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

The vast majority of bots are still failing the header test - we organically arrived at the except same filtering in 2025. The bots followed the exact same progression too. One ip, lie about the user agent, one ASN, multiple ASNs, then lie about everything and use residential IPs, but still botch the headers


I don't think #notAllTeslaOwners is going to convince people not to have these visceral emotional reactions. I'm not entirely sure what people expect when the worlds richest man makes a point of trying to make millions of people unhappy, trolling or otherwise. This is the natural outcome.


Having an emotional reaction is natural. We are intelligent species. We can deal with outbursts of emotions and tame them.

The problem is if such emotions materialize into physical actions like hate speech, bullying behavior or worse.


The article specifies those as the source


Hah, I missed that. The corrugation was used on Junkers because it added a lot of strength. The downside is the drag it created.


Have you seen the Xbox Adaptive Controller?

https://www.xbox.com/en-US/accessories/controllers/xbox-adap...


Hm. I thoroughly disliked it - 100 layers of abstraction, glue and duct tape in the cloud to construct a rube Goldberg machine that doesn't work. It felt like everything wrong with modern tech.


Haha I'm sure you mean "barcades", but that was amusing.


Yeah, I loathe it. I use Linux (of all stripes), Windows, android etc. So it's not brand loyalty. The UX is trash.


A quick google turned up this service - https://www.printme1.com/


$47 for this work via that service


I think you may have missed the joke - they were implying Github was using Copilot internally, causing the outages, due to poor output. Not that Copilot itself was unavailable (although that may be true, also)


While I agree with this as a general rule, it ignores an entire class of problem. I work in a data preservation space - if we let people delete things every time they wanted to, it'd be a disaster. Instead we 'tombstone' it (hide from everyone but admin), then let someone with some space from the process confirm it actually should be deleted. We've averted dozens of disasters this way.

I'd argue the user must feel in control, as you say, but not necessarily _be_ in control.


Same here. We implemented a “soft delete” in a system I worked on recently, as actually deleting something could have legal implications. We just have a table column where we mark it as deleted and then exclude those from any retrieval queries. If we ever need to undelete, someone can manually update the database.


Well, it ties in with another rule I have, don’t allow for stupidity. If a user can do some stupid things, it’s not designed well. (Say your deletion problem)

But yes, as long as these decisions are made consciously by a team, it’s get the attention it deserves.


I don’t know—this kind of deception is how the industry attracts more regulation. Delete needs to go back to meaning delete, and the user should be in actual control.


No. I frequently undelete or unsend. Others do too. Removing the Windows Recycle Bin or its equivalent would not make my life better by "giving me agency".


One of the first things I do in any OS is disable the recycle bin or equivalent functionality. To each his own!


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

Search: