ben0x539

25 ms·

301.
by ben0x539 5y ago
to be fair, that does mean it doesn't add an additional party who can spy on all communication
302.
by ben0x539 5y ago
I mean, if I ran a team and I paid recruiters to find people to hire, I think I'd be disappointed if they ended up antagonizing the candidates in the process.
303.
by ben0x539 5y ago
I get the impression that they want to ensure people choose meaningful short(ish) URLs, rather than getting random alphanumeric suffixes, because they are invested in the trust placed in the gov.uk domain and it not looking like phishing bu
304.
by ben0x539 5y ago
Probably because they want to be in the loop.
305.
by ben0x539 5y ago
It doesn't have to be surprising to be entertaining!
306.
by ben0x539 5y ago
I have this installed but I have no idea how to make it put passwords into a given password field, or save the password as I'm setting one somewhere, so I went back to the browser addon. I think I'm getting too old to copy+paste p
307.
by ben0x539 5y ago
> I’ve seen a couple of experiments of them trying it, ? Browser-addon 1password has been the only way to use (modern?) 1password on Linux for a long time.
308.
by ben0x539 5y ago
> Also, fact is that matching consumers with products that they like doesn't just have enormous business value, but is actually socially positive! What is the math here? How do you account for society-wide lost productivity from spe
309.
by ben0x539 5y ago
That's fair, but my browser has permission to access my data for all websites, and uBlock Origin probably has my best interests in mind more so than Google Chrome.
310.
by ben0x539 5y ago
I'll buy this for firewalls in end-user routers, but if you put the firewall on the personal device it's gonna get disabled the first time it supposedly interferes with a videogame or a movie stream or whatever. :(
311.
by ben0x539 5y ago
I don't want to call anyone out by making specific examples. I'm talking about comments that in their wording presuppose agreement that the person you're talking to doesn't know what they're doing, or the thing you&
312.
by ben0x539 5y ago
Could you quote the policy against spam?
313.
by ben0x539 5y ago
> less annoying version of reddit Hey now, there are plenty of corners in reddit that are less annoying than my HN comments. We're for sure more self-important here, though.
314.
by ben0x539 5y ago
Not being replaced by modern replacements is pretty much IRC's thing. Edit: I guess https://xkcd.com/1782/ makes that point better.
315.
by ben0x539 5y ago
It's probably worth noting when people commit petty abuses of power so you know not to trust them with actual, important power.
316.
by ben0x539 5y ago
> What do they do to prevent people from quickly founding a channel around a new topic and squatting on it? I don't think this is a huge issue for IRC communities. Freenode in particular had a bureaucracy around #<name> channe
317.
by ben0x539 5y ago
> Is the expectation that someone could squat (as per the new channel description) a channel for all perpetuity, even if they no longer participate on the platform? I really think that is the expectation. I can see reasonable exceptions
318.
by ben0x539 5y ago
It's not "abuse" as in "this guy is abusive to other people", sure. It does look like an administrative action that goes against community norms. If the authorization used for this action had been derived from commu
319.
by ben0x539 5y ago
It's sad that a bunch of legit criticism around Rust in the kernel (like around tooling and maintenance burden if nothing else) probably won't lead to actual improvements being made because a tiny handful of people can't help
320.
by ben0x539 5y ago
Do you think it would be preferable for the Rust-in-the-kernel advocates to not engage with the kernel community at all until they have a prepared a large array of demonstrations?
321.
by ben0x539 5y ago
It's a good policy, but I don't think it would work well as something _forced_ on users.
322.
by ben0x539 5y ago
Sounds like you're interested specifically in https://blog.tchatzigiannakis.com/undefined-behavior-can-lit...
323.
by ben0x539 5y ago
Seems tricky. Surely the 262 comments were intended to be public.
324.
by ben0x539 5y ago
Trying to avoid illogical things isn't in itself logical. Not accounting for people acting irrationally isn't rational. Your argument from logical principle presupposes that vaccinated people wearing masks is 100% useless. I don&#
325.
by ben0x539 5y ago
> They should start unwinding that now, but it'll take a few months. How do you determine when the right point to start unwinding it is? Just glancing at random new-cases-in-SF graphs on google, we're somewhat better off than 1
326.
by ben0x539 5y ago
How do you tell from the outside it's not for rational reasons? I don't see how wearing a mask is irrational just because it may not be critically necessary. It doesn't measurably inconvenience me to keep my mask on, and I do
327.
by ben0x539 5y ago
People have been wearing masks before it was government guidance. People I'm talking to will keep wearing masks when it stops being government guidance. It sounds like they're doing thinking on their own rather than going autopilo
328.
by ben0x539 5y ago
yes, it's roughly comparable to { let x = return; f(x) } where the call to f is clearly happening after an unconditional return. A slightly more practical example might be something like f(if blah()
329.
by ben0x539 5y ago
Astrophysics was probably a thing before chemistry, so maybe the chemists ought to have picked a different word!
330.
by ben0x539 5y ago
The current idiomatic go style is to write your own for-loops for everything. Isn't that just manual specialization executed by the programmer rather than the compiler?

More ›