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

That list is the IPs users connect to. It is entirely distinct from the list of IPs the VPN traffic egresses from. I doubt believe that they publish their egress ranges.

It's almost always in the same /24.

Of course I wouldn't recommend taking the conclusion. But it is a valuable view of some differences that the Forgejo developers perceive as valuable.

Seriously, are you proud of the new look? SHOW IT TO ME. Even the video was mostly themed mock-ups that didn't show what the actual design looks like. Just post a screenshot of the whole browser.

llama.cpp has a flake in-repo that I often use for trying out different branches and patches. I also have yet to have an issue just replacing the src and build number attribute in the nixpkgs build (in one cases I wanted to add an additional CMake flag but that was also easy).

IMHO this is way easier than without Nix in many cases as figuring out the upstream build process and getting it running can often be quite the chore. With Nix it is all set up for you.


One major issue with Vary is that it makes cache coalescing very complicated. This is because you can't know whether two requests will share a response until you get that response. So for subsequent requests you need to decide if you should block it hoping that the response will satisfy it or if you should send it through pessimistically, possibly triggering a thundering herd effect on every cache rotation.

I'm not sure if it is possible to solve this nicely in a generic way, but it does make it a bit ugly.


This is not caused by Vary but by the app being so.. variable.

If you segregate content-type/language by end-point then the variability goes away. But now you have a plethora of end-points. The complexity can get moved around, and in this particular case the complexity for the caching layer can be removed, but the complexity isn't gone.


Thanks. This link has more detail about Linux support. I submitted it separately for discussion.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49824189


I'm 99% sure the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act covers this. The problem is that it seems that none of the victims want to, or are brave enough, to sue a company with absurd amounts of funding.


If it's covered by criminal law they don't need to sue. They can call the FBI.


Same FBI that prosecuted the Epstein crime ring so aggressively!


They're gonna get to the Epstein stuff right after they get the guy that called Kash Patel names.

https://newrepublic.com/post/215320/texts-kash-patel-order-s...


It shouldn't actually take that much bravery. If your case isn't completely frivolous, isn't your maximum loss limited to the court filing fees and a lawyer payment that you know in advance and can decide when to stop paying? It's not the same as getting sued.


Can't you be ordered to pay the legal fees of the person you sued if you lose badly enough?


Yes, but this only really happens if your lawsuit is bad faith or frivolous. If they have a valid reason for the suit but just lose, this won't happen.


I mean it's surprising to think you're 99% sure while being wildly off base. Everything in there require intent.


Or the victims have no incentive to do so, such as in the Hugging Face case.


Uh huh.

It can’t be a coincidence that all the targets have been tech services that are likely to engage with them after the fact.

Had this gone after a bank or a government agency someone would be going to jail.


Exactly. Just follow the patterns. Its pretty obvious.


Documenting public water sources is an incredible public good. I thank you for your efforts.


How does Rust help with 2 at all? IIUC the main requirements were not memory or performance related but TPM and instruction set minimums.


No, but my credit card has no battery, requires no cell service, is waterprrof and quite durable.

I see the advantages of the Chinese system but I really found myself missing my card.

- While payer-offline payments were possible most merchants didn't want to (and some seemed unable to) so payments in places with bad cell service were painful.

- It was a lot more steps to open the app and enter scanning mode or display your code than to just tap a card or phone.

- It was always unclear if you were scanning or being scanned, leading to friction for every payment (generally larger brands scan you and you scan for smaller merchants).

Honestly for in-person card payments are just nicer.

For online WeChat was better, but no different than Apple Pay or Google Pay except for course that it is standardized by the government.


Consider applying for YC's Winter 2027 batch! Applications are open till November 2.

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

Search: