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

the shrike has noted your interest


Translators sure, interpreters no.

Interpreters also have to factor in cultural context and customs, ensuring that meaning is conveyed without offence being given in formal contexts.


I don't see why software couldn't do that, if you give them the context.


The end-user is unlikely to know which part of the context is relevant, and it may also change from moment to moment depending on who is speaking to whom. Of course you could imagine an AI interpreter that has cameras for situational awareness and asks for clarification if anything important is unclear while smoothing over minor stuff without interrupting, but you could equally easily imagine an AGI, so it's not clear that this could be built to a reasonable quality standard with current technology.


That seems like something LLMs could eventually get good at


They'll just push everyone to use corporate wooden language and then they won't have to worry about tone and implied meanings :)


is it really a vulnerability if the entire thing is open by design?


Who says it was? Why would they willingly give out their customers' and customers' customers data to any anonymous person or a bot? More likely a bad oversight


This is “the tire shop doesn't have a torque wrench” level shit. If it's an oversight, it's an oversight due to incompetency, not because a good team just happened to miss something in a crunch. Another possibility is that the issue was raised and management said to fix it later, and because software “engineering” isn't a real engineering field that holds its practitioners to any duty of care, those responsible (the engineers) just went along with it.


For 3 years? That would mean that no developer has ever raised these issues with management, to speak nothing of an actual pentest being conducted.

No, this is not some obscure security hole they forgot about. This is plain incompetence and/or deliberate design decisions.

I agree that full public disclosure like this is irresponsible, but exposing issues like this to the public is the only way for such companies to make a change or, preferably, lose business and shutdown.


No auth at all? For years? That’s a tremendous oversight. Nobody running a test having to authenticate?


Because they don't care, and their customers don't understand any of this shit?

It feels like the usual case of vendors buying service to better exploit the users, and themselves getting burned and/or exploited by that service too.


Yes! You as a user are not meant to knowingly access data that does not belong to you. Even something like changing the id from 1 to 2 is legally considered unauthorised access.

It would be different if for example the application was showing data for other customers through normal use of it, but even if there is no other barrier to access than changing an id that is considered bypassing access control and can result in jail time in most places. Now I'm not an expert in India's computer misuse laws but I am willing to wager they are not the most progressive when it comes to this kind of thing.


same thoughts, annual reports of larger companies have more dense figures than these too.


Doubt the company made it open by design. Doubt you will find an order from the CEO to make it open. It was probably a fuck up by a shitty coder.


it's only been a year since 2012? Man it feels longer, must be all the bad news


Even before 2012 people were saying it was either 2012 or 2021 and we're not sure which. The reasoning was basically that some years are missing from the calendar.

It came back in 2020 with a slightly different number: https://www.republicworld.com/fact-check/viral/fact-check-di...


Qualcomm once had 7 engineers and zero lawyers. They hire lawyers much faster than they hire engineers


and every lawyer in QCOM is at least treated like a Senior Director.


Use enough duct tape and a cat would be fine for this


Wow, for real? What a fucked-up thing to say.


There is a thing called sarcasm you may want to look into.


I mean, I get that it's trying to be a joke. But it's not trying very hard.


until phone makers realise they can shave 1mm off the thickness of the phone by cutting the battery size by 66% (and they will)

Then we're back to barely-a-day-of-charge


Or 33% thinner and double the life. I'd take that trade, for sure.


But why not 0% thinner and 3x-3.5x times the life? Are we really plagued by thick phones right now?


The real reason is that if you make several million phones that a certain percentage is always going to explode, either by manufacturing defect or a user pierces the cell through accident. This might mean the difference between some light leg burns or your death and phone makers are not going to take the negative press of the latter scenario. Their only answer is better power usage.


One of the big advantages listed in the article is that these batteries don't explode like today's Li-Ions.

Maybe in a few years we'll look back at this time and wonder how people were ok with putting a bomb against their face every day.


and also how we drove vehicles powered by explosions? :)


kids :)


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

Search: