mibbitier

Also "large" is fairly meaningless when you don't include a measure of complexity.

Sharing images is a fairly simple task.

Is market leader defined in terms of quality/features? Or number of users?

Socialism is just a path to Communism.

If you nationalize everything, and run everything as a state owned monopoly, then individuals can no longer own companies.

That was the extreme position of the Labour party.

Obviously some things need to be state owned. I would say that health care, just like the police service would be one of them. Railways are debatable.

Are you 100% the memory leak was in nvd3 code? Did you submit a bug report or patch?

I guess some like kicking people when they're down.

Briefly searching around the net, anything can be found to be very scary.

And how history is often decided based on who shouts the loudest, rather than the actual facts.

How is the state owning monopolies and locking out competition considered "liberal"?

> Correction: higher-band taxpayers might have been paying through the nose. People paying less tax (i.e. the less well-off) were paying less.

Ah yes, because as long as it's those nasty greedy rich people overpaying for inefficient state monopolies, that's fine?!!

If it's considered "extremely right-wing" to believe in the freedom for individuals to own property, free enterprise free market, and smaller government without state monopolies locking out competition, then I guess I'm a right wing extremist.

You're probably right. But I can wipe with a towel in 2 seconds. 20 seconds is far too long to be any use.

If we hadn't privatised industries like British Leyland, British Steel, etc etc etc, we would be bankrupt and in the grips of unions.

Maybe you weren't born when this was going on, but "prices were cheap" is idiotic. British leyland, British steel, etc etc were some of the most loss making, unproductive industries. If by "prices were cheap" you mean "were massively subsidized by the government so we were paying through the nose for them anyway", then agreed.

Look at the 1970s. Strikes. Union action. Rubbish piling up on the streets, and power cuts. That is what nationalization means.

Since privatization, how many times has your water supply or energy supply failed?

Even the worst privatization (British Rail) is arguably far better than it was before privatization.

One of Thatchers biggest achievements was to take on the millitant socialist unions, and she won. Overwhelmingly. She set us free from their grip.

"Profit" shouldn't be a dirty word. I love companies to make profits when they provide a good service. What I dislike are millitant unions striking for endless pay and pension increases, whilst at the same time providing a horrible service.

I hate to descend into politics, but you are presenting as "fact" what is actually a very biased and extreme left wing view, which thankfully is pretty outdated in the UK now.

Is nationalisation of the entire economy to state ownership really "progressive"? That clause has some pretty nasty overtones IMHO.

Everyone knows how to call up their ISP and ask for filtering to be turned on or off.

First step after buying a mobile phone is to call them up and get them to remove the stupid filtering.

Air dryers are incredibly bad. Hand dryers are practically a waste of time since they barely do anything IMHO.

It may well have been a "fun thing" they added in there, but never intended to release to the public. The "bug" could well have been that it was enabled in the public release.

So, it's a feature, but the bug could have been that it was unintentionally 'enabled'.

Reddit demographic is extremely anti-advertising, and poor. Not exactly an extremely easy group to monetize.

If everyone got one of these, websites would just change a bit of code, and ads would work again. Thankfully, most people find advertising a useful part of their lives - adblock usage is still something like 1% of users.

blocking ads is as ridiculous as trying to block porn.

Ever tried getting past adblock? It's very trivial.

Also I'm not convinced this method of removing ads would work on ads served over https, where they can't inspect the traffic.

Writing a complete json parser would have taken less time than writing this rant...

Cleaning up? By spending spending and more spending? And increasing the wars and death tolls? hmmmm... Not quite sure how that's helping things.

Please do not speak for other people.

I am from the UK and literally cannot understand why anyone would want 4 more years of the same. Wars waged, promises broken, drone strikes, trillions and trillions spent, plunging the country further and further into debt.

Not to mention removal of more freedom and civil liberties.

Just put some more javascript in there to deal with it. I'm sure it's not the hardest problem in the world.

huh? Infrastructure is totally and utterly irrelevant to the problem. I know enough about common sense to make such a claim.

Just send a new message, exactly as you would post an original item/comment/etc, but have some special text/field in there that says "please ignore the previous message". The UI would then hide the previous message.

eg

  COMMENT: {id:9374758, from:"mibbitier", data:"I hate you all!"}
  COMMENT: {id:9374759, from:"mibbitier", data:"*IGNORE_MESSAGE_IN_UI* 9374758"}

Nothing whatsoever to do with infrastructure. Nothing to do with caches. Purely to do with the UI. Not rocket science.

Granted, it's a poor way to do it, but it's better than nothing, and easier than trying to invalidate caches etc

All they need to do is add a new "message" to say "y'know that message number 4029375 in the cache, yeah that ones deleted, ignore it".

This is not hard.

Difference is though, with an internal combustion engine, the "turning fuel into power" happens inside the car.

Whereas with electric cars, it happens at a power plant... then gets sent to the car via electricity, with lots of it wasted along the way.

Personally, I don't see electric cars as solving anything. We should be looking at generating the power in the car, from things that are plentiful - water, dirt, garbage, sewage etc.

You mean the ones that typically only last a year or 2?

Burning coal to make electricity, then transmitting that electricity all over the country, wasting some of it along the way... Then using that to charge a battery, then using that to power a motor.

I'm not sure it sounds particularly efficient unless you completely ignore all the work that goes into making the electricity :/

That would explain why Currys and PC World are also ridiculously awful.

Every time I go into one of those shops, it's because I need something immediately, to take away. They never have it in stock, and ask if I'd like to order it. If I wanted to order it, I'd do it myself, online.

I'll bite. How in the world do you consider driving to be wasted time? Don't you think while you're driving? Don't you work through problems in your mind? Don't you rest, listen to music/radio? Don't you have interesting discussions with fellow passengers?

3. Why does everyone sigh when they find a "software" on off switch compared to a hardware one? Because the software one invariably doesn't work, or doesn't work immediately.

4. I'm sure it's possible to make an automatic transmission better for fuel consumption, that's an easy problem. But make an automatic transmission that knows what you as a driver want (I'm betting that's rarely "fuel efficiency") - that's the holy grail, which certainly hasn't been achieved yet.

1. Can you imagine Top Gear proclaiming driverless cars as the way to get status? No. They'll be ridiculed by anyone who knows anything about cars (Same way people who drive an automatic are ridiculed). Imagine "Drag and drop programming is the future of software development!!!"

2. Not convinced anyone really gets stressed driving, and not convinced that "not being in control of the car" would make anyone less stressed. Personally, when someone else is driving the car, I'm always more stressed not less. If I knew it was being driven by some software, my stress level would hit the roof. Everything I own that has "software", crashes every now and then. I don't really want my car to have more software than it needs.

3. Software bugs are plentiful in any system. Simple mechanics, and humans will always trump software for things like this. Surely if this stuff was so easy to automate, we'd have software flying planes already (Which seems a substantially easier problem).

4. Considering that we still can't make automatic cars that change gear at the right point, I'm skeptical.