declan

13 ms·

151.
by declan 11y ago
Huh. I implemented iOS and Android Facebook login for https://recent.io/ in a few days last month. (The login code itself wasn't that time-consuming but UX, debugging, etc. took longer.)
152.
by declan 11y ago
<stickfigure>: I like that idea! What areas have you tried? You can get pretty rural pretty quickly west of I-280 in San Mateo and Santa Clara counties, and of course Santa Cruz County further south. Head 10 minutes west of I-280 via
153.
by declan 11y ago
An update: I've found out that Strikingly (which has excellent customer service) will manually add SSL support to a domain purchased elsewhere if you ask them. But if you want SSL, it's probably still easier to buy a domain throug
154.
by declan 11y ago
Everything you say is correct. But on the other side of the ledger, the later Box employees presumably received market-rate salaries, and I suspect that many of the 1,200 employees are salespeople who may well bring in more in commission th
155.
by declan 11y ago
This article was on the front page of the Wall Street Journal today. One thing that struck me when I read it this morning is that the headline is practically unrelated to the article: the word "rich" appears only in the article&#x
156.
Homeland Security: Crypto makes it harder for Feds to find “terrorist activity”(dhs.gov)
11 points by declan 11y ago|11 comments
157.
Rand Paul, Ron Wyden, Zoe Lofgren Introduce “Aaron’s Law” CFAA Reform(paul.senate.gov)
4 points by declan 11y ago|0 comments
158.
by declan 11y ago
We're talking about two different things, really: You're saying that RMS was concerned about copy protection and locked-down devices in general back in 1997. That's true, and nobody has said anything to the contrary. But RMS
159.
by declan 11y ago
Agreed that SSL should be included at least as an option; it's now gone beyond a nice-to-have feature. The ClaimYourName site reminds me of Strikingly (a YC-funded company), which unfortunately still doesn't support SSL for domain
160.
by declan 11y ago
>Everybody in tech with 2 brain cells predicted this. Cite, please? Claiming, somewhat rudely, that was the case doesn't make it true. If you were prescient enough to publicly criticize the anti-circumvention sections of the DMCA in
161.
by declan 11y ago
The linked article is good as far as it goes, but it fails to take the next logical step and call for the simple repeal of the anti-circumvention section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. I was living in Washington, D.C. and f
162.
by declan 11y ago
Putting a smiley face on it doesn't mean you're right. :) Under federal law Sergey and Larry and Eric can each give a maximum of $2,600 to any federal candidate, $5,000 to a PAC, or $32,400 to a national party committee. This is n
163.
by declan 11y ago
>The only tech event I strongly recommend attending is LAUNCH Festival by Jason Calacanis. Agreed. It's very well done. Also note that Jason has been very critical of the "pay to pitch" phenomenon: http://www.bu
164.
by declan 11y ago
<zaroth>: I'm not sure why you were downvoted, so have an upvote. Not saying I entirely agree with you -- calling it a "tax" is incendiary and no more accurate than saying "why do we need to pay a 10% tax to grocer
165.
by declan 11y ago
> Ben Edelman, whose done a damn good job over the years not only watching Google Ben Edelman is a smart fellow; I've known him for 15 years or so. But he is a paid Microsoft consultant and advisor. Perhaps he's right on some o
166.
by declan 11y ago
Those are individuals choosing to donate money, not Google. As I said above, any corporation is prohibited from donating even $0.01 to any candidate for federal office.
167.
by declan 11y ago
> campaign contributions made by Google to the Congressional representatives... Sigh. It is illegal for Google, like any other company, U.S. or foreign, to donate even $0.01 to any "congressional representative" (by that I take
168.
by declan 11y ago
You might be interested in a classic (well, pre-Microsoft antitrust) book written by a professor who has specialized in antitrust law. I've interviewed him a few times. Excerpt: "Professor Armentano thoroughly researches the clas
169.
by declan 11y ago
>What would be a viable way for Google to fix this that doesn't hurt users? Assuming that any of Google's business practices needs to be "fixed" (a claim that's debatable and has been rejected by U.S. FedGov), yo
170.
Google updates Material Design specifications(google.com)
3 points by declan 11y ago|0 comments
171.
by declan 11y ago
Yup. I wrote about this for CNET in 2013: http://www.cnet.com/news/how-web-mail-providers-leave-door-o... "A survey of top mail providers shows that Google is alone in using strong encryption, known as SMTP-TLS..
172.
by declan 11y ago
There was Cygnus Solutions, which I believe maintained GNU software (debugger, binutils) and contributed large parts of gcc. Cygnus was bought by Red Hat for $674M in 1999. HN folks may recognize EFF board member John Gilmore as the founder
173.
by declan 11y ago
A few thoughts based on my experience, which included being subpoenaed by the U.S. Department of Justice while I was at Wired. We filed a motion to quash, which was unsuccessful, so I was forced to take the stand. I posted the docs here: h
174.
by declan 11y ago
>This is what I hate about apps and services using phone numbers as primary credentials. Phone numbers can and do change, so they're nowhere near as stable as e.g. a simple email address. Well put. I can think of a half-dozen phone
175.
Helpful Hackers vs. College Regulators(reason.com)
2 points by declan 11y ago|0 comments
176.
DMCA: How an Anti-Piracy Law Became a Tool for Online Censorship(reason.com)
2 points by declan 11y ago|0 comments
177.
Why are Snowden's supporters so eager to give government more Internet control?(reason.com)
2 points by declan 11y ago|0 comments
178.
The Feds Want a Back Door into Your Computer. Again(reason.com)
2 points by declan 11y ago|0 comments
179.
by declan 12y ago
Let me try to offer a correction or at least a clarification. :) First, you didn't quote this key section of Google's TOS: "You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, wha
180.
The Secret Republicans of Silicon Valley(nationaljournal.com)
12 points by declan 12y ago|2 comments

More ›