What is Hackers' Pub?

Hackers' Pub is a place for software engineers to share their knowledge and experience with each other. It's also an ActivityPub-enabled social network, so you can follow your favorite hackers in the fediverse and get their latest posts in your feed.

2
0

AAAHGH GET THEE BEHIND ME SATAN

I suddenly feel a compulsive need to write a thinly-disguised knock-off of Heinlein's "I Will Fear No Evil" about a dying billionaire who has his brain transplanted into his (brain-dead after a car crash) secretary's body (he's dying from the same car crash), only to find that she's still aware in there, they're sharing the body, and she hates him. (Think Trump getting himself transplanted into Ivanka.)

No political satire intended, honest.

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0

ㄹㅇ 블스팀이 한국어 섹계 방치하는게 절대 아닙니다... 정지 엄청 많이 시키는데 그거 이상으로 새로 생겨난다는거.. 그러니까 여러분 모두 블루스카이 아주 열심히 해서 섹계 덮어버려야함 서로 리포스트 많이 해주세요

0
0
0
0

Look, these extreme positions are completely unhelpful. Injecting bleach into your veins is obviously bad, but only a few people recommend that. And, yes, they're trying to sell bleach and are fully bought into the hype. But the other extreme, not consuming any bleach, is just as unhealthy. Bleach consumption is the future. You just need to do it in appropriate places, such as with a meal. I have one small glass of bleach with lunch and then a larger glass with dinner. I drink it, from a clear glass, so I can see exactly what I'm consuming. Obviously injecting it is a bad idea, but drinking bleach responsibly is good for you, as long as you know what you're doing. Of course, I'm an expert at drinking stuff, in the hands of an amateur it might cause problems. Don't be put off by all of the bleach refusers. They're just anti progress. Anyone who isn't getting experienced drinking bleach is going to be left behind. Just drink it responsibly.

Now, some people object to some of the process of manufacturing bleach. Yes, it does involve dumping toxic chemicals in rivers when you buy bleach from the big vendors. But that's why I use ethically sourced bleach, which comes from a factory in China where it has a certificate saying that it complied with all local environmental regulations. If you're worried about the ethical aspects of drinking bleach, always drink ethical bleach.

I've also recently heard people complain that people drinking and injecting bleach has driven up prices and hospitals can't afford to properly clean wards, leading to an increased infection rate. That's true today, but you're thinking in the short term. The increased demand for bleach means that the supply will increase and economies of scale will make bleach prices come down.

0
0
0
0
0

Working on DNS, trying to avoid adding a microsecond to processing a packet or enlarging a packet by a few bytes. AI: we need our own (nuclear) power station to be able to train and run this model. (I know a LLM can process many queries, still the difference in attitude is staggering)

0
1
0

심지어 이걸 X 본사에 신고해도 "이용 약관에 위반하지 않았다"면서 신고도 반려되었다고 하네요... X가 많이 망가져가고 있음... fixvx.com/OhayoMybroth...

RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:l2hxm7jansx4uoalu4tklnyi/post/3mbgd3dvel222

X(트위터)의 신고결과 안내 페이지 (일본어). 내용 원문: Twitterからのお知らせです。
入手可能な情報を確認した結果、報告されたコンテンツにメルールへの違反はないと判断しました。
ご協力いただきありがとうございました。今後、違反していると思われる事例にお気づきの場合は、またお知らせください。
X環境を管理する方法についての他のリソースは、ヘルプセンターをご覧ください。
ありがとうございます。
0
0

이미 영어, 스페인어 트위터에서는 트위터 그림 수정 기능 추가되자마자, 공계에 본인 사진을 올리는 여성의 게시물에 AI 돌려서 옷 벗기고 멘션으로 올리는 일이 매일 수시로 일어나고 있음. 심지어 트위터 내에서는 그냥 멘션, 인용처럼 트위터 공식 기능 중 하나를 사용한것이기 때문에 트위터가 어떻게 제재하지도 않는 상황임 이러는데도 끝까지 "트위터나 다른 인터넷 공간이나 똑같다"는건..

0
1
0
0

챗지피티나 제미나이 등등도 진작 인물 사진 편집을 허용하게 되었고 직접 로컬 모델 돌리면 한참 옛날에도 할 수 있었는데 (나도 집 컴퓨터에서 SDXL 돌릴 때 내 사진 갖고 옷입히기 놀이를 종종 했었다) 이들은 최소한 사용자가 요청하기도 전에 남의 사진에다가 당장 이 사진을 마음대로 수정해서 모든 사람들이 볼 수 있는 곳에 올리세요!!! 버튼을 띄워 버리진 않음

RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:e4a32z23pazq5dxnucj6wpee/post/3mbgk3ota4c2d

0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

If you're the kind of hacker that likes news you might peruse our latest post about the infrastructure update: f-droid.org/2025/12/30/a-faste

But before that, here's a small poll for you.

Where do you think the build servers, that build and verify 200 apps per week, are located?

0
0
1

New year, new ideas...

If you're a Cheetah+ member on Ko-fi or Patreon, there's a new post coming as the year also came with an idea on how to improve a clever technique I've been refining for a couple of years now...

It's turning into an everything but the kitchen sink technique... 😹

Sneak peek at an upcoming post.
0
0
0

HPV vaccination reduces oncogenic HPV16/18 prevalence from 16% to <1% in Denmark

Link: eurosurveillance.org/content/1
Discussion: news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4

Eurosurveillance | Human papillomavirus prevalence in first, second and third cervical cell samples from women HPV-vaccinated as girls, Denmark, 2017 to 2024: data from the Trial23 cohort study

BACKGROUND Danish women vaccinated with the 4-valent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine (HPV types: 6/11/16/18) at age 14 in 2008 reached screening age in 2017, allowing assessment of long-term effects on prevalence, persistence and incidence of HPV infections. AIM To examine the HPV status of cervical samples over time among women vaccinated as girls. METHODS Between February 2017 and February 2024, residual material from cytology-analysed samples collected through the ‘Trial23’ study, part of the national screening programme, was tested for HPV16/18 and non-vaccine high-risk (HR) HPV types. Prevalence in first, second and third samples, and persistence and incidence between samples were calculated. RESULTS Over 7 years, 8,659 women provided at least one sample, 5,835 at least two and 2,461 at least three. In 7,800 vaccinated women, HPV16/18 prevalence was 0.4% (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.2–0.5), 0.3% (95% CI: 0.1–0.4) and 0.2% (95% CI: 0.0–0.4) in three consecutive samples. Prevalence of non-vaccine HR HPV was 32% (95% CI: 31–33), 28% (95% CI: 27–29) and 31% (95% CI: 29–33). Persistence of HPV16/18 and non-vaccine HPV among vaccinated women was 40% and 53%. In adjusted analyses comparing vaccinated vs unvaccinated women, incidence was significantly lower for HPV16/18 (adjusted relative risk (aRR) &lt; 0.10) while incidence of non-vaccine HR HPV types was higher (aRR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.12–2.45). No significant difference was observed for persistence. CONCLUSION Our study provides real-world evidence of stable protection against HPV16/18 infections in women vaccinated as girls. Less intensive screening seems reasonable until women vaccinated with the 9-valent vaccine reach screening age, when screening should be reconsidered.

www.eurosurveillance.org

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0