rezonant

30 ms·

391.
by rezonant 3y ago
Hard agree- a lot of people just opt not to at all- that's what I usually do (other than HN). And when you do decide to go ahead and participate, the energy it takes for each post is a lot higher- you have to consider every contingency
392.
by rezonant 3y ago
I think there is a pronounced fall-off in the "gamification" interest too as a user progresses in karma. IIRC the last perk for high karma is downvoting comments at 501- no more fun perks to spend your Internet points on beyond th
393.
by rezonant 3y ago
I often find that checking comment karma too frequently can come with an emotional rollercoaster. You post a take you think folks will find interesting or resonate with, and then the next time you look at it it's gone from 1 to 0. But
394.
by rezonant 3y ago
Yes, that's a nonstandard function provided by v8, so it wouldn't work on Firefox. [1] This can be worked around by just constructing an Error and taking it's stack property, captureStackTrace is just a convenience function,
395.
by rezonant 3y ago
Interestingly, The Dreamcast's GD-ROM format was nonstandard enough to not be copyable with a normal CD burner, at least at first. They used CAV + cutting the disk speed in half in order to write more data (up to 1.2GB). https:&#x2F
396.
by rezonant 3y ago
We've been waiting since holidays last year for one of our updates to be reviewed.
397.
by rezonant 3y ago
Guessing here, but I suspect they are referring to the revocation of the enterprise signing certificates used by gray-market iOS app stores, since native app emulators could only be distributed that way until now. It's whack-a-mole- th
398.
by rezonant 3y ago
I mean it's supposed to be impossible for a web server to know you are using Incognito, by design, for hopefully obvious reasons. So by extension it's also impossible for websites to "respect" that you are in incognito a
399.
by rezonant 3y ago
The funny part about this whole thing is that Google actively works to ensure that websites cannot tell that you are in Incognito mode . For instance, see [1] If Google servers have a way to detect that a request arrives using Incognito mo
400.
by rezonant 3y ago
Considering the vast majority of exploits are at the application level (SQLi, XSS, etc), putting barriers between your various applications is a good thing to do. Sure, you could run 10 apps on 10+ VMs, but it's not cost efficient, and
401.
by rezonant 3y ago
Blasting a site but sending no communication offering to make it stop doesn't sound like an extortionist.
402.
by rezonant 3y ago
Also those requests for the 200MB setup aren't even hitting your servers unless you have disabled caching for some reason, not that it'd be that hard to serve it directly.
403.
by rezonant 3y ago
Something like 300-400 API requests per second is not a heavy load for any reasonably designed API. Something like 300-400 static files requests per seconds is less than peanuts.
404.
by rezonant 3y ago
That's also not true, two factor works before putting in a credit card, as I've said in a related post. I completed an email based two factor request when I did my test and I still have not given them a credit card.
405.
by rezonant 3y ago
In multi-modal land, check this out: https://www.nict.go.jp/en/press/2023/11/30-1.html#:~:text=Hi... . In Oct 2023 they did 22 Pbps, a lot more than this experiment, but imagine adding the E spectrum to t
406.
by rezonant 3y ago
Ah ha, that explains my downvotes. I am not claiming the hosting provider are reasonable people. I'm referring to the reasonable person standard of contract law.
407.
by rezonant 3y ago
That's not true. The pricing page I link does not require an account, and after you create an account, you can access the actual provisioning UI without entering a credit card. I just did it. The two factor is a check that you actually
408.
by rezonant 3y ago
Because the law doesn't care about your cash flow, and a reasonable person would expect that the fee you pay to upkeep your server is sufficient, since that's how it works in general. Trying to claim an extraordinary right to host
409.
by rezonant 3y ago
Firstly, as I've said in posts that you've replied to, the Services here are their forums and website. Your Vultr account is used both to purchase VMs and to post comments on their forums. "Services" in the agreement ref
410.
by rezonant 3y ago
Good for you. But that's not what the terms say. Read them closer, and make sure to read the end of the sentence.
411.
by rezonant 3y ago
They didn't do that, that's the rub. Even if Services included the actual hosting service (it doesn't in this case, see tons of other commenters quoting the definition for Services in this agreement), it still wouldn't
412.
by rezonant 3y ago
> Is a website I host in Vultr an "associated online property"? No, I don't think a reasonable person would read what you've quoted and come away with that interpretation. Maybe I'm a hopeless optimist about what
413.
by rezonant 3y ago
"Betrayed"? This is so sensational for what amounts to a misunderstanding of a sentence in legal terms that is just long enough for customers (well, Reddit at least) to lose the context. But not for a court, "for purposes of
414.
by rezonant 3y ago
Seems to be a chicken-with-its-head-cut-off outrage day on HN today. There's tons of other places to spend your outrage, especially since their blog post is right, my first reading of the passage in question ending in "for the pur
415.
by rezonant 3y ago
> However, you can't actually look at any details without creating a "free" account. Annoying. Are these not details? https://www.vultr.com/pricing/ I found this by spelunking deeply into... the main
416.
by rezonant 3y ago
It's not just RBAC, the actual feature needs to be designed with this sort of use in mind. When it is, OAuth is perfectly capable of handling it. The ideal way to implement something like this is to expose the message in the Facebook C
417.
by rezonant 3y ago
It's only a dark pattern if this was the permission Netflix asked for when you hit "Sign in with Facebook" or some other unrelated feature. If the permission was granted when you tried to use Netflix Chat, a bidirectional in-
418.
by rezonant 3y ago
> Is Netflix a secret Facebook client that I don't know about? Lmao, is this a serious comment I'm replying to? Yes, in fact, that's what the feature was. You could send a movie recommendation via Facebook within Netflix,
419.
by rezonant 3y ago
If Thunderbird had a hosted web version, yes. Are you arguing that data portability and interoperability should never be possible if the receiving app is an online service? Of course Thunderbird could send an automatic update that starts
420.
by rezonant 3y ago
In the sense that some users may not have realized what they were allowing, that's fair. But that just implies that the permission dialog for this sort of thing should be pretty onerous while being very easy to understand. There are de

More ›