LambdaComplex

I agree with everything the author said in that I'm not a fan of the things they're complaining about, but I don't think I would go so far as to say they make a language objectively _bad_

The author's About page says he has "a particular dislike of self-anointed 'experts,'" but that seems to be exactly what he is.

> soul-successor

I think you just made a new malapropism by getting the "sole" in "sole successor" mixed up with the homophone "soul" and then relating it to "spiritual successor"

Both "sole successor" and "spiritual successor" are accurate descriptions in this case, so it works beautifully.

Whenever I face a problem like this, I try to narrow it down to a certain layer of the OSI model as quickly as possible. Is DNS resolution working? Yes, so we have an IP address to connect to. Can I ping that address, or is there a network connectivity problem? Am I able to establish a TCP connection to that address/port using telnet?

On the plus side, it looks like these vulnerabilities can't be exploited once the device has been fully set up (unless I'm misreading the reports).

But, still, we all know that the S in IOT stands for "security"

As much as I'd like to believe that the Microsoft of 2 decades ago is dead, I can't help but feel like this is a clear example of the "embrace" part of EEE.

It's gaslighty to say that a client that does not use SMS is not an SMS client?

Maybe this should be formalized as a corollary of Cunningham's Law.

Even Adam Smith complained about landlords though.

> My customers, for example, to whom I provide service, are not infringed upon in any way

The issue is that I—and, more importantly, your customers—must simply take your word for it, since we're unable to confirm or deny it for ourselves if you don't make the source available.

When dealing with large corporations, taking such statements at face value is pretty foolish.

> individual people often benefit from denying access to the source code of software that is used to provide a service

To the detriment of the users of that service--which are the people that the FSF aims to protect.

You believe in freedom for who, exactly? Freedom for the users of software? Or freedom for corporations who benefit from denying access to the source code of that software?

The Free Software Foundation exists to protect the former at the expense of the latter.

The entire point of shadowbanning is making the fact that the user is banned non-obvious to that user--otherwise, they'd be liable to immediately create a new account and continue with the activity that warranted the ban in the first place.

Both "telling them why" and "not obfuscating the fact" would defeat the entire purpose of a shadowban (as opposed to a "traditional" ban).

> > Before reading the article, I would have assumed for example that 127.1 would be 127.1.0.0, not 127.0.0.1.

> But then it wouldn't be a valid IP.

127.1.0.0 is a perfectly valid IP address. The loopback range is a /8.

> even if it can't pay a huge amount for some positions, there's always a lot of recognition that everyone is needed to make it work, and everyone is appreciated

I can't pay my rent in recognition or appreciation though.

The problem is not that they're pointing their apex domain to a personal website; the problem is that they have a CNAME record in place for their apex domain, which is not actually allowed per the DNS standards

And you quit on the spot, right?

I'm all for fighting against totalitarianism, but I feel like it's kinda weird to get a job at Google if you actually care about that

Agreed completely. Discord has always been much smoother for me than Slack, and the voice/video chat quality is literally the best I've ever seen anywhere. If they made their branding a bit more professional and changed the permission model from the (accurate) garbage you described to something closer to Slack then I think Slack would be doomed.

This is probably the worst idea I've heard all day.

If Mozilla did this then Google would officially control the world wide web. It would be like back when IE6 ruled, except quite possibly even worse.

Maybe look into Qubes OS? I've never used it, but the concept sounds kinda like what you're describing: "a security-focused desktop operating system that aims to provide security through isolation. Virtualization is performed by Xen, and user environments can be based on Fedora, Debian, Whonix, and Microsoft Windows, among other operating systems." (from Wikipedia)

Sounds like you agree that there's a problem with a system the prioritizes profit over everything else :)

> we have to stop making it illegal to build enough homes for people that need them

There's already enough homes (in the USA, at least) to house all the homeless people in the country. Unfortunately, giving homes away wouldn't be profitable, and profit is all that seems to matter.

I'd expect the C to be buggier, personally

HTTP supports range requests, which can be used to resume partial downloads.

Poke646 was the name of a mod for the original Half-Life...I'm getting the feeling that isn't a coincidence

Ninja edit: Yep, confirmed http://www.poke646.com/index.php/3-faq

In 2006, Congress passed a law which required the USPS to fund _75 years_ worth of employee pensions in advance. You wanna talk about taxes being wasted? Go look at Congress; they've been trying to kill the USPS for years.

Any relation to the CRUX Linux distro? Or is this just an unfortunate overlap of names?

> Since you cannot predict the UUID for future Windows versions, you cannot pretend to be compatible with them.

Until a clueless product manager tells you to just iterate through all possible UUIDs to check :)

Best followed by this video, which made me laugh my ass off for several minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSa-pwML4z4

(I grew up watching SpongeBob, if that matters)