rockdoe

40 ms·

481.
by rockdoe 12y ago
uBlock is getting popular fast, but note AdBlock Plus itself is also open source.
482.
by rockdoe 12y ago
The manner is very important. You can easily mislead people by telling the truth.
483.
by rockdoe 12y ago
If you changed the defaults, it was kept. If you never set a search engine, the shipped default was changed (and clearly mentioned as such in the release notes not to mention all over the press, so saying "behind my back" is quite
484.
by rockdoe 12y ago
Chrome as a platform, yes. Web as a platform, no. The come from the latter and are going to the former.
485.
by rockdoe 12y ago
Nope. And no, semi-legal ROMs aren't authoritative on that.
486.
by rockdoe 12y ago
You've articulated this better than I have. By default, combinations like Firefox+SafeBrowsing+Ghostery+Adblock make an uninformed user (or informed users who prefers convenience) safer against a given adversary: advertising agencies,
487.
by rockdoe 12y ago
I couldn't disagree more strongly. There IS a solution. There are even multiple ones. The critics are pointing out that a particular one they focus one isn't perfect on their arbitrary metrics, and so they claim it isn't go
488.
by rockdoe 12y ago
It might already be in regular releases, I referred to Nightly because that's what I use, and IIRC it was added there already quite a while ago.
489.
by rockdoe 12y ago
I don't understand your post because it's full of blanket meaningless statements. A government agency doesn't need to pay anything, they could use legal means to extract the information. I don't think there's anythi
490.
by rockdoe 12y ago
The problem is that this trade-off isn't properly explained or qualified in the original posts. Do you think I'm doing the uninformed public a favor if I go around yelling: "Vaccines frequently cause fever, pain around the in
491.
by rockdoe 12y ago
If you have "Update Add-Ons Automatically" checked then yes it does that. I'm not sure what your point is.
492.
by rockdoe 12y ago
So what would the author prefer? That security sensitive software doesn't check for updates? WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG. Somewhat later there is this remark: Why are these add-ons? Why are they not designed-in and built-in to the b
493.
by rockdoe 12y ago
needs to convince Google, Apple, and Microsoft to all cooperate I would certainly have added Mozilla to the list. Just look what's happening with asm.js, which is really the closest thing to what's being discussed. It didn'
494.
by rockdoe 12y ago
If you agree they have to automate the process, then haven't you just agreed it's a technological problem?
495.
by rockdoe 12y ago
1. A photo on your cv. Or it goes in the bin. I've never understood why this isn't outright illegal. There's literally no reason for it but to discriminate.
496.
by rockdoe 12y ago
I'm pretty sure this is common (the same happened to me).
497.
by rockdoe 12y ago
https://github.com/mitsuhiko/flask/issues/1272
498.
by rockdoe 12y ago
The article looks interesting, not so much for the merits of the case but for the data on the median age per employer. There's going to be a bias in there related to at what point the company was growing the fastest. The question is if
499.
by rockdoe 12y ago
DMCA takedowns and region locks are a legal/social problem, not a technological one. That seems like oversimplifying matters. The way Google automatically identifies infringing content is very much a technological issue, as well as t
500.
by rockdoe 12y ago
Owning the users' data makes it harder for them to move to a competing service. That's not a secret.
501.
by rockdoe 12y ago
Let's not forget YouTube can also arbitrarily decide what video sizes competing browsers are allowed to receive, or what DRM system they should have implemented. Good luck shipping something that doesn't work with YouTube. I'
502.
by rockdoe 12y ago
For that to be an argument two things would be required: 1) Changing patchlevels causing huge performance differences. 2) Those "patchlevels" being immediately deployable to production in the real world. Neither is true, so you do
503.
by rockdoe 12y ago
So submit an improved version?
504.
by rockdoe 12y ago
What you are saying makes no sense. And yes, if I'm using Debian and didn't add any PPA or extra sources, then the Debian Foundation IS the sole trusted source of software. And you do that because you know hey won't fuck up
505.
by rockdoe 12y ago
Is that an accurate characterization of Silicon Valley, though? If you're an engineer in a startup you known you're making somewhat of a gamble. But even if you lose, you're not exactly going to be poor. If you're a foun
506.
by rockdoe 12y ago
And the best way to introduce innovation "from the top down" for some reason always involves inventing more complicated legislation or benefits. Then somehow, large established companies turn out to be the ones who end up profitin
507.
by rockdoe 12y ago
But the problem is that the ones doing the vetting (i.e. Debian) have given up on making a vettable distribution because the build is so broken.
508.
by rockdoe 12y ago
companies like GitHub, who absorb the risk of using git Except they don't do that at all? If a bug in git would cost your company a lot of money, why do you think GitHub would be accountable if you have some enterprise deal there? I
509.
by rockdoe 12y ago
And would you be liable for any missed bugs that cause production to break?
510.
by rockdoe 12y ago
Given the context, it's probably a bad idea to name employers, but I've literally never seen this happen at any company I worked for, and I did consulting, so that's quite a few. I wonder what laws you're referring to

More ›