aflag

54 ms·

691.
by aflag 6y ago
I guess you'll need to convince the judge that there's reasonable doubt that you did not create the Facebook account that you use and that you were unaware of the ToS and not acting in bad faith. Not saying it's impossible, b
692.
by aflag 6y ago
I think disabling javascript could be considered hacking the software.
693.
by aflag 6y ago
In order to access the service you need to register. The registration form would not allow you to register without accepting it. They only need to prove that you indeed access the service. That doesn't seem too hard to prove for most s
694.
by aflag 6y ago
I don't think reading it is pointless, even if you are very likely to accept all but the most draconian of terms. You still need to know the rules, otherwise, you may inadvertently break them, which could have very harmful consequences
695.
by aflag 6y ago
Yes, it was a poor attempt of trying to explain the common misconception that the First Amendment applies to private business. You are correct, though, the word censorship is broader than that.
696.
by aflag 6y ago
If you break the TOS, then the service provider can take any actions they are entitled to in the TOS at their discretion. You can challenge the validity of the TOS, but you can't force the service provider to be good or fast at enforci
697.
by aflag 6y ago
None of that is technically censorship. They are all private companies and they have the prerogative to give the users a TOS, which they can accept or not. That said, I do think that having more options is always good, a decentralized Inter
698.
by aflag 6y ago
I'd imagine that later saying your license was denied would direct the internet mob in your favour, not against you.
699.
by aflag 6y ago
Why would it be misleading to say they are applying for a license?
700.
by aflag 6y ago
If you care only about job prospects and your career, then I would skip it. However, if you like exploring different ideas and concepts in computer science, it is definitely worth a look.
701.
by aflag 6y ago
What's an SV company? I googled for SV companies and Software V companies and found nothing. Many companies seem to have SV in their names, though.
702.
by aflag 6y ago
I thought GPL 3 was not compatible with GPL 2.
703.
by aflag 6y ago
You can still use NATs with ipv6, there's just not many reasons too, no?
704.
by aflag 6y ago
The difference is that you can give an IP to a device semi-permanently and you can route to it directly if needed. This allows you to configure a firewall in your device specifically, rather than having to orchestrate with the router. For i
705.
by aflag 6y ago
What is the downside? The external network only needs to know you're responsible by an IP range that your ISP gives you, you can still configure your network internally as you please.
706.
by aflag 6y ago
I think the point is that NAT is not necessary in IPv6, whereas it is in IPv4 due to address shortage. You can still have a firewall without NAT, btw.
707.
by aflag 6y ago
You merely pointed that it's technically possible to write free software for macs, which I never disputed. My point that macs (and apple) are a hostile environment for free software still stands. By the way, GPL is not a fringe license
708.
by aflag 6y ago
As pointed before, the apple app store is incompatible with GPL. With the notarization system it makes it necessary for developers to at the very least use apple's proprietary toolkit to release their software. The FSF has a big list,
709.
by aflag 6y ago
Also, the screen behind it features MacOS. Which, needless to say, is also hostile to free software.
710.
by aflag 6y ago
If networking is not a problem, why not deploy it already decompressed? I'm assuming the 5 minutes time included decompressing it? It seems a bit weird to take so much time to allocate some objects in memory and possibly establish a fe
711.
by aflag 6y ago
How long are you talking? I can't think of a process I've ever worked on that took more than a few seconds to start. As you say, if you have any sort of rolling deployment mechanism the start time of your application is somewhat i
712.
by aflag 6y ago
Not sure if rate of change truly matters. In my opinion, microservices make most sense when dealing with multiple team. It's much easier to update core services when everyone depends on it through the network, rather than requiring peo
713.
by aflag 6y ago
All the metrics you've given are either subjective or inconclusive. I think the claim that firefox is less secure than chrome needs to be backed by a metric such as the number of critical issues and how long they took to be patched. Ot
714.
by aflag 6y ago
I wasn't really. Just trying to give useful feedback. I'm probably not alone in finding these tacky/empty. As you point out yourself, we are already bombarded by ads with unsincere words. This feels like just adding to the mi
715.
by aflag 6y ago
If they both have similar market share, then that variable has been isolated and the conclusion that the cheaper exploit is the less secure is sound. When that variable has not been isolated, it's not possible to conclude that the diff
716.
by aflag 6y ago
What evidence do you have to back up that claim?
717.
by aflag 6y ago
Doesn't automated text defeat the purpose of most of those kind words? If someone who knows you tell you you're worthy it's nice because you think they mean it. They've got to know you and came to that conclusion. If a b
718.
by aflag 6y ago
Though the word does have a dictionary definition, it's just sort of empty. That's what I was criticising. Both adjectives, modern and readable, are subjective and not really meaningful in a technical context. Unless you define pr
719.
by aflag 6y ago
I see the first paragraph of a language's website as sort of the "elevator pitch" for that language. You probably want to cut down any vague and uneeded words in that context and focus in the defining aspects of your language
720.
by aflag 6y ago
Lisp had lambdas for 60 years, I think ML has had type inference for about 50 (maybe there are earlier languages that had it?), ML also had generics for that long. So, none of your examples were recent developments by your standards. Even i

More ›