forgottenpass

>Not only can continuous delivery provide regulatory compliance consistency, but also more traditional human-bureaucracy approaches cannot provide it.

Ehhh... I work in a regulated environment, and think I disagree. The reason I don't know if I do is because it's really a question of definitions.

By this article, developing with our super-manual bureaucratic compliance process of 15 years ago was CD (and probably further back, I've never had to dig that far in the archives). The things we did in the name of disaster recover, control-ability and traceability fit the provided definition of "deployment pipeline."

At the very same time, I think this article is trying to say our highly automated tool-assisted compliance processes of today are not "continuous compliance" because we have manual stakeholder synchronization gates and quality-enforcing review gates on the way to production.

>If your photos live on the service's servers, they are no longer yours.

They very easily could be, if the service wanted to write it's contract of adhesion to allow the user meaningful control over the scope of how the service can use the photos.

But conventional wisdom believes there is less money in that route, and nobody in "tech" is willing to settle for less than maximum exploitation of assets.

>Am I missing something or is this named individual really stating that he and his compatriots regularly break the law?

Any lawbreaking involved is done in service of the system, he has nothing to fear from doing it or publicly admitting to it.

>Then there are the people who do it to escape from themselves — they don’t like who they are or who they’ve become, and they want a fresh start in a place where no one knows their name. They don’t do much planning. They don’t concern themselves with the ramifications. They just disappear and don’t look back. Experts call this “pseudocide.”

I wish them the best of luck against the nannys of the world screaming after them to "get back here and fit your life into my database schema!"

Yeah, spending even more time in cramped quarters, exactly what I want to do with my hypothetical extra vacation time.

I don't think Hawley's position or presentation are perfect, but if you can separate the wheat from the chaff this is a really good start.

And even if you don't like it at all, let this just be another indicator that the general population is starting to wise up to the fact the "tech" business model has been getting more and more exploitative. You can continue rationalizing the systems you build at your dayjob here on Hacker News, but in the real world dang isn't around to hush the people who want to tell you to go get fucked.

There absolutely is, but they don't want to see it so they never will. (And I mean actually want to see it, no matter where that introspection goes. Not just telling themselves they're the kind of people that would want to see it.)

People that have worked in software at non-fashionable companies outside the region can usually see it, but when people move to the bubble (geographically or mentally) they often get assimilated.

It's hard to talk about, except in person. Online they can swarm any conversation, and they're from the west coast which means they're experts at passive-aggressively tearing people apart.

>We need to 1) further strengthen an awareness of the "free product means you pay with your data

Why? It's a horseshit platitude. Plenty of things I pay for also surveil, advertise to me and sell my data.

>I don’t know what is the point here in comparing to a regular watch.

The author is questioning the utility of doing all that bullshit from something strapped to his wrist.

>Clearly Apple Watch is meant more for that.

You don't say?

>but what exactly did they think they were signing up for?

The last 15 years of big "tech" have been a giant collective rationalization that building mass surveillance is innocuous.

They think they're singing up to enable palatable use cases of collecting and analyzing that data, and nothing bad will ever happen. Just the same as anyone singing up to work at google/facebook/etc...

> More than half of the respondents said they either had a negative experience while applying for engineering internships or knew another woman who had a negative experience, such as being subjected to gender-biased interview questions and inappropriate remarks, or observing a noticeable lack of diversity when they interacted with company representatives during the interview process.

Using statistics that lump "noticeable lack of diversity" into the same category as "inappropriate remarks" really undercuts the message. It makes the reporting appear dishonest and I had to read the rest of the article much more critically. It feels like someone wanted to start that paragraph with "more than half" to make the problem seem as big as possible, and then throw a run-on sentence in the readers face hoping they don't notice two issues of very different severity are conflated.

That's just how diehard Apple fans have always talked.

>anti–intellectualism masquerading as intellectual curiosity.

Joe can be kinda dumb, but there's nobody smarter than him that's conducting interviews where the guest isn't just a prop to get the interviewer's opinions across [1]. Those are even more flagrant masquerades at intellectual curiosity.

[1] People who cover esoteric topics that nobody pays attention to but the weirdos already obsessed with that subject matter don't count.

Alternate title: "Self-styled vanguard of society fails to explain the popularity of someone willing to mingle with unwashed masses."

You need to take waaaaaaay less drugs. Or - considering that this is Hacker News and that raises the possibility you might not be on anything at all - you need to try some drugs.

>That’s frightening and sad

Yeah, discipline and dedication to mastery of one's psychical self is for weirdos. Furthermore, what's the point of combat skills in a world with law and order? He should really just spend more time sitting on the couch consuming media.

> This goes around and around, usually getting nobody anywhere, and happens all over again the next time

A security regression in a new software release is a much older type of story that just gets talked in circles too.

>it should rather be that we talk about the content of the article

iPhones are jailbreakable again. Whoop-de-doo. What are we supposed to say about it?

Might as well talk about the system design that makes owners of devices getting root on them considered a flaw in the first place.

> Sports are incredibly boring and mindless

So are your hobbies.

> At least politics is something that actually affects everyone whether they want it to or not.

Everyone need an outlet for team loyalty and deep emotional investments in outcomes. Spend that drive worrying about what color someone's jersey is, so you don't do it worrying what color their tie is. Then you can spend your calm, cold, and rational cycles towards politics.

> while these are all legitimate worries someone should take a minute and ask why, when mustached men have been stalking women since the days of Whitecastle yet no systemic changes have been effected, the moment women feel threatened from the safety of their LCD screens America opens the nuclear briefcase. No one finds that suspicious?

> regular stalking is barely ever mentioned in media, no matter how many times the guy was laying under her new boyfriend's front porch on Wednesday nights after Organic Chemistry class, what drives the article is "and then he stalked her on Facebook!" [...]

> As the recipient of not zero decapitation emails I admit it does make you curious about whether or not you can buy an alligator, but while you're arming your windows like a Saw movie you should contemplate the difference between what should be done and why it appears something should be done.

http://web.archive.org/web/20150905124257/http://thelastpsyc...

>it seems that Buddhist meditation is focused on love, compassion, empathy or some kind of goal.

You may like Mastering the Core Teachings of The Buddha, it ditches all the woo-woo fluff that many people in the US want more than the actual meditation. The book certainly believes enlightenment through meditation is possible (otherwise it'd just be a meditation book with no Buddhist connection). But the author doesn't pull any punches when he shoots down at all the ways people over complicate and brand buddhist meditation as something it's not.

Slate Star Codex review of the book: https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/09/18/book-review-mastering-...

the book: http://integrateddaniel.info/book

>Google insists on trying to fix unsolved social conflicts unilaterally

I wonder what all this paternalism will do to society long term.

In the short term we mostly see the people who are agitated by being on the wrong side of popular opinion (or are just caught by hamfisted enforcement), or others who expect levels of protection they're still not getting. But that's just the exceedingly obvious parts.

Every social intervention risks unintended consequences, no matter how well intentioned and angelic the goals are.

Censorship in TV and movies have irreparably damaged our collective psyche for generations (e.g.: the most obvious and uncontroversial area to say it's warped us are in attitudes around sex).

Where does social media censorship go from here? And what effects will it have on the population at large over time?

>It frightens me how people turns everything that is supposed to be a part of human life into a medical condition

In my experience it's correlated with the US West-coast passive aggression. Nothing can just be a difference in opinion and/or personality clash.

>This is a dogmatic viewpoint I think often seen in very technical people who are unwilling to see the interconnectedness of how our society works.

You're asking him to argue against himself rather than put a strong case forward for a position. And you're framing the fact he doesn't as a mental limitation. You're denying the authors agency by asserting it wasn't even a stylistic choice about presentation; he didn't present what you would have so therefore his brain must be broken.

I was handling more cash than that as a teenager. I worked in retail and it was pretty common that the morning deposit would be more than that.

Also, if you ever make secondhand equipment purchases from a private seller (not a used-whatever dealer) you get comfortable with large amounts of cash.

Hell, I had that much money stack up in my sock drawer after a months of collecting rent from my roomates.

Just because it's unusual to you doesn't mean you have any perspective to comment on if the law should view it with suspicion.

If saying slack sucks "trigger[s] a combative emotional response in reaaders," I don't think it's the speaker that needs to re-evaluate their choices in life.

>it's often really hard to go through the steps needed to improve the situation for themselves. Having others around them understand that it's a struggle, and not something they can "snap out of" is really important.

Having gone through some dark periods of my life, I'd much rather take "snap out of it" advice over the unintentionally patronizing "support". Both are the words of well-intentioned people unable to relate, but one of them mistakenly believes they've overcoming their inability to relate.

Isn't kernel header availability a solved problem on any linux system that isn't busy pretending not to be built on linux?

File this one under: kludges to get around openly user-hostile userland.

The Valley is currently dead-set on spending all the good will "tech" has built over the decades and running away with the profits before people wise up to the fact they were promised tools but got Skinner Boxes and a corporate surveillance state.

>A lot of people haven't yet felt the pain of using traditional relational data for these nontraditional channels.

Haha. Wow. I didn't know it was already time for another anti-relational hype cycle.