heyyyouu

7 ms·

31.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
Yeah, it comes off as more as a way of taking advantage of desperate people willing to try anything.
32.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
You can do the same exact thing with facebook advertising. People have done it (job ads, apartments, etc.). This is just targeted at banner/Web vs. social media. Doesn't make it any more or less icky, just saying that it's no
33.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
Even when the rest of it is "available" it can be taken back after weeks if it doesn't actually "clear." There's what you see as clearing vs. actual clearing. I've also had, with very large deposits, to ca
34.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
This has been linked to and commented on endlessly for years now, on many sites, for example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3159210 And I've never really understood why; most conference organizers like this kind
35.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
I'm not sure how this is anything new. Phone company employees sometimes listened to phone calls. Unless your communication is encrypted somehow you have to assume that at least some employees of the service may have access (which is p
36.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
Yes, exactly. But to me in many ways that's application programming on the Web vs. Web programming. It may seem pedantic but it's two separate skill sets, and my teams that do each are separate (I have front-end devs that are basi
37.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
I included the WRONG link - please use this instead: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/supreme-court-sends-consum...
38.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
ACK! You're correct! Thanks for catching that. Here's the link I meant to use: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/supreme-court-sends-consum...
39.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
This article doesn't say what the six organizations were, which is the main contention of settlement (the fact that it was going to them, not what they are). But in case you were curious: AARP, World Privacy Forum, Carnegie Mellon Univ
40.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
It has nothing to do with AMP. There's a lot of reasons why, but one reason is for example, two different sites can technically be hosted on www. and the non-www version, if the site isn't set up to redirect the www to the non-www
41.
MSDN Magazine Is Going Away(twitter.com)
1 points by heyyyouu 7y ago|0 comments
42.
Chrome hides www and https:// in the address bar again(bleepingcomputer.com)
257 points by heyyyouu 7y ago|188 comments
43.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
The exception in this standard is for "likely" and "imminent" violence. There are also exceptions for the commission of a crime, but then the crime has to be committed, and thus the intent. Episode 8 of the "Make N
44.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
It could. If you read deep-down in the article you can also see that the NYT and WSJ are making massive efforts to keep new subscribers, but the LA Times doesn't appear to be investing much at all. It's possible that could be the
45.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
It 100 percent is still this way. But generally your queued list can be set up 1-2 days beforehand, so that's why it's often 48-72 hours, because you're already in that list that's been cleaned at the provider for drop.
46.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
Giving over your list to a third-party provider like Mailchimp can be a risk. One thing most publishers is more protective over than anything else is the database. Also, Mailchimp just isn't ideal for high volume mailings/companie
47.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
It's because of permissions there's different databases, plus most importantly the drop lists are usually keyed up 48 hours in advance (you have to do in advance because of all the checks you have to do, etc.). They can take you o
48.
The L.A. Times’ disappointing digital numbers(niemanlab.org)
43 points by heyyyouu 7y ago|27 comments
49.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
Nope! but good to know.
50.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
Definitely! We actually dropped one vendor because it was all ex-Oracle salespeople, and their negotiation tactics were outrageous. They tried to hold us over a barrel and instead we made a major platform change in six weeks just so we coul
51.
Open Source Firmware Goes Live(queue.acm.org)
2 points by heyyyouu 7y ago|0 comments
52.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
Oracle does some evil shit. Their sales tactics can be outrageous. It really doesn't seem like they give a crap about their clients/servicing them.
53.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
THIS. I don't understand how so many people don't actually get how Google and AMP work. You don't need AMP for organic search results. It's used by Google, yes, but only for certain things AND there's ways to turn i
54.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
I do this for a living. As head of digital and editorial for a major publisher It's absolutely not suicide as we are extremely successful with our Google traffic without AMP. In fact MANY publishers don't use AMP -- I would say mo
55.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
It's still 90-95 percent Google, surprisingly. You'd think it would be less with mobile but no. We are seeing more duck duck go, but bing and yahoo have stayed steady for years. Social is a rise, and that's a lot of mobile. A
56.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
That is one technique some people use.
57.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
AMP is optional. You don't have to implement it. Even if you do there's ways to instruct Google when to use it/when not to.
58.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
Yes, a lot of people agree on that. But you don't need to block Google from your site to stop AMP.The way this article is written it makes it seem like the only way to have AMP not affect your site is by blocking Google entirely, and t
59.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
Exactly! I am so confused as well. It's like this person doesn't understand that AMP is optional. And even then there's ways to instruct Google NOT to point to your AMP page. (And no, you don't need AMP for SEO -- it&#x2
60.
by heyyyouu 7y ago
I'm very confused by this article -- AMP is an optional framework: https://amp.dev/ and even if you use it you can opt out of having Google load/point to it: https://support.google.com/news/p

More ›