jelly

Failing to overcome the network effect unfortunately. My (perhaps naive) hope for this copyright directive was that it would add a cost or limiting factor to the network effect, i.e. after your platform grows past a certain size you are accountable for every user and have to filter uploads at great cost.

It's almost unbelievable that they want to remove the single piece of protection that makes Article 13 remotely acceptable to me: exemption for SMEs. If many small European internet platforms were allowed to grow in place of the existing American megaplatforms we could have a more competitive ecosystem (i.e. platforms couldn't suddenly change their policies or UIs without risk of significant user losses) and upload filters wouldn't be a legal requirement.

They (Brass Horn) mention this pitfall on the product page: https://brasshorncommunications.uk/projects/Onion3G/

"There's always one" is a common rhetorical device whose meaning is closer to "There's often one, and I easily forget the times there's not." I don't think the parent's intention was to make such a claim.

As was mentioned in an article [0] linked in another comment, men who are unemployed and have given up are typically low self-esteem and susceptible to depression. If you've met one, you won't hear them say they've given up.

[0] https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2016/08/15/men-not-a...

Facebook, like many large internet companies, buys their IP blocks outright, so they show up under their AS number [0]. Facebook seems to have 3 AS numbers [1,2,3] and that IP appears in [3]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_system_%28Internet%...

[1] https://bgp.he.net/AS32934

[2] https://bgp.he.net/AS63293

[3] https://bgp.he.net/AS54115

Arguably it reduces his workload. If you're terse and abrasive people will try to spend less time talking to you except when absolutely necessary, which frees up more time for reviewing and writing patches.

Linus' reasoning echos his past criticisms of hardening patches:

>if people run things on real machines, then BUG() is absolutely the last thing you EVER want to do for "debugging".

>This is why I scanned your pull request for BUG() and similar. Because I simply will not take "hardening" that kills the machine. That's a hard requirement. No excuses, and absolutely zero exceptions.

>After a year or two, when the hardening has actually been in place, and you can say "hey, look, none of the warnings happened", I may be ok with turning them into BUG() calls.

The monty python drama is a distraction, this is an issue of principle that Linus has had to explain multiple times.

>The cornerstone of the case against unions isn't that we should stop respecting people, it's that unions are often no longer the best way to accomplish that goal.

>Generally we need to move those solutions into less partial laws and courts, instead of creating another unchecked center of power over workers.

Those most in need of the labor rights and respect unions traditionally afford are often those who have almost no access to the legal system. Fundamental problems like that are very difficult to fix, so in the meantime unions are the best way to accomplish that goal.

This cascade of privacy scandals seems quite well timed on Facebook's part; if all the blatant issues get publicized then "resolved" just before GDPR's May 25th start then they can extract the maximum value while facing no penalties. How annoying!

That's exactly my feeling as well, a less-friendly player base is one of the unintended consequences of matchmaking

Valve have traditionally taken a hands-off approach to the communities surrounding its games; I would be surprised to see their name among the list and I like how they do things currently. Though I have experienced toxicity in CS:GO, it has been no worse than in other competitive games.

Tor was /targeted/ by the NSA, but I haven't read anything that makes me believe it (or onion routing in general) has been compromised. I get the feeling tor has proven so effective that the only reasonable attack against it is sowing mistrust.

I've had that problem with W10FC, the permission window will often only spawn after the requesting app has notified you it failed to connect.

This was covered in a recent kaspersky paper[1], which I found in [2], where it is termed "fourth-party collection". The pdf gives a more complete description on page 2 (I found the increasing level of separation between collector and reciever to be almost comical)

[1] https://cdn.securelist.com/files/2017/10/Guerrero-Saade-Raiu...

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15663985

My concern is that Cloudflare's decision is based on some generous interpretation of an otherwise innocuous post. If there was a direct quote of what DS said, I could accept it, but otherwise I am left concerned that Cloudflare's CEO just woke up angry one day and gave a hand-waving excuse wrapped in a big blog post.

again, this is someone saying DS said it, but not giving a screenshot or a quote

Based off when the solutions (or "gotcha" hints) were posted:

Q23: 19:28:28

Q24: 19:38:38

Q25: 19:54:52

Q26: 20:02:44

Q27: 20:05:08

Q28: 20:24:09

Q29: 20:27:42

Q30: 21:22:56

Q31: 22:37:51

Q32: 22:53:41

(thread languishes until 2-3 am, few posts are made, a new thread arrives)

Q33: 05:05:16

Q34: 05:23:58

Q35: 05:38:09

Q36: 05:54:55

Q37: 06:17:25

Q38: 06:21:57

Q39: 06:47:14

Q40: 06:53:04

Alternatively, perhaps fully paying off your loans has become such an unusual thing that it has joined the ranks of "things rappers brag about in their lyrics"

Many social media sites are headquartered in the US, so private accounts there are completely open to an NSL (or the DHS' equivalent). Information-gathering doesn't have to comprehensively cover every site to yield results.

That could be the most interesting part of this case; if access to an appstore is essential for a service, can Google/Apple forever remain the "Default Providers" while still enforcing their own rules?

I have a feeling that the Internet Explorer default-browser antitrust fight will have to be had again, although gab might not get that far.

Some do, some don't. Such is the nature of choice.

It was quite possibly gamergate in 2014. I don't think dragging up the whole culture war here is valuable, but clearly a large portion of the gaming community were left feeling mistrustful of the gaming media. That war continues as background noise at this point, but is still a powerful influencer on many left-vs-right subjects.

This seems like a reframing of Charlie Brooker's criticism of news coverage regarding mass shootings[0]. Then, as now, many institutions seemed focussed on providing dramatic and emotional coverage rather than more objective and disconnected reporting.

I think the BBC has somewhat changed its tone in respect to events like this; it's usually slow or last to report casualty numbers and attacker names, but being last doesn't effect social change if lots of competitors are doing it anyway.

[0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2o1V4lX_g4

The youtube video seemed very hand-wavey, I found the paper that the NASA link refers to on arxiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.03390

I think the relevant part starts at section 8.3, page 48, but it's quite dense so I wasn't able to glean much more from it!

I nearly got tricked into closing that article after the first paragraph; the chumbox subconsciously indicated to me the end of the article and I had to consciously think "wait, this is an article about these ad grids." In fact it happened for every example they showed.

Voting is anonymous, so calling people names based off who they voted for isn't a viable strategy.

I can't help thinking organised religion was /the/ way to create a local community. Unless the state steps in and "forces" locals to gather regularly (in the way fear of god "forces" worshippers together) there's little reason for family X on road A and family Y on road B to meet, let alone shared experience for them to bond over.

This was a great read! Thank you

In the first case: why not just the paper?