coldpie

38 ms·

871.
by coldpie 2y ago
This is a pretty lazy & emotional take on the question. As you say, the tech really can cause real harms, and it's good to think about how it can be used responsibly, both as a provider of the tech & as a user. For example, the
872.
by coldpie 2y ago
Hmm. I'm not sure where I land on the topic, but to give a bit of a defense to the safety approach, I think it's a matter of scale. To draw an analogy, we're generally OK with law enforcement using what they observe in public
873.
by coldpie 2y ago
Yes, I know. That's what this part of my post means: > may only be used for defensive purposes It's done with a clause in the public license like "if you sue us, then we revoke this license to you and may in turn sue you.&
874.
by coldpie 2y ago
Nothing is certain in courts, obviously, but Red Hat's license is very explicit that that is the intent: > Red Hat intends Our Promise to be irrevocable (except as stated herein), and binding and enforceable against Red Hat and assi
875.
by coldpie 2y ago
ZeroInterestWaste dot com
876.
by coldpie 2y ago
Yeah I get it. I'm just saying screaming at a community that they're doing it wrong is a low success rate method, and will probably only further frustrate you. Better to learn to go with the flow and do your small part to influenc
877.
by coldpie 2y ago
Sometimes you gotta pick your battles. I don't think this is one you're going to win. Best to find a way to live with it, like using the Hide feature :)
878.
by coldpie 2y ago
I replied to one comment thread. Perhaps you should put on your big boy pants and use the little [-] thing to minimize threads you aren't interested in reading.
879.
by coldpie 2y ago
> Which is exactly the system 99% of companies follow, just more formally stated Not just formally, but in a legally binding manner, including if the patent is acquired by another company (eg during a company purchase). Even if the ori
880.
by coldpie 2y ago
Yes, that's the reason for the "except for defensive purposes" part. Quoting from Red Hat's promise: > Our Promise also does not extend to the actions of a party (including past actions) if at any time the party or it
881.
by coldpie 2y ago
You can also choose to legally declare that your patents may only be used for defensive purposes. But no one ever does this, because they do not actually intend to use them only for defensive purposes. This is a bogus defense of software pa
882.
by coldpie 2y ago
No, I don't buy it. If the patents are publicly and perpetually freely licensed except for defensive-only purposes, then sure, they're not unethical. Red Hat's patent promise ( https://www.redhat.com/en/
883.
by coldpie 2y ago
> All they did was write a blog post about an interesting technique. They could literally read the patent application and write a blog post about that, assuming the methods are the same. Okay, change "sue" to "prevent from
884.
by coldpie 2y ago
> The poster clearly is aware of the drawbacks of such patents, and didn't clearly play any role in filing the patent (they said "we … filed it," not "I filed it"). A person with the same name as that commenter
885.
by coldpie 2y ago
So whoever now owns that patent (Google? maybe some patent troll picked it up?) could, in theory, sue the author of this article for patent infringement, right? Even though they invented it independently and never once used or looked at you
886.
by coldpie 2y ago
I understand why you feel that way. There's a little "Hide" button under every story. It makes the stuff you're not interested in go away. There's no shame in using it. Story's gone, no harm done, move on to st
887.
by coldpie 2y ago
> - There is no pride in managing or understanding complexity > Complexity exists, you can't make it go away, managing it and understanding it is the only thing you can do. Simple systems only displace complexity. I interpreted t
888.
by coldpie 2y ago
One way to get a hint at what kind of work employees do is by looking at open job postings: https://www.vanguardjobs.com/job-search-results
889.
by coldpie 2y ago
Indeed, that is about the stated revenue on their Wikipedia page. Divided equally among their 20,000 employees, that comes to $350,000 per employee. Expenses like office space, taxes, fines/fees, inflated executive compensation, etc w
890.
by coldpie 2y ago
> they would / should face severe consequences for defrauding the state. They are not above the law I don't know how to reply to a statement this naive. What about the past 8 years makes you think these people are not above the
891.
by coldpie 2y ago
The big differentiator is the VGHF's archive supports fulltext search, which is huge. For example you can find the first mention of one of my favorite games, M.C. Kids, in seconds with VGHF's search[1]. How would you do that on ar
892.
by coldpie 2y ago
I'd say I write about 2 to 6 checks per year? It's the easiest payment method that doesn't come with transaction fees (eg 0.3-5% for a card; similar for app payments). So it's pretty common for higher-ticket items where
893.
by coldpie 2y ago
Zuck's lobbyists pay better than China's.
894.
by coldpie 2y ago
> I'm not a fan if present-ish day sci-fi though, reality is depressing enough as it is. I subscribe to the Asimov's sci-fi short story magazine (I highly recommend it!) and yeah, I have to skip every story that starts with &qu
895.
Video Game History Foundation's digital library opens in early access(gamehistory.org)
8 points by coldpie 2y ago|1 comments
896.
by coldpie 2y ago
Please consider getting in touch with a problem gambling hotline. This isn't Internet snark--going into debt to play the stock market game is a serious red flag.
897.
by coldpie 2y ago
Sorry, I should have quoted your post. I was responding to this portion: > now I’m trying to think of what I can do to secure their devices if they’re not going to update
898.
by coldpie 2y ago
Hmm. Assuming Android, install Firefox with uBlock Origin, and hide the Chrome and App Store launchers someplace deep?
899.
by coldpie 2y ago
In the context of a regular end-user desktop machine, this seems overly paranoid to me. The odds of encountering a real, JS-based spectre attack in the wild are basically zero (has anyone ever seen a browser-based Spectre attack outside o
900.
by coldpie 2y ago
> Who benefits? The team that implemented the feature and hit their quarterly goal and got their full quarterly bonus. The execs who set the quarterly goals will be rewarded by wall street for shipping AI features. In 2 years, when rea

More ›