konstruktor

In my opinion, "other things are just as bad" is as good an argument as "if you turn it off, it's not dangerous".

I still think it's not smart to send push notifications in an active shooter situation for a feature that is made to give people who are not involved peace of mind. If you consider such risks, and not get defensive right away, you will find that solutions can be pretty simple, e.g. a banner inside the app, instead of a notification.

If the safety of your products depends on disabling features, you should stay out of anything remotely safety critical.

> If you are in an area impacted by a disaster Facebook will send you a push notification asking if you are OK.

I guess that's great during an earthquake but can be terrible when you're hiding during a terrorist act.

On a meta level, I find it worth noting that you, as somebody who talks about women as "women" gets quite different, and seemingly more honest, answers from them than the other poster who calls them "girls". It's almost as if treating people with respect mattered.

I agree that the general advice is disturbing. However, looking at grandparent's post, I highly doubt that he asked the question in a way that indicated a judgement free response to the answer. This will not get him honest answers.

This is a perfectly valid agenda, but it doesn't entitle one to doing so using the results of somebody else's labour.

> Should the germans and the french follow suit with a referendum whether they should bail out greece again?

Yes, and they should have done so much earlier. If the other Eurozone governments would have listened to popular demand, Greece would not have been bailed out, and the default would not affect their taxpayers as much as it does now. The whole bailout programme was hubris, and it is time to call the bluff.

They were elected based on their promise not to accept more austerity. I would agree with parent that they don't have a democratic mandate to do the opposite now, even if they could legally do it.

Many engineers often seem to forget that their work has impact on the lives of people. I think that, in the part of the email that you are not quoting, Roy Fielding makes a very good point that TLS everywhere is not just a technical issue, but has significant social implication.

Thus, incentives and motives are very valid concerns. If the IETF's idea of professionalism precludes the discussion of ethical concerns, it needs to change.

No, this is actually pretty standard.http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-hosting

I re-read the conversation after reading your comment, and find them assertive but not hostile.

I am apalled that your rational argument is being downvoted, instead of disagreed with in the comments. On the other hand, it makes perfect sense, and fits the topic: It's easier to downvote or loot than to discuss or take political action.

Supposing that most of the rioters did not make use of most of their means of nonviolent action for years, I cannot agree with your statement. Occupy was a different story, being a mostly nonviolent movement.

In India, peaceful, nonviolent resistance got rid of the British.

By what virtue is this a standard? The very generic name? For HAL, there is at least an internet draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kelly-json-hal-06

> But the South American nation of 2.7 million is currently embroiled in a battle with Philip Morris, which claims that legislation requiring 80 percent of cigarette packs to be covered with health warnings is devaluing its “legally-protected trademark and brand.”

From the Lean Startup methodology point of view, this is a big win, because Big Tobacco panicking validates Uruguay's strategy against smoking. All it takes is for more countries to follow suit.

I can't think of any telecommunication or computing device that I own or have touched in the last few years that was built by white, English speaking men.

Regarding software, I googled a bit to find numbers, and one of the first articles actually giving numbers says 19 percent of software developers are in the largest English speaking country, the US: http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/european-technology/there-a...

I don't think the article you are linking is a good source. The first paragraphs are full of ad hominem attacks.

What angers me most about that conference incident is the indiscriminate public shaming of two people, one of whom was just at the wrong place at the wrong time. Imagine being all over the internet because your company sent you to a conference with the wrong guy.

Assuming you are talking about 500kcal per exercise session: This results a total of 130000kcal per year, or the nutritional value of more than 16kg of fat. So how is your example an argument against outrunning your fork? If you enjoy both eating and exercise, this may as well be the way of least resistance.

Ironically, Perforce doesn't even have proper search in commit history when it's working as designed. No need for the server to break...

I believe you are conflating two aspects: Large binaries, which are, in very specific circumstances, a (or maybe the only) valid reason to use Perforce, and large codebases, which usually aren't.

When looking at an actual example of the latter [1], you will see that they are heavily optimizing against contention on the central database by limiting the size of database operations. If you want to do something that would require a longer database query: Enjoy your client side error message about implementation details you never wanted to know about.

[1] http://research.google.com/pubs/pub39983.html

Perforce is not fast, it cheats: You tell the server in advance what you are doing, so that the submit is fast. This comes at a tremendous price: Your editor/IDE has to have a perforce plugin to do what should be the VCS' job (tell perforce what is happening in your workspace), and the connection to the server has to be reliable and low latency, lest you want to spend seconds every time you make an edit in a file that has not been checked out already.

In practice, this model is a constant source of frustration, and everything Perforce has done in the last few years seems to be workarounds for this broken architecture.

Information is also a contribution.

They have also signed admissions of guilt, which makes them very vulnerable.

And when you call the cops on an innocent person, you are in trouble as well. This means that the "loss prevention" person as well as the company have incentives to not call the police on the wrong people. With this scheme, not so much.

Sorry, wrong react thread - and I cannot delete this post.

Alternatively, there is a very similar example, including a talk, right from the source: https://github.com/facebook/flux/tree/master/examples/flux-c... https://facebook.github.io/flux/docs/chat.html#content

The article specifically talks about controlled flight into terrain, which, by definition excludes malfunctions.

When I see experimental evidence, and somebody arguing against it, I trust the former, especially if the latter feels the need to say 'trust me, I am a professional!'.