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

I believe you are thinking about Javalin

https://javalin.io/news/javalin-5.0.0-stable.html


Yes this is the one. Thank you


I think the argument is more that this tool by virtue of being easily accessible creates more malicious actors. Similar to how most people wouldn't steal a locked bike, but a larger portion would steal an unlocked one. It isn't that much harder to steal a locked bike vs an unlocked one, but the threshold is just a tiny bit higher so more people will attempt it. Conversely this tool lowers the threshold for stalking, so more people, who otherwise wouldn't, will use it maliciously. That isn't the fault of the tool or its developers, but it is something to be aware of when building any tool. When you release it, it may get abused by people for bad purposes.


Assuming your online identity is secure by obscurity is not a realistic option. If all it takes is a flashlight for everyone to become “vulnerable”, we need to just assume the light is always on. Someone handing out flashlights just highlights the bigger problem.

If this truly causes worry, adopt better opsec and create generative usernames for different sites. If not, assume anyone will easily be able to link your bowel issue subreddit comments to your LinkedIn profile.


I built something related to this for our webapp. Most of the text in the app is in a language specific "key to text" map that is loaded at runtime. I made a bookmarklet that switched the language into a debug mode where the keys mapped to a "<file>:<language-variants>:<Key>". You could switch to this "mode" with a simple keypress. User then highlighted the key they wanted to change, pressed another key-combo and was presented with the different translations and could change them (and switch back to normal mode for a preview). Lastly they could generate a PR with the changes they wanted and a Dev could make sure the strings worked (e.g. validating they had not removed a needed placeholder etc). All in all pretty nifty tool.


That sounds like a really cool solution! People come up with all kinds of clever workarounds for this problem but then get stuck maintaining and scaling them. This is one of the things that inspired me to join FlyCode solving this once and for all instead of ad-hoc.


I agree, but I think you need hope in order to be happy. I.e. happiness is the combination of high hopes and low expectations.

Without high hopes you could just be anticipating things to get worse which tends to lead to anxiety and just a general glum outlook on life. Hoping things will be better tomorrow, but expecting things to get worse is a subtle but important mindset shift.


As my mom says: Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.


Found a completely good one!

"Elon Musk's advice on success"

Bad: 0.0000 - Good: 1.0000


If all else is equal, then additional dependencies are a bad thing. Otherwise the only reason to not depend on everything would be code size... And if it's a compiled language with even just a minimum of optimizations then even that wouldn't be an issue.

As with most things - it is a trade-off.


Would creating a GPL or BSD licensed project and then contribute to that work (in case the employer allows work on FOSS)? Then one would presumably be free to start a business using that software after quitting. Also if it's BSD licensed there's nothing preventing one from close sourcing the stuff after quitting. Of course the code would potentially already be out in the world and used if it's in a public repo...


Be careful, some employers consider any work done on any project during work hours (or on company equipment) their property.


Wouldn't the fact that if they are ok with you working on FOSS protect you? If you have the source you are free to modify it to you hearts content, right?


IIRC RNA is made up mostly of the same nucleic acids as DNA. T (something something) is replaced by Uracil. The main difference is that DNA is double stranded whereas RNA is single stranded. Since mRNA uses three acids to represent one of the amino acids that make up the proteins it encodes, and there is a finite amount of amino acids, this means no new proteins are encoded if you add more "letters" to DNA/RNA.

Possibly the RNA could have some secondary function in the folding of the protein or as a complex inside it...

Edit: spelling


(Also for RNA, the sugar backbone is ribose, and for DNA it is 2-deoxyribose)


One thing I think is missing from the current html spec is having a src attribute on select tags. Would be nice to be able to not have to define the options directly on a page and instead serve them up dynamically. Not a big problem off course, but it seems like something that is missing.


I like to sum this sentiment up as:

"One day even Socrates will be forgotten."


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

Search: