anonms-coward

To be fair, that sounds a lot more reasonable. A CEO represents their company and their actions leading to people boycotting their company is just people voting with their wallet. People have boycotted small businesses due to the opinion of the business owner's children, even after persistent apologies by the business owner. In this case I don't even think there is anything significantly wrong. This isn't much different than a company sanctioned advertisement gone wrong.

Not to mention the replies on his tweet are full of people arguing nonsense like "it seems you have something to hide" , and "cancelling means shutting down voices", not realising that people would be much less angry if cancellation meant twitter account cancellation and not losing one's jobs.

Well here is a sample for you:

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/07/a-new-low-in-...

That wasn't the only argument though. If the data was encrypted with a facebook held private key, the user would still not be able to see it. If it was E2E encrypted with the only key being on the device, people will get mad when they reset their phone and get a new one, only to find their messages are gone.

SMS had the same problems forever, but isn't owned by a company, thus you can't blame xyz company if random apps access your SMS. No company got ever investigated by multiple nation states over that.

You still haven't addressed my main question though, how will a random app scraping your WhatsApp be any less of a scandal than Cambridge Analytica?

The number of people who use whatsapp is an order of magnitude or more than the number of people who consciously use Google drive, as in people who know google drive exists. Even the people who have google drive, most of them have much less intimate data on it than in their private messages on WhatsApp.

If we are to take the position that all users are tech literate and should be fully in charge of how their data is used, then even Cambridge analytica wasn't bad. People explicitly gave it access to data that was accessible to them. However, the uproar proves otherwise. People don't like it when they click yes yes and some random app has access to their social media data or messages. This is why Gmail also started requiring independent audit for all gmail apps.

While I definitely disagree with the way drive doesn't give access to users for their own data, I think giving access has it's own problems, as you might land in another Cambridge analytica type situation.

1. Shady addictive game requires full access to drive.

2. Shady game downloads all your chats with all contacts

3. FB is on fire since they allowed access to people's chats with others, even those who didn't download the game.

4. People get mad on FB/Google for not protecting their data.

Isn't that just for one chat? Can you download all combined?

Just like every thing else, this too was amplified by the internet.

If you said something controversial 40 years ago at a grocery shop, shop owner might be mad and refuse to service you, and might even put a bad word for you across the town. In the worst and rarest case, you might have had to leave town.

Now, anyone can record the interaction, put it in front of more people on twitter than the front-page of a big newspaper. And this amplifies things. Not to mention that it remains there forever for the whole wide world.

At this point in many places, you will be more quickly forgiven for taking cash from a shop's register than saying something which is not the prevalent opinion.

While mobs have existed since eternity, the internet amplifies mob voices and makes everything you ever said available to a determined adversary. Since it isn't possible to predict what will be acceptable in society 10 years later, it makes sense to blog anonymously, lest the mob comes for you and even your loved ones who may not even share your opinions.

Is there a comparison somewhere of how many flash features ES6/7 still lack? Also any performance comparisons between the two.

I don't think that will get the NYT to listen. A better idea is that if you are a subscriber, unsubscribe and give this as the reason. As recent history proves, the NYT truly listens to cancellations. A bunch of people running pihole, not so much for sure.

It is there with folks who know about those people and feel connected to them. SSC has a lot of it's audience on HN. Hence you see the outrage here. People can't feel similarly outraged by every doxxing since they have limited time, energy, and emotional bandwidth. If people were forced to worry about issues just on their impact, a large number of kids are starving in Africa, and by that logic people shouldn't worry about anything else till they can do something about that.

If you can prove whether recursion or even a loop is bounded or not, you have solved the collatz conjecture.

That talk sounds interesting. I tried searching but didn't find anything like that about a nested VMs in js. Any idea if the talk is online. I am curious to see why they needed nested VMs.

> and the ability to go back to compiling for web gives managers a sense of "this isn't a one-way, I'm screwed if something goes wrong" journey

It wouldn't be a good idea to believe that though. Flutter website are just canvas paintings, and have nothing to do with the web. You can't add new html or js to it easily. can't make much use of new improvements in the web world.

Most importantly, if you are running a business, flutter web isn't really accessible, so please don't use it for any non internal tools

Is cloudflare at a scale where it would be possible for them to provide cheap enough prices on video hosting and bandwidth to enable someone to build a profitable YouTube alternative on top of that? Assuming that a youtube competitor can get to similar scale and make similar revenue.

> A person's right to even exist in society shouldn't be up for debate.

But she isn't saying anything like that. No where has she ever said that trans people don't have a right to exist.

> Because of who she is, and her massive audience, this does real damage.

But this is the only reason she is able to speak at all. Another author got fired just for tweeting that she supported JKR. If JKR wasn't so famous, she would have been fired and cancelled long ago.

> against a group of people who are extremely oppressed, and using outdated / debunked info to do so

I have no expertise on the information JKR and her opponents are tweeting, but I agree she might be incorrect in several. But is it so wrong for her as a woman to say that she doesn't feel comfortable if any man who self identifies as a woman is allowed access to women spaces, because this is what a lot of her opponents reply with. Please note that women also have been oppressed for not centuries, but millennium.

Yup, that's the only thing any company or person can say without causing a Twitter storm against them. By saying this they can simply avoid clarifying what they mean by this. I think all these public personalities will have a much harder time if they were asked a clearer question:

Should any man who self ids as a woman have access to women's private spaces.

I don't see a large company ever answering that in yes/no.

What would happen if Bolsanaro doesn't survive? How does succession works in Brazil. Is the next person in line more or less rational than Bolsanaro. Also can it end up leading Brazil further to the right due to sympathy votes? Or will it make people realise his incompetence if something happens to him.

I think most of the people being able to speak against the mob opinion have many things in common. They are rich, famous, and are generally hard to cancel. Carmack, JKRowling and maybe even pinker are in this category. For example, one writer got fired just for tweeting "I stand with JK Rowling". (https://www.scotsman.com/news/people/scots-author-sacked-bac...) . Many professors have been suspended just for not speaking tone in tone with the popular opinion. If Pinker wasn't this famous, he might have been fired by now.

People not willing to venture out their echo chambers is bad, but much better than being hell bent on taking away the livelihood of others for bad tweets.

Why does uber think they can do a better job that focused companies whose main business is grocery retail. Uber doesn't even have another profitable business to subsidize their grocery business while starting.

I think this is very important.

Mob justice over what people said years ago is very dangerous. And due to the global nature of the internet, it is very hard to get the mob off your back. It seems many students have been denied their college admissions due to stuff they tweeted as a teenager. It seems in the modern world felons deserve redemption, but bad tweeters do not. Not to mention that cancelling people over what they said in the past is so stupid, that if applied consistently, will lead to funny scenarios. For example, if teenagers should be punished for their past tweets, why shouldn't be Joe Biden for saying on the record that he doesn't support same.sex marriage in the 2008 VP debates. This is not even counting what opinions biden held in the 20th century.

It seems that we have come to a point where you simply can't speak on certain topics, neither in the affirmative nor in the negative, and so most people end up saying what will keep the mob at bay. Case in point, all the people attacking JK Rowling do not want to say that any man who self ids as a woman should have access to women's private spaces.

Makes a lot of sense. Professors of high age are at very increased risk. Students fit in tight spaces would for sure include asymptomatic careers. And any hope of expecting an entire student community to take utmost caution is simply futile.

People are committed to civility at HN and good faith arguments mostly because HN is a small community, much smaller than twitter e.g. It is also inhabited by mostly people with intellectual curiosity, and accounts violating the guidelines get banned quickly in their infancy.

I followed quora since when it was a very small website. It was full of very useful and well written content. As the userbase grew, the quality of the content went on continuous downward trajectory. If HN had 100 million users, you would see the same content quality at HN, and the volume would make moderation hard, if not impossible. Not to mention, you might start seeing calls to cancel user XYZ on HN too if it reaches a userbase as large as twitter.

It can, but mostly due to the fact that the amplification of voices would be less, since people won't be talk to thousands of people, unlike twitter.

I think the rise of a well headed, free speech space is extremely important. The US has reached a point where certain topics are not even up for debate, as ruled by the court of twitter mob.

How does Jio do it? Would encrypted SNI help in thwarting that?

BLM is not a monolithic entity though, and is comprised of lots of groups pushing lots of agendas. e.g https://mobile.twitter.com/agavedelacalle/status/12691745749... .

I was lucky enough to read about china in university and read 3 different books about Mao for varying perspectives. What is happening in the US is strikingly similar to the cultural revolution. Making "anti progress" people kowotow to the revolution, taking away their means of livelihoods. Wait till these people start saying that anyone with a slightly different opinion than the revolution is a racist and needs to be "reeducatted", and long for a social credit system similar to china.

The CCP also didn't start with the goal of oppressing people. It started with the goal of ending century long oppression of chinese peasants at the hands of the ruling elites. If you read Mao's little red book, he even makes some arguments against censorship.

Apple is not behind BSD at all, using Darwin is not being behind BSD. Any of the the popular BSD distributions is not backed by Apple. Not to mention Microsoft needs linux, not the other way around. Microsoft is desperate to get linux developers on windows, using WSL. They had to rename Windows Azure to Microsoft Azure. Linux would not be affected at all if Microsoft stops contributing. Azure will be if it stops offering Linux VMs.