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

>those cables must include a DAC to function properly and so usually have a tiny kinda crappy one in them, right?

FWIW, audiophiles were very impressed with the measured performance of the €10 Apple USB-C to 3.5mm adapter and its DAC. The Google one is likely good too.


They'll have my money if they meet the requirements for GrapheneOS.


Sailfish OS is better than GrapheneOS through virtue of being mostly a vanilla linux distribution with Android being just an optional bad dream.


It’s literally inferior security wise. The desktop Linux security model is antiquated when compared to the advances in security/isolation/etc that modern mobile phone OSs have developed.

It is not trumping Graphene any time soon.


GrapheneOS' main selling point is security. Is Sailfish OS better at that, or at least in the same league, nowadays?


It's in a different league as it's a linux phone first and foremost, not degoogled/hardened android, you get full root access as a checkbox in settings that will install terminal app for you to hack to your heart's content, user having root access is not an attack vector for them


I was not asking about having terminal and root access. I was asking about security-wise parity, for example memory protection, full "disk" encryption, permission model, application sandboxing etc. This is the main selling point of GrapheneOS. This and Android application compatibility, but Sailfish OS has its Android compatibility layer too.


Yes to full disk encryption, and yes to sandboxing.


Well, that could help drive the production numbers up, hopefully driving the per unit price down. :)


>Tesla is remarkably well done. Simplicity is under rated.

https://electrek.co/2025/12/03/tesla-model-y-named-worst-car...

>So much so i bought one with the intention to keep for a looooong time.

Good luck with that.


I am affacted by this as well: the rear knuckle uniball bearing was broken after 3 years (Achsschenkel). Many MY here in Europe have this issue, due to bad parts or too hard suspension.

But there are two other things that make it a bit unfair for Tesla in comparison to other brands:

Often the cars fail official inspections because of rotten breaks - this happens when your drive carefully and the Tesla is using regenerative breaking instead of the real breaks. Simple solution is to force breaking from time to time (I.e. breaking in neutral). Another aspect is, that all the other brands have a mandatory inspection from the manufacturer before the cars will be tested by the independent check. This avoids that they will fail it, because the car will be repaired before it is checked by the independent inspection. This is not mandatory for Teslas.


> Often the cars fail official inspections because of rotten br[e]ak[e]s - this happens when your drive carefully and the Tesla is using regenerative breaking instead of the real br[e]ak[e]s.

That's something that they should have taken into consideration when designing the car.


It is not a big deal. Just burnish it once every few months when it makes high pitched sound during low speed braking. https://service.tesla.com/docs/Public/diy/model3/en_us/GUID-...


> that all the other brands have a mandatory inspection from the manufacturer before the cars will be tested by the independent check.

I'm in Europe. Never heard of mandatory inspection before independent checks. How would that even work, or be enforced.


Service intervals. Other OEMs will prompt a service interval at X thousand miles/km to go pop in and have it looked at by a dealer, probably swap out your cabin air filter, upsell you on some new wiper blades, etc.

ICE vehicles would normally catch these issues sooner because you'd be pulling in a lot more often for oil changes (and a quick mechanical inspection is typically a courtesy at that time).


I think the break rusting issue can be fixed in software.


>Often the cars fail official inspections because of rotten breaks - this happens when your drive carefully and the Tesla is using regenerative breaking

Huh? Every EV uses recuperative braking, how is this special to Tesla?


The Teslas have far stronger regen than other brands. Have you ever wondered why Tesla's Long Range models have 500 horsepower? It's not for increased acceleration power, it's for increased braking power. Far less energy is wasted on the friction brakes in a Tesla.


German TUV thinks Teslas are horrible because apparently nobody is servicing their brakes on a regular enough interval so every time Teslas get pulled in for their 2 year inspections after 3 years of ownership they keep failing out on brakes and suspension, but VWs are the pinnacle of perfection because they slam 10K service intervals in your face.

(Of note: I drive a hybrid vehicle, and over 125,000+ miles of ownership I have replaced my front brakes once and my rear brakes three times now in five years.)


I'm at 125000 on my Long Range Model 3. I plugged a tire last month and photographed brake caliper - like new. I could not believe it. I can upload a photo if you'd like.


.... I also didn't add the rest of my environmental conditions like the fact I'm in an absolute rust belt in the winter.

NYS DOT does some good work with the salt and sand up here, heavy on the salt. Mother Earth has some high blood pressure up here as she turns rotors to rust.

My calipers (all around) are also in excellent condition after 150k and I've been told that it's an absolute surprise I didn't destroy them with how low the pads went on the last change...


> Huh? Every EV uses recuperative braking, how is this special to Tesla?

It‘s not. But there are some newer EVs (e.g. Mercedes and VW) that track brake usage and will periodically switch to using the disk brakes when there‘s danger of corrosion.


I am no Tesla fanboy. But let’s face the truth. Teslas leave factory with end of line check. Then they are driven more than average cars for 3 years without any maintenance. Then go for check. And surprise surprise, the first model Ys were not well made. I bet with 1000-1500€ maintenance cost over these 3 years the TUV result would be dramatically different.

Btw, my petrol car had ugly rusty rear brakes. No way to pass the check. The car had manual handbrake and I used in every highway exit to slow down and removed rust.


You are supposed to (and GrapheneOS prompts you to) relock the bootloader immediately after installation of the new OS.


I pull out a contactless card. No battery life worries, and much more compact.


Every banking app works perfectly for me on GrapheneOS.


>the problem was EMI from the computer making it into the equipment

Do you have a PC case with a huge window? They (used to?) have grounded metal housings with only tiny openings for a reason.


>If you want to get around the individual privacy issue of this, you'll need a business anyway.

Unless the country in which the business is registered makes corporate registrations (and officers) public.


Sure, yes, eventually your name will likely be published somewhere on some government site and their downstream scrapers -- but at least your personal address and phone number can be kept private.


It's headed there.


7 days is too long! It should be 30 minutes!


Certificate per request


that's just OTR


OTR still has static identities, with DH used to ratchet the ephemeral keys. The comparison would be more like Signal ditching Safety Numbers and Registration Lock for hourly SMS verification of new independent keys with no successor signing.

There's a fundamental divide in what certificates mean: modern CAs view WebPKI as a fancy vantage point check--cryptographic session tickets that attest to the the actual root of trust, usually DNS. Short-lived certs (down to 10 minutes in Sigstore, 6 days trialed by LetsEncrypt) make perfect sense to them.

But DNS challenges are perfectly forgeable by whoever controls the DNS. This reduces authentication to "the CA says so" for 99% of users not running a private CA alongside the public one.

Transparency logs become impenetrable to human review, and even if you do monitor your log (most don't), you need a credible out-of-band identity to raise the alarm if compromised. The entire system becomes a heavier Convergence/DANE-like vantage point check, assuming log operators actually reverify the DNS challenges (I don't think one-time LetsEncrypt challenges are deterministic).

I think certificates should represent long-term cryptographic identity, unforgeable by your CA and registrar after issuance. The CA could issue a one-time attestation that my private root cert belongs to my domain, and when it changes, alert to the change of ownership.


Of course, so we have another global failure/censorship point besides Cloudflare…


Yes, that's the whole point..

Er, I mean, its totally for security guys!


> 7 days is too long! It should be 30 minutes!

And secure boot shall be signed with it. /s


This, and lock the account ID via CAA record.


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

Search: