deno

49 ms·

541.
by deno 10y ago
You care about Chinese government’s censorship, but you don’t care about privacy from multinational corporations and governments?
542.
by deno 10y ago
The quotation in the article is cherry-picked to make Sanders look good. With little research you can see he’s been repeating this claim non-stop without any such disclaimers. The following is a direct quote from The Nation interview linked
543.
by deno 10y ago
What different things?
544.
by deno 10y ago
Justyna, the style of „quoting” you’re using is correct for Polish, but not English, which uses a pair of upper quotation marks, like so: “”. Good luck with your startup.
545.
by deno 10y ago
Politifact is infamous for their bias. Here’s an example of them rating the same exact statement very differently, depending on who made it: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jul/...
546.
by deno 10y ago
They already do with all kind of stuff and it’s not really an issue. If you keep the name consistent people quickly figure out it’s not a “real” attachment.
547.
by deno 10y ago
Since you asked, one option would be to simply include it as an alternative part in the MIME message (which email is). In fact, I would argue, that’s the correct option.
548.
by deno 10y ago
It seems the feature here is server-less discovery (mdns). Because otherwise intranet communication between apps is already possible via WebRTC. Along that track, it would be nice to see native DHT support in the browser, for global serve
549.
by deno 10y ago
That’s why I didn’t really commit to that argument, leaving it as hypothetical. For one thing, not all women would even consider abortion of pregnancy as an option, due to personal beliefs. There’s also emotional impact of such decision to
550.
by deno 10y ago
Men have just as much interest in safe sex, as women do. In fact, one could realistically argue men have more interest in safe sex, because the decision on whether to continue the pregnancy is exclusive to the woman, however men are still
551.
by deno 10y ago
> If the offload factor is sufficiently small there is no rational reason to burn battery on it. Sure, but there’s also no cost to it, if you go with the piggyback/opportunistic approach. That’s the point. It’s either net positive o
552.
by deno 10y ago
> This really isn't applicable to opportunistic mobile use of IPFS, as you are unlikely to have a large enough local swarm to guarantee uptime or availability. IPFS content is chunked, your swarm is lan+wan. > That's a reaso
553.
by deno 10y ago
Reading your title I expect to see a dry academic article. Their title sounds like, well… a blog post. I would propose this title instead: > What comes after iptables? Meet nftables.
554.
by deno 10y ago
Opportunistic as in piggyback on active WiFi connection and non-idle state. P2P networks like Bittorrent pride themselves on being available despite high churn, so this is right up their alley. The network works even if people only seed dur
555.
by deno 10y ago
As I said on mobile it would have to be very opportunistic, not something to be left in the background that keeps the phone awake.
556.
by deno 10y ago
Let’s not forget the context here. We’re talking over-WiFi (not cellular) opportunistic sharing between two phones running an IPFS node. If you have anything to share at this point this is probably a good indication that both clients have s
557.
by deno 10y ago
Seeding when phone is actually in use would be net positive. And everyone is on their phones all the time nowadays anyway.
558.
by deno 10y ago
> Also, is there some eventing mechanism to push messages through the database between tabs? http://caniuse.com/#feat=broadcastchannel
559.
by deno 10y ago
There’s really no reason to have a separate plain text confirmation here, just an indication that what you’re seeing on screen is not a phishing attempt by a rouge app[1]. A single ‘secure mode’ LED would suffice really. How come no one can
560.
by deno 10y ago
Everyone’s here focusing on usability aspects, but in fact this is a great security feature more than anything[1]. Security research has been calling for something like this for a long time. Any “enterprise” laptop brand should have been
561.
by deno 10y ago
Yeah but if you search for “cpp amp” it’s already mid-page, despite there being a C++ project with the same name. The page has hardly any backlinks yet. Anyway if discoverability is an issue they can always give it a catchy marketing name (
562.
by deno 10y ago
You are contradicted by literally the first sentence in that article.
563.
by deno 10y ago
If you can always find what you’re looking for for any non-trivial (2 keywords or more) search terms, how is it not a minor collision? “CPP” is not even the name of the language—it’s the file extension. EDIT: Mostly I’m just annoyed that
564.
by deno 10y ago
No, there are terrible antipatterns that browsers enable to not break compatibility. A strict performance sensitive mode for web platform (HTML/CSS/JS) is long overdue. AMP is a pretty great solution, and the only issue with it ha
565.
by deno 10y ago
The name makes perfect sense in context: > CPP could borrow from the concept and approach of the already existing Content Security Policies (CSP). This means that there would likely be a reporting-only mode that would allow sites to see
566.
by deno 10y ago
Search engines already deal just fine with context. Just type in “cpp language” or “cpp html,” respectively. I think everyone keeps making name collisions to be a much bigger deal than they are in reality.
567.
by deno 10y ago
This is the equivalent of retiring the domain name itself. If you stop renewing it anyone can hijack it and serve whatever they like. Not to forget, they will also get email intended for that domain. Anyone sane will keep the domain name an
568.
by deno 10y ago
I can’t think of any type of blacklisting this would prevent. Care you elaborate?
569.
by deno 10y ago
You’re right :) $ dig @8.8.8.8 ns +short pornhub.com ns2.p44.dynect.net. ns3.p44.dynect.net. ns4.p44.dynect.net. sdns3.ultradns.net. sdns3.ultradns.com. sdns3.ultradns.org. sdns3.ultradns.biz. ns1.p44.dynect.net. Porn
570.
by deno 10y ago
Cloudflare’s misguided reliance on Javascript Paywalls[1] is fundamentally hostile to open web. It’s essentially a form of DRM. And they don’t even bother to implement it properly—for example if your site tries to follow best practices and

More ›