stanleydrew

> It's worth noticing that even the preload directive is non-standard, even though it's used as part of this entire "preload infrastructure" all across the web.

This isn't exactly accurate. The HSTS RFC explicitly contemplates the preload list: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6797#section-12.3

I think you're just talking about aggressive browser caching of 301 responses, which isn't related to TLS or HSTS. It is pretty common to respond to plaintext HTTP requests with a 301 to the equivalent TLS URL, so I understand the confusion.

Seems like this proposal would be more appropriate as part of a JSON-specific protocol with HTTP as transport.

I'm not a crypto fan, but I think the argument would be that Bitcoin in particular wasn't created as a means of wealth accumulation, but rather as a means of avoiding government interference in "money." That may have been misguided, but I think that's the argument.

Ah yes, the false flag accusation. I've noticed it's almost always the first thing propagandists turn to, probably because it's effective and basically unfalsifiable. It allows you to project your prior beliefs onto the actors in any situation.

The past few weeks have also demonstrated the benefits of the existing system.

Excessive risk taking is a human phenomenon. Sometimes that results in a bank failure. Sometimes that results in a stablecoin failure.

With the existing system, we have various backstops in place to ensure the return of bank deposits that people assume are safe.

I think "home prices are going up everywhere" means actual closed transaction sale prices are going up, not listing prices.

There are a number of obvious counterexamples to this, Coinbase's continued existence being just one.

Your footnotes basically invalidate your argument. You aren't just deploying a tarball, you also have to deploy the java runtime and make sure it's compatible with your application.

I agree that Go fans make too much of the single binary feature, but it does seem easier than your deployment process.

Of course your process is easy for you because you built it to fit your needs. But if you imagine a new developer who has no experience deploying either Java or Go applications, and consider what's easier to deploy without any previous knowledge or automation, I think you might agree the Go deployment options are simpler.

What's an audible video?

Just as bad for whom?

I think the big difference is that with a public market for their shares, Stripe itself probably wouldn't need to sell new shares in "down rounds."

Yes the stock price would fluctuate on the secondary market and certainly would have dropped since 2021, but equity holders wouldn't be dependent on Stripe raising funds or organizing tender offers to sell.

Presumably the new money is in exchange for some newly-created class of preferred shares. Stripe holds the cash until it repurchases common shares from employees or any other holders, and those shares would go back into the unallocated common stock pool I'd assume. So yes, I'd think the only way this works is for Stripe to be the purchaser.

I believe this is what various "stress tests" are for. If your bank is a certain size you have to basically do scenario planning for situations like ”what if 25% of your deposits leave overnight and you have to sell securities that you didn't plan to sell?” As I understand the situation, SVB was just under the required size to submit to those stress tests.

What incentive does someone like Thiel have to induce a run at SVB?

Isn't the risk of bank runs increased without this assumption? If we're all consistently attentive and worried that we may not get our bank deposits back, then every minor hiccup at a bank could plausibly cause a run.

The whole reason we're having this discussion is that it appears to not be universal for anyone with more than the insured limit to split deposits over multiple accounts.

But there's also a big distinction between the working capital required for a business and the size of e.g. a personal savings account, which is kind of getting lost here.

If your payroll is $1M every month then it may not really be practical to split deposits across many accounts.

The problem is that we don't yet know what the "rules" will be in this case, and a lot of commenters are getting out over their skis assuming that tax money is going to go into the bank accounts of SVB depositors or something similar.

It's a matter of differing expectations.

When you purchase stock in a bank, there is a reasonable expectation that your investment could lose value.

When you deposit money with a bank (in the United States in 2023), you basically never consider the possibility that you might not get it all back.

You can certainly argue that the expectation isn't fair, but I'm pretty confident it's nearly universal.

> If anybody gets an extra penny more than $250K from the Feds than that is by definition a bailout.

I think this is naive. The FDIC or some government entity is in a pretty reasonable position to take on the longer duration assets that appear to have brought down SVB. If they hold those assets to maturity then everything is fine, and they can return deposits today if necessary because they don't need to sell assets to generate cash.

They're both scarce and thus considered "collectibles."

I get the thrust of the comment, but it's not a particularly good analogy. The petition signers are asking for the FDIC to prioritize their debt (deposits at SVB) repayment. They aren't asking for debt forgiveness.

> The problem with both of those though is that you are then less in control of your identity – the domain owner has the power to stuff you over if you are just a user of it.

I don't think this is true. When you control the domain then you control email and subdomain address spaces. In the context of the given example, there's no difference in control between dholms.xyz and dan@dholms.xyz or dan.dholms.xyz when the same person registered or created all of them.

I had their non-SMS Symantec 2FA set up a couple years back, but turned it off cause I couldn't figure out how to disable the SMS fallback. Every time I got a new device and wanted to set up the Symantec TOTP generator they would just send me a SMS for validation. So I just told them to turn off the Symantec part.

Maybe they've changed their policy since then. But when you call to get set up on a new device, how do they verify your identity now if you don't have SMS fallback?

It's off-topic (or maybe not?) but I get a very strong "ChatGPT wrote the first draft of this" vibe from a lot of the introductory prose in this post.

It's pretty cheap in terms of dollars to use a human freelancer, but it's kinda "expensive" in terms of time. You can't just quickly iterate on ideas when your freelancer is asleep at 1am and you have a burst of creativity.

Yeah this. There's often a presumption like "I'm a very talented software engineer and everyone should want to hire me and thus companies shouldn't design a hiring process that I personally find annoying."

Hiring is a matching process. If a company with an annoying hiring process is a bad match for you, that's fine.

It's not exactly what you're looking for, but maybe test drive a car with Android Automotive (Google's built-in infotainment product). I have it in my Volvo XC40 EV and like it. But at least in my car there are still physical controls for audio playback and a few other things (not climate).

There is a list of cars with Android Automotive at the bottom of its Wikipedia page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_Automotive

These seem to be mostly so-called "mini-splits" which are air to air ductless systems.

The companies making money from older heating methods are doing the fear mongering. That's not particularly odd.

Ok I'll bite. How does the banking system work? Are you just saying banks create loans worth more than the deposits they have, i.e. they have fractional reserves?