devrand

19 ms·

61.
by devrand 3y ago
They might be referring to their idle reclamation policy: https://docs.oracle.com/en-us/iaas/Content/FreeTier/freetier...
62.
by devrand 3y ago
It's registered: https://domains.google.com/registrar/search/whois/7.zip
63.
by devrand 3y ago
In what way would that help? At the end of the day the company will need to pay taxes and employees will need to be paid (who in turn also need to pay taxes on that). That basically forces conversion to fiat via a bank account that they can
64.
by devrand 3y ago
I don't see where I stated that anyone was claiming ignorance. My point still holds: users had the option to create a record, but it was not the default. From that perspective the comparison provided does not hold. The real debate is a
65.
by devrand 3y ago
I'm not sure that's a comparable situation as someone explicitly took an action to make a record. In the case of Chat it's all software automation. No one is explicitly taking an action to make a record or destroy a record. T
66.
by devrand 3y ago
AFAIK you have an obligation to retain records if under a legal hold, but you do not have an obligation to create records. So if your company policy is to record all phone calls, then yes, you would need to retain and provide those records
67.
by devrand 3y ago
Well they did reject a $15m payout after they won the first trial.
68.
by devrand 4y ago
I couldn't find anything specific to that, but I did find thus blurb where they seem to explicitly track how often they're serving Elon's tweets for A/B testing experiments: https://github.com/twitter&#x2
69.
by devrand 4y ago
And yet that's basically the only thing people accept.
70.
by devrand 4y ago
Actually paying for goods and services with crypto is garbage though. I can barely stand the 3 seconds it takes for my credit card chip to process, meanwhile crypto is somewhere in the range of a couple of minutes to a couple of hours to co
71.
by devrand 4y ago
Same thing happened to me. I tried to Venmo request friends for "Habana Outpost" and it got flagged for review. I just withdrew the requests and resent them as "Outpost"
72.
by devrand 4y ago
That’s not a client side database. The “verification server” is a publicly accessible database.
73.
by devrand 4y ago
Isn’t that exactly not the case here? This product existed for over a decade.
74.
by devrand 4y ago
Why can't code just be old? If it's stable, sustainable, and able to deliver on customer needs, then who cares? The only benefit at that point be to prevent people nitpicking that their code uses "var".
75.
by devrand 4y ago
Isn't this why non-refundable deposits are common? The fee would be paid out of that. That all being said, for sales that big I'm guessing ACH/wires are a lot more common anyway.
76.
by devrand 4y ago
But you need both the master password _and_ the secret key. Even if you write it down on a post-it note, you now need a physical attack to access it on top of whatever attack you needed for the master password.
77.
by devrand 4y ago
> most people would do the former, this is basically back to square one, and to call this "end-to-end" is misleading. I'm not sure I agree that this is misleading. Google, who is storing the data, never holds the key. Like
78.
by devrand 4y ago
The organizations that need this for compliance reasons likely don't care about that. This is likely going to be a very niche feature (in the grand scale of all Gmail users) that really only exists so that it can be sold to large enter
79.
by devrand 4y ago
AFAICT this feature is mostly for internal (to your domain) emails as you need to supply your own identity provider for key management. I don’t believe a random external sender will be able to send an E2E encrypted email. Or at least not in
80.
by devrand 4y ago
> Starlink already offers unparalleled end-to-end user data encryption. I don't understand this marketing. How would they possibly being doing E2E encryption? This is the wrong layer to be applying encryption at anyway.
81.
by devrand 4y ago
On what basis is GitHub obligated to provide them service?
82.
by devrand 4y ago
I think it still works for that. In the OnStar case you have the option to decline the service, but you still need to pay for it. That would likely run afoul of the requirement that it has ongoing costs to support the service. So I think th
83.
by devrand 4y ago
I think hardware was a loss-leader anyway. They were generously giving them out for free. Games are probably the biggest loss for them as a majority of that money was handed off to publishers.
84.
by devrand 4y ago
This does coincide with Apple changing Applecare+ to cover an unlimited number of incidents. Their motivation was simply to streamline their own internal repairs?
85.
by devrand 4y ago
> Well don't buy their PSUs, since they're just some random Chinese PSUs with an EVGA logo slapped on it. That's basically every brand. Corsair/ASUS/EVGA/NZXT/Cooler Master... none of them actually make
86.
by devrand 4y ago
> I can see why a car manufacturer would not want to make two versions of each car, one with heated seats and one without. In the past this is just how "luxury" options trickled down into standard options. If it's more eco
87.
by devrand 4y ago
> You receive the full information of the copyright holder if you receive a DMCA takedown. That’s not exactly helpful if it’s a fraudulent claim.
88.
by devrand 4y ago
> It's still extremely annoying and it's definitely not a good look for their business, but I assume the number crunchers have determined actually dealing with the fraud isn't yet worth it financially. They’ve dealt with i
89.
by devrand 4y ago
Did they have significant growth recently? It's possible they're laying off mostly newer employees who may not have even vested yet.
90.
by devrand 4y ago
I was actually surprised they bothered to add it at all. It's definitely not for their target audience: people using streaming services. What they provide is actually great for that audience. My best guess is that they keep pushing int

More ›