Chaebixi

29 ms·

241.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> as domain names are legally treated as property and cannot be confiscated except through due process (like a court seizure following a ruling on illegal activities). That's just current convention, though. If better governance me
242.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
It's not going to stop everyone, but it will stop some of them. I've been on it for years, and I only get a handful of calls a year from telemarketers (which tend to be the unscrupulous caller-id spoofing kind).
243.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> Social media is one of those things which by nature is difficult to break up. I'd say it's as hard to really fix as any natural monopoly. No. Right now, social networking right is sort of like email in the AOL/Compuserv
244.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> Along which lines could it be broken up? Datacenters? Subsets of the social graph? Would you liked to be grouped with your family, your school or your church? > It seems very plausible that one of them would grow and engulf everyone
245.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
If a decentralized social network like Mastodon can start supporting event planning, it might have a chance to gain ground against Facebook. That's really Facebook's only killer feature and unique value right now, IMHO. https:
246.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
You can always mute your phone and join the national do-not-call registry to cut down on the calls.
247.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> But the more 'real' the test is, the less of your own test it covers relative to all of the other external dependencies. But the more 'real' the test is, the more of your own assumptions get about how your depende
248.
Formal verification of floating-point arithmetic at Intel (2006) [pdf](cl.cam.ac.uk)
1 points by Chaebixi 9y ago|0 comments
249.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> And they can be more brittle than your actual code. The brittlest tests I've ever seen have been mock-heavy unit tests. Some of them amount to little more than file-change detectors. Those tests can fail massively even when ever
250.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
>> They should be more considerate of other developers who use .dev internally like them. > Why? What do they owe anyone? Your attitude is the root cause of so many problems. The have a moral obligation to not be jerks. If you&#
251.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> If you're objecting to this now, not back when the program was being formed, you clearly handled this poorly by not being involved in something you care about. > If you don't care and weren't involved, you also don&#x
252.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
No. If you waded through the history lesson, you'd eventually learn that Google maintains the list of domains requiring HTTPS that all the other browsers use. Unless something changes, Firefox will eventually pick it up.
253.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
Were you responding to a different comment? I was writing about political development, not economic.
254.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> Should we block LoL now then, or are it's communication tool(s) different for whatever reason? Blocking LoL is fine by me. China's blocked Google .
255.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> To ensure that nobody else does. Google uses .dev pervasively for projects - if someone were to buy .dev and sell domains in it on the global DNS infrastructure, then myfancynewproject.dev would resolve to something entirely different
256.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
Selecting this when composing an email allows you to edit the localpart entirely. Similarly, when replying to an email sent to your catch-all and you have an <star>@ identity for the hostname FastMail will automatically set your from
257.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> I was a very happy FastMail customer until a hacker asked them to reset my password. After _incorrectly_ answering a handful of questions asked by the FastMail support, the recovery email address was changed and a password reset link s
258.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
>> No Chinese firm should be permitted to own a controlling interest in any communication system widely used in the US. > That can backfire very quickly, when Europe is going to say the same – no US firm should be permitted to cont
259.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> Unlike China, the US needs a legal reason for this sort of decision, not just the whim of whoever is in charge. Non-reciprocal trade/investment policy that disadvantages US companies, that's the legal reason right there. I u
260.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
Adding up your numbers: Tencent: 40% foreign owned Alibaba: 45% foreign owned Baidu: 35% foreign owned None of those are majority or controlling stakes. Which is hardly the... > Baidu, Alibaba and Tencent are all largely owned by foreig
261.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> WeChat will not suddenly get popular in the US because it sucks. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have survived in China without the firewall. But assuming it did, I think the correct response is to require it to have end to end e
262.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> What if WeChat just suddenly gets popular in the US? What should the US do in that situation? Block it (or heavily regulate it), pending a reciprocal opening of their market. The whole "be open, lead by example, and they'll d
263.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> Again, it isn’t his money. It isn’t his savings, it’s yours. People are all high and mighty about other people’s money, but shut up when it’s their own. Again, ownership and stewardship of money isn't the highest good, and shouldn
264.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> Put it this way, do you want Tim Cook making idealistic decisions with your retirement savings? Do you mind losing 80% of it because you don’t want them doing business in china anymore? That settles it then: dystopian miasma it is! Ca
265.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> jpetso: Yeah! For example, the government could become a stakeholder in all companies to ensure that the populace's interest is taken into account in addition to profit... wait a second, that's what China's doing What ki
266.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> Cook realized that his board or shareholders would fire him for getting Apple locked out the Chinese market (both for sales but also for the manufacturing). Not an easy position to be in. They could conceivably diversify their manufact
267.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
Yeah, they played the West. The Communists got what they wanted (technology transfer), while keeping everything firmly under their control. > I think China is actually demonstrating the fallacy of our idea that as a country develops it
268.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> If N companies pulled out of China and it didn't liberalise, they've incurred a cost for no benefit. If N+1 pulled out and it did trigger China to liberalise, they'd benefit from doing it. > The trick is finding the N
269.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> Maybe he even cares as a human being (if he doesn't -> psychopath), but with his CEO hat on he certainly does not. Aren't CEOs and managers even trained to think that way in business school? For instance the "shareho
270.
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> Chinese internet is as closed as it gets. Any foreign company eating up the market share of a local company will get blocked eventually or be forced into merging into a local entity. > For now it really is open in one way : Chinese

More ›