Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | thameera's comments login

This is a cool project! Love the fact that some comment summaries are added too. I hope you would continue building it, and also make the text easier to read- like by making the page fixed-width.


Love this, and hope you continue the development.

Feature request: Ability to open an HN URL in Haxplore.


Not only that, the account could have done worse in the coming weeks - so it's better to be late than never.


Also from the commit message:

> like Shift JIS (sometimes called SHIT JIZZ)

Back then when I was working for a Japanese outsourced project, the code won't compile unless the computer's locale was set to Japanese because the C code had comments in Shift JIS.


I use workflows in Alfred[0] for finding files, navigating to pages, and searching around a multitude of other customized datasets. The advantage I have with that over a fzf, at least for me, is being able to search instantly with a Cmd+Space without having to switch to the terminal.

[0] https://www.alfredapp.com/workflows/


It's very disturbing to see that your worst passwords are for your bank accounts. Each bank I've worked with has some weird limitation like this. Not to forget that the only form of MFA that most banks allow is SMS - assuming they even offer MFA.


Banks are probably still running on the old mainframe (old as in upgraded in 1998 when y2k forced it), with password storage that was state of the art in 1960 (plain text, but the file is actually protected well so hackers can't get it). That isn't to say better password cannot be used, just that they have never enabled it.


I don't understand that - I get that the system that holds the data is old, but when creating an online banking system shouldn't the piece that holds the data be a good half dozen steps removed from the website and authentication?


Not if you want a single sign on. Of course customers only use the web login, but internal people have to deal with all these different logins.


I once spent 15 minutes trying to register in a local Domino's website which kept bugging me about lack of a special character - even though I had one in it. Turned out to be that the app truncates the entered password after the first 20 characters and only considers the first part. Thankfully the special character was after the 20th position so I noticed the error and fixed it, but if it wasn't I'd be wondering the next time I'm logging in why it's not letting me login with a valid password.


Why do you need a secure account to order pizza?


How else are they going to run pepperoni-based big data analytics?


I've had the same problem with Verizon, in the past the password would only store the first 20 characters. Took me an hour or two to figure it out and fix the problem. I'm not sure if that's still the case, hopefully not.


My issue with Verizon is they lock an account after 3 bad attempts, and the "username" is the cell phone number for the account. Which seems to be slurped into some automated brute force engine.

Every single time I want to login, I have to do a password reset first. Makes me which I had the phone number to every manager in the company, so I could lock them all out every day.

Also, since having the phone is the only second factor for authentication, that's all you need to access an account.


You might not even have noticed if the login form truncated the input as well before hashing it. (You probably would have noticed after some update to their website removes the truncation though.)


Presumably it also truncates the password when doing sign-in?


As long as it is in a place that you 'have', I believe we can technically count it as MFA.

After 1Password introduced MFA (TOTP) support, it has been used widely in organizations in shared vaults so multiple people can share critical logins that use MFA. This of course means that if your 1Password account is compromised it's game over.


Coming from a different part of the world, this proposed change was news to me. Does anyone have a link to the actual proposal and reasoning?


Every change is independent. Each state makes its own rules (well, has the freedom to decide what it wants, although there is apparently some federal oversight).


The only thing the state has control over is if it observes daylight savings time. Changing to a different time zone requires the Dept. of Transportation to approve of the change.

This is one of the things that makes this so complicated... most of the bills are “asking” the state government to petition the federal government to make a change. And it isn’t guaranteed that the DOT will approve the switch.

Even more complicated... the state can only control whether or not to observe DST. It can’t control the start/stop of DST, so if California wants to always be at UTC-7 (the current PDT), it couldn’t just decide to always be in PDT. It would need to petition the DOT to be moved to MST and then to not observe DST.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time_in_the_...


Good that there is some central control, because if this all passed it would become a righteous mess.


People are sick of changing their clocks by an hour twice a year as "daylight saving time" starts and ends. So there are many proposals to settle on permanent summer time or permanent winter time.


> If you don't care about showing off then you won't publish anything

I want to agree, but how can we explain near-anonymous StackOverflow profiles who have brilliant answers in them, but no way to identify who the actual person they are?


Anonymity doesn't change the equation. No one on hackernews knows who I am but I still want the recognition of my peers (upvotes) which is why I'm posting here.

The fact that everyone ultimately wants peer-approval means we need to create participatory structures in which people are rewarded (with approval) for doing useful things. Stackoverflow is a perfect example of this. People gain karma by answering questions that other people ask.

"Everyone should have a blog" is the opposite of this. It's feel-good nonsense along the lines of "everyone has their own subjective truth and all truths are equal". If we tell everyone to publish it will become near-impossible to find voices worth hearing. It's like saying you should answer every question on stackoverflow whether or not you know the answer.


You're leftyted, I see you!

People see different facets of our identity, only God sees all of them.

In some cases our limited online presence might represent a more authentic version of our 'true selves' than we present in [the rest of] "real life".

>"it will become near-impossible to find voices worth hearing" //

Isn't the OP saying there that we all have a voice worth hearing. You're right that it would be harder to find the voices we could extract the most value from; but realistically that's probably already impossible.


Most of my Stack Overflow karma has come from edits.

Just like in real life; I'll underwhelm the average sleuth with the amount of badges I have vs. the work I've actually done.


Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

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

Search: