joekrill

But I don't buy a lock for my front door expecting the manufacturer to simply give the key to anyone that asks nicely for it.

Almost all credit card companies in the US allow you to dispute charges. Some even allow you to do it online. Typically it's then up to the merchant to prove the charges are legitimate. And from what I've heard that's very difficult sometimes. Most larger companies simply eat the cost. And it's a significant problem for small businesses as some folks use this to cheat the system and get free things.

I know you mean well, but this is not good advice. The benefits of exercise are so vast and varied, and study after study has confirmed not only the physical benefits, but the mental benefits as well. To compare it to listening to music or some other "engaging pursuits" is just completely wrong.

Is it hard to start exercising? Sure. I imagine it's hard to do a lot of things initially, especially when someone is depressed. To steer folks away from doing something that could really help in a very significant way is a huge disservice.

I'm not sure how it's ironic in any way. Maybe in the Alanis Morissette usage of the word?

Whether or not you go out of your way to avoid ads isn't really germane to my point. I'm simply suggesting that it's not at all "backwards" to show ads for subscription services. That's just a fact. Are there exceptions? Absolutely. But it's just simply not the case that the concept is unusual or backwards.

Even if you think you aren't seeing ads, you're probably seeing product placements, or something similar.

Anyway, I'll leave you with one of my favorite NewsRadio clips:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhrnMbhMgmw

I believe Hulu actually has 2 tiers: one with ads, and higher paid tier that is ad-free. So they still use a pay model that includes showing ads. From what I have read, Netflix has at least tested showing trailers for their own content. That's still an ad, regardless of whether it's for their own content or not.

Magazines and newspapers may not track you to the extent that websites can and do. But they certainly sell your information to third parties. And they have at least some basic profile information about you (if you're subscribing to Cat Fancier, it's a pretty good bet you love cats). Even an address or zip code provides a likely income range, political leaning, etc.

Billboards.... well that depends what you consider a "billboard" and what you consider "tracking". There has certainly been stories here on HN about eyesight tracking, stores tracking you using cell-phone beacons to see where you are going. These things can and have been used in signage (i.e. "small billboards").

But that's not really the point, anyway. My original point was that it was not "backwards" to pay for a particular service and have it show you ads. It's very, very common. And in most cases it's actually the norm, in almost any type of media. So I stand by my original point: showing ads is not "backwards", it's the norm.

I'm surprised at the almost universal outrage over this. I assumed this was in response to the whole election interference campaign and related issues, i.e. preventing bots from blasting out content and predetermined times or in response to specific keywords in the news, things like that. So this seems like a step in the direction of ensuring actual humans are doing these things (or at least make it slightly more difficult for the bots). But maybe I'm wrong. I don't really use Facebook to begin with so I'm probably missing something here.

> They also show ads even if you have a subscription, which sounds very backward to me.

So are you also cancelling your cable subscription, any magazine subscriptions, physical newspaper subscriptions, no longer driving on toll roads with billboard...?

I'm not saying it's right, or good, or valid--but the standard practice, for as long as I can remember, for most mediums, is to still show ads for things you pay for. So I'm not sure how that makes it "backwards".

Doesn't this all assume that all trading partners are being fair and honest, though?

For example, let's say a country artificially keeps prices low for microchips in an effort to infiltrate the US market (for whatever underlying reason). Or some other country's clothing is super-cheap because they use forced labor.

I'm no economist, and I'm not even well-versed in the subject. I don't even know if these are real-world scenarios. But it's things like this that have always bothered me when people advocate for straight-up libertarianism, or complete lack of government oversight. Because there are always people who don't play fair.

Don't some banks allow 6 digit PINs?

This seems like it would be very interesting but a series of Tweets seems to be just about the worst possible medium for this.

What exactly is this supposed to be tracking? Feels like just an opportunity to get the affiliate click-through.

I think it's important to note that this is explicitly about "the OS division". Microsoft may have a company wide policy about this, I have no idea. But I think there's a huge distinction between an OS having hidden code and some higher level application or script having hidden code. The effects are much different and much more dangerous at the OS level.

I don't suppose there's any way to listen to the audio of these? Is it public? Or online? All of the "oral history" links are 404s.

While "move fast and break things" sounds great and works well in a lot of cases, this is the huge problem with it. There are real consequences. And with GDPR and other privacy laws, this is will start equating to real money lost. I expect that motto to be retired much the same way Google got rid of "Don't be evil".

I see a HUGE performance difference. I use VS Code now exclusively, having moved from Atom months ago. But most of the rest of my dev team is still using Atom. Every single time I've worked with one of them and used their machine one of the first things I notice is how much slower it is. We're all on Mac. And this happens even with folks that have much more powerful machines then I do.

And to your other point: I never even _notice_ it's Atom at first. They are so very similar visually, so I'm not sure I agree that the difference is in the UI. The thing that always tips me off that I'm using Atom is the performance, without a doubt.

> Does that mean I have a gambling problem then? Because I had hoped that despite my M:tG habit [1], I was not really-really a gambler.

Just because someone gambles doesn't automatically mean they have a "gambling problem". But I certainly don't see why M:tG booster packs wouldn't be considered gambling, as well.

> And let's not discuss my DnD etc RPG habit. I flip cards and roll dice way too much for someone who sincerely thinks she's not into games of chance.

But do you have to pay a fixed price each time you roll the dice or flip the card?

Well the article does explicitly say:

> Is this an ideal blockchain implementation? Probably not. It can be improved in many ways.

To your point, though, couldn't the rules just be part of the block chain and documented as a "transaction"? Any change in the rules would just be another transaction and require majority approval.

Really? I've been using a domain name that is my name for years. I've never had a single problem or anyone question on.

An Olympic sized swimming pool is 2.5MM liters. That's roughly 660,000 gallons. So it's actually ~10 Olympic sized pools.

Worked for me. Not sure what outside page you are referring to. Although there was a weird problem when I tried to logout. It didn't really seem to work right but eventually I got redirected to the login page again after clicking around a bit.

Definitely. I really don't understand this sudden obsession with every website wanting to show notifications.

Not quite as successful in larger mammals, though:

https://www.parsemus.org/contraceptives/reversal-whats-statu...

That's awful advice. Obviously _someone_ has to use their judgement to _create_ the rules. But if you have a large codebase that lots of people are interacting with, letting everyone "use their judgement" is going to create an unreadable mess of code, because you're going to have different patterns and approaches all over the place. It would be like writing a book and one paragraph is in English, the next in Spanish, the third in French, then the fourth goes back to Spanish, and on and on.

I kind of got the same feeling, though I'm not discounting that there is a lesson in there someone. But this line in particular got me:

> ...then pursue only jobs that will reward you with these traits if and when you master rare and valuable skills.

In my experience, most folks don't really have this luxury.

But I'm not suggesting they tell everyone the company is in dire straits and they are on the verge of getting fired. Just don't willfully lie to them on a daily basis and tell them that things are amazing and their jobs are totally secure. In my scenario, we weren't actively asking questions regularly. But they were offering the (mis)information on an almost daily basis.

I'm not saying they need to let the world know. But don't actively tell them on a daily basis that the company is in excellent shape and everyone is safe and secure for the foreseeable future.

> The people who lost their jobs had been actively assured this would NOT happen for the past several months.

My last employer did this. Not so much the exact scenario, but they constantly assured us they were fully committed for the long-term to our satellite office that they opened. They went out of their way to reiterate this quite regularly and put a good of effort into it. Until one day they showed up and shut down the entire office.

I just don't understand why. Who treats people like that? It's not like these decisions just suddenly pop up out of the blue one morning and a decision to fire people has to be made immediately. Clearly companies have to mull over this type of stuff for quite some time. I don't understand why you reassure people like that only to completely up-end their lives. Knowing that B&N pulled this crap, I'll definitely be avoiding them moving forward.

So moral of the story is, when I company has to start assuring you that you most definitely won't be let go any time soon, it's a pretty good indicator that it'll be happening very soon.

> That essentially means that it was. If it wasn't they would have denied it and released data.

What kind of ridiculous, half-assed logic is that? There could be any number of reasons they can't confirm this yet.

I haven't officially confirmed I'm not an alien being from a far away planet -- so that must mean I am one!

That's just because the DC area is so spread out. You don't really have to be in DC "proper" to get the benefits of the area. Which I think is different than a lot of other major metro areas. You see the same thing with New York paired with Newark.

Wait, so it's just buying shares in the company Kucoin itself? Which itself is just a bitcoin exchange? By trading on Kucoin you are investing in Kucoin? I don't see how this is anything like buying stocks in real company. It almost sounds like a multi-level marketing scheme.