_qulr

49 ms·

451.
by _qulr 6y ago
From my experience, they tend to ignore those forever, and then they use the fact that the bugs haven't been touched in a long time as an excuse to close them as WontFix.
452.
by _qulr 6y ago
Thanks! That's surprisingly short. Now the question is how those IsGoogle functions are used in storage handling.
453.
by _qulr 6y ago
Hmm. It seems to be mostly open source though? I found a document about differences on Linux, and I didn't see much. https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs...
454.
by _qulr 6y ago
[Article author here] A few notes: 1. I tested with many different sites and configurations in order to narrow down the issue. The screenshots in the article are just a small sample of my tests, for illustration. 2. I'm not logged into
455.
by _qulr 6y ago
> I think this test should be performed when you logged out from the Chrome profile. It was.
456.
by _qulr 6y ago
[Article author here] I'm not logged into Chrome or any Google services. I've gone through everything in chrome://settings and disabled all of the Google-related settings.
457.
by _qulr 6y ago
> As soon as one company does it, though, that gives cover for any other company. That was exactly my point! "The quick collective action tends to dilute the criticism against any single one of those companies." The problem in
458.
by _qulr 6y ago
> The issue is that they both do it. No, that's not the issue. That's never been the issue. As I said much earlier: "Everyone is wrong about some facts." "However, this does not imply that everyone is equally wro
459.
by _qulr 6y ago
I'm not even talking about policy. I'm talking about basic factual matters. Start with something simple: the in-person attendance and TV viewership of the President's inauguration. This is completely irrelevant to policy and
460.
by _qulr 6y ago
My point is that from the perspective of someone outside of both tribes, there's no reason why one has to accept the conclusion that each of those tribes is equally enlightened or ignorant. I realize of course that they disagree with e
461.
by _qulr 6y ago
> And assuming that everybody who didn't show up to vote isn't associated with a tribe is just... you can do better than that. That's not a thing I said. I also don't assume that everyone who did show up to vote is as
462.
by _qulr 6y ago
> When half the country disagrees with the other half Nearly 48% of the electorate did not vote for either major party candidate. The two parties are both very much minorities. There aren't simply two sides to every story. There&#x2
463.
by _qulr 6y ago
> And these bleeding heart liberals This doesn't really give the impression of actually deeply caring about homelessness...
464.
by _qulr 6y ago
> This is just filter bubbles and various cognitive biases. Stories from any cable news network are regularly full of major holes, which you overlook when they're on "your side" because you're not invested in finding
465.
by _qulr 6y ago
> I think people need to come to terms with the fact that the USA isn’t immutable and no government lasts forever. I agree with this. The Constitution is outdated in the extreme. We're long overdue for something new. > A divorce
466.
by _qulr 6y ago
> homelessness is a weird metric to use Homeless is not a weird metric to use. It's absolutely a failure of government in the worst possible way. Democrats deserve all the criticism in the world for tolerating that situation. Still,
467.
by _qulr 6y ago
No hugging, no learning!
468.
by _qulr 6y ago
> I'm even more surprised people are demanding that forums and social media be stripped of the ability to moderate porn, spam, and vile personal attacks (ie not be able to moderate anything not illegal). Oh plus conspiracies and rac
469.
by _qulr 6y ago
> It's possible that they are apt to desire to do a little self regulation now in order to avoid a heavier hand doing it for them later. Whose heavy hand do you mean? It appears to me that the 2 major parties have very different ide
470.
by _qulr 6y ago
> The change you desire would almost certainly require a constitutional amendment No, it would only require a change of mind (or at least a change of policy) by Jack and Zuck.
471.
by _qulr 6y ago
Twitter doesn't require anyone to listen to you either.
472.
by _qulr 6y ago
This is not the scenario described. The scenario is that all of these web sites allow 419 scams for years, and then all of the sudden in the same week they all decide to ban 419 scams. That would be really strange, don't you think?
473.
by _qulr 6y ago
I was responding to "Or they are using similar criteria to decide what is allowed, and so independently arrive at the same decision when the same thing is posted to them all." If airline A decides to offer free checked bags, and t
474.
by _qulr 6y ago
> The difference is that Twitter can't put you in prison and it can't seize your property. I specifically said I was talking about freedom of speech. There are many different kinds of freedom, and these aren't specifically
475.
by _qulr 6y ago
"Twitter will ban posts that deny the Holocaust, a company spokesperson confirmed today. The news, first reported by Bloomberg, comes two days after Facebook implemented the same policy." https://www.theverge.com/2
476.
by _qulr 6y ago
It's a matter of freedom. The standard argument is that freedom of speech only applies to governments, but that's based on an outdated assumption. In human history, we've never before had individual companies like Facebook an
477.
by _qulr 6y ago
> Twitter is an extremely powerful bit of technology that can basically make you believe anything. I don't believe this.
478.
by _qulr 6y ago
> I think they should be erring toward better control of disinformation, Maybe Twitter should just shut down for a month. That's my point, there's so much untruth on Twitter, even specifically related to politics and the elec
479.
by _qulr 6y ago
> It's a newspaper collaborating with the president's personal lawyer The President is still allowed to tweet almost anything he wants, so this is still very selective censorship.
480.
by _qulr 6y ago
The majority of things on Twitter and Facebook are bullshit. How many politicians and "pundits" are allowed to blatantly lie on Twitter? Not sure why this is different.

More ›