cloudflare only charge you the icann fees for most TLDs and don't make a profit on the same. If you fancy saving a few dollars over another registrar it might be a good place?

You can also use their page rules to easily do domain forwarding or just server up some static content from S3 with caching enabled


Really interesting, will R2 support lifecycle rules like S3 does? We write around 90 million files per month to S3, if we could replace that with R2 and have the files automatically expire after 30 days that'd be a pretty amazing price reduction for us.


Hey, I'm the PM for R2.

We support per-object TTLs, so this should work!


The full lifecycle support s3 has is really powerful. One use case we have for ugc content is disallowing online serving systems the ability to permanently delete an object. Instead the object is marked as deleted and then automatically cleaned up after 30 days.


Yeah that'd work for us! Just signed up for access :)


They appear to be focused on an automatic version:

> Behind the scenes, R2 automatically and intelligently manages the tiering of data to drive both performance at peak load and low-cost for infrequently requested objects. We’ve gotten rid of complex, manual tiering policies in favor of what developers have always wanted out of object storage: limitless scale at the lowest possible cost.


GP isn't mentioning lifecycle to change storage tier, but to delete the files after some time.


You're quite right — I think I was primed by a different mention of S3's intelligent tiering in this thread.


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

Search: