numakerg

>spend the money and benefit people or ecosystems

I think the kind of people buying $13 million cars often neither know nor care about the state of the world outside their bubble of luxury.

Panopticlick says I have "strong protection against Web tracking" but amiunique.org says I'm unique. Though amiunique also claims my TOR is fingerprint is one of six.

The writeup mentioned that (await future)?; is undesirable because it disrupts the logical flow.

Could await be implemented as a prefix, with an additional macro?

awaits!(foo()) that expands to (await foo())

It seems there's a conflict between the logical flow of prefixes going right to left and postfixes going left to right. I wonder if there's any value (for other future languages) in having syntax to swap post and prefix for convenience

instead of (await doSomething()).somethingElse()

doSomething()@await.somethingElse()

Why couldn't they use a macro or a function?

EDIT: nvm. it says in TFA not the linked writeup

China is the poster-boy of doing things without repercussions. They could shoot down any commercial satellite and suffer barely any consequences.

>This wait time is almost twice as long as it was in 1993 when national wait times were first measured.

Why? Are there more sick people? Are there fewer doctors and resourced? I've seen many articles covering the issue, but nothing that provides a concrete explanation for why a system used to work but doesn't anymore.

I don't know much about cryptography or low-level software, but could you hide the second profile inside the encrypted data?

For example, I believe Truecrypt has a dual container system with two passwords in addition to their regular encrypted containers. You enter one password to get to the "fake" container and another password to get to the "hidden" container. Plausible deniability exists where it is impossible to prove whether you are providing the hidden password and whether there is a second hidden container.

Could a similar system be employed for a mobile device? The core OS components could be shared by both containers and it's clear that you could potentially have a second hidden profile, but it's not possible to prove that it exists.

Of course just the presence of countermeasures on your devices would raise suspicion.

Would this system come with plausible deniability?

Also, does anything like this exist for desktop operating systems?

Off-topic, but I wonder if there's a name for this kind of marketing, where a company will write useful and/or interesting articles that end up in search results or content aggregators.

I don't know if it's more effective than traditional advertising, but it's certainly more pleasant.

>If Verisign were to charge him $10 million per year to renew the tucows.com domain name despite "the bile that would rise" in his stomach he would likely pay that renewal fee because it is only through Verisign that he can obtain the tucows.com domain name and because the domain name is that vital to his business.

Would it be in the company's interest to sue ICANN at that point?

>We need to stop letting people scare us into giving away our freedoms.

It doesn't seem all that scary if everyone's doing it. Just look at the use of facial recognition in the movie Coco. They could have made up any magic to stop Hector from leaving, but Disney decided to teach kids that having your faced scanned when going through security is totally normal.

https://youtu.be/t9Dn4YrJGak?t=92

What about HN? Their response to deleting comments is halfway between the thumb and the pinky.