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

Microsoft loosened the kernel driver requirements to allow anyone to register as a boot driver as long as a CA digitally signs them. Microsoft asserts that this was done at the EU's behest. They could tighten the driver requirement for the RoW, but that would lock Crowdstrike out and likely trigger antitrust concerns again.

If Microsoft had their way, I imagine they would require verification through their driver lab that does this for a living (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/i...)


I'm surprised people aren't bringing up the "original" Sphere. Vegas had an Omnimax dome 45 years ago! I have fond memories of it as a kid. The entire theater was comprised of speakers on which spherical movies were projected. It's a shame it never got more traction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMAX#Dome_and_Omnimax


There's an operating Omnimax dome at the Cincinnati Museum Center at Union Terminal. I don't know how it compares to The Sphere but if you're close by it's worth the trip in my opinion.


American social media is already banned in China. TikTok is also banned in China in favor of the state-controlled Douyin.


I had the same question.

Most YC founders seem to be new college graduates instead of seasoned FAANG folks. I'm in the latter camp and believe I'm better off leveraging my connections because I've aged out of YC.


Co-founder and I are “seasoned FAANG” folks. We went through YC last summer. It’s true - many founders are on younger side, but a good number seemed (i didn’t actually card anyone) to be same age as us and we didn’t feel out of place. Would recommend.


WeWork pushed incumbents like Regus to simplify the onboarding process.

In the olden days, getting a Regus desk required an office tour appointment, followed by paperwork. Now they have an app, and nobody needs to send or receive a PDF.


Is there anything to indicate this is a trustworthy application? This is a closed-source binary, which has carte blanche access once you click "Yes" on the UAC prompt.


Such a tool not being open source and from unknown parties, says a lot by itself.


What does it say exactly? Is it not possible to release closed source freeware anymore without being scrutinised for no reason?


It's possible, but would you really be surprised if you installed it and later discovered it contained spyware/malware?

I would be surprised if I got something from a well-known, reputable company that turned out to be malware. Something from an Internet rando? Not so much.


I mean if you’re already running windows, you’re probably OK with spyware/malware.


Replace Windows with the words “popular operating system” otherwise you’re not making claims with any good faith.


It's not 'no reason' :-)

They are being scrutinised for a reason.

And that reason is the in the very nature of the software. What it does, and what it wants access to on the system and so on.


Basically, yes. I think we've all come to expect freeware to also be free (libre) software. I certainly am in favor of free software as well, but I think that we assume at this point that if you aren't making money from it and you aren't releasing the code, you have something to hide. However, the interesting thing is that back in the day, shareware was often closed source unless you paid to register it, in which case you got access to the code (depending on the publisher, obviously).


I don’t recall any shareware back then having open source access to the dos,windows programs just floppy disk shared binaries. The reality was before the always on internet and broadband speeds, malware was very rare, but viruses were ubiquitous on shared floppies but more of nuisance. Floppies with shareware by named distributors we’re unlikely to have virus unlike online boards or floppies handed around student to student back in the day.


I just got done reading a book called "Shareware Heroes" that mentioned various shareware apps providing source code to users who registered. The free versions never had source provided; the source was advertised as a perk for paid users. It's different than what we expect today, but honestly not the worst business model out there.


Tha sounds interesting. Can you remember any of the names of the apps/games?


Not right off, but I could possibly look at the book this evening and reply some of them here.


>I think that we assume at this point that if you aren't making money from it and you aren't releasing the code, you have something to hide.

I only see this attitude within open source circles (eg: this place). Most people couldn't care less, for better or worse.


Well, by we I did mean HN people.


For increased safety, I've settled on using software that is open source, has a paid version, or is from one of the usual suspects.


Until it becomes popular, it is sold to Avast, and becomes spyware.

Such is the circle of life for system utilities in Windows land.


What kind of answer would satisfy you?


"Here's the source."


"Not gonna audit it myself, though. I'm sure everyone else has gone through it."

-Open source enthusiast, probably.


This is true for most home users, sure. But if the tool is useful then it has a use in many industries with Windows systems, so someone can be paid to review the source.


You weren't kidding about Microsoft having trouble with naming.

The original name for .NET was Next Generation Windows Service (NGWS), and before that it was Project 42.

And then the first .NET tutorial site we built was called GotDotNet.com. Engineers didn't get a say in the name.

Source: I was a SWE (SDE) in the .NET Framework team in 2000.


The gaming machines are all networked Windows PCs with payout odds that are controlled by group, which can be defined into sections as small as twelve machines. (The exact number may have changed in the past decade.)

NGCB (Nev. Gaming Control Board) does regular on-site audits of the machines and the central configurations to ensure that they are compliant.


Exactly. Your post answers OP's question.

The root cause of the SDK fragmentation is because Microsoft sees diminishing returns for Windows.

After Silverlight failed to gain adoption, they started losing interest in the desktop. When Windows Phone was killed, there was even less interest in UWP.

It's a shame because .NET is quite nice.


Completely agree. Sonic is a customer service provider that happens to be an ISP.

I've had their gigabit fiber service in SF for the past two years. The few times I've had to call and inquire about a service issue, I was able to speak to someone within a minute of calling. And if you check their forums, you'll find their CEO responding to questions.


omg omg omg! the sonic cherry picker truck was finishing up the fiber work right outside my house this morning... talked to the amazingly nice cablemen and i should have fiber in ~month!


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

Search: