rsingel

17 ms·

181.
by rsingel 3y ago
If you want the same thing with more controls and less building/maintenance, you can run Ghost on Digital Ocean for $5 a month
182.
by rsingel 3y ago
Found we have one these. Glad The Verge covered this
183.
by rsingel 3y ago
That's a good question. Tech issues are tough, which is why you see lots of friend of the court briefs to explain it. For FCC matters around net neutrality, there's generally two courts: the DC Circuit Court of Appeals and then th
184.
by rsingel 3y ago
This is great from a legal standpoint for net neutrality. ISPs (and their FCC champions) like to claim they are not telecom services that funnel data back and forth which makes them Title II common carriers, subject to strong FCC oversight.
185.
by rsingel 3y ago
Love the homage to yourworldoftext.com, which remains one of the net's largely forgotten gems
186.
by rsingel 3y ago
It didn't cost billions and it was a key incident that led to a huge revolution in how federal websites and projects get built, e.g. 18f and the US Digital Service. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive&#x
187.
by rsingel 3y ago
The headline is more accurate than this formulation. None of this is hard to figure out if you have an iota of curiosity. If you let go of the rigid categories you were taught, you'll find the world is far more complex and interesting
188.
by rsingel 3y ago
What is that word?
189.
by rsingel 5y ago
Google Reader, which y'all claim to love, supported reading any blog, not just Google's owned Blogger. You could have done the same thing and built a generalized newsletter app. But instead you built a reader just for Substack, wh
190.
by rsingel 6y ago
Would love to hear what your favorite and least favorite datasets are
191.
by rsingel 6y ago
Don't remember that but there's this: https://www.wired.com/2007/05/spying-in-the-death-star-the-a...
192.
by rsingel 6y ago
I published most of Klein's docs at Wired the morning of a hearing on EFF's case vs. AT&T. The docs were under legal seal at the time but I got them from a source not bound by the seal. Still had a good chance AT&T would s
193.
by rsingel 8y ago
There's a very long history of industries considered so vital to other kinds of commerce that they can be classified as "common carriers" that are not allowed to discriminate against what things to transport. These are known
194.
by rsingel 8y ago
Also the fact that we can't run servers from our home connections is ripe for a challenge if we ever get net neutrality protections back. The 2015 Order said this, "A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access se
195.
Robocalls tell seniors net neutrality raises phone bills by $30(arstechnica.com)
9 points by rsingel 8y ago|1 comments
196.
Why Is Apple Supporting an Anti-Net Neutrality Astroturf Group?(medium.com)
2 points by rsingel 8y ago|0 comments
197.
by rsingel 8y ago
This is not true at all. First of all, the HiQ case was against LinkedIn. Second of all, the ruling held that LinkedIn COULD NOT bar HiQ from scraping the public content. LinkedIn appealed the ruling to the 9th Circuit, which heard the ca
198.
by rsingel 8y ago
Lol on being downvoted. I was a writer and editor for Wired for a decade, including writing the first story ever about YC, covering security and breaking news on the NSA and AT&T's spying of Americans. But sure, what journalism nee
199.
by rsingel 8y ago
Lol. There's no such thing as "neutrally reporting accurate facts and news." If I was going to report on your comment, should I talk about how many sentences you wrote? How many uppercase letters you used. When you posted it?
200.
California's strong net neutrality bill is back(gizmodo.com)
2 points by rsingel 8y ago|0 comments
201.
by rsingel 8y ago
The chairman called two votes. The first one came at the opening of the hearing BEFORE any testimony to accept the chairman's amendments. That passed with the help of Republicans and was a rude slap to the entire point of a hearing (vo
202.
by rsingel 8y ago
That's incorrect. The amendments strip out other protections from the 2015 Open Internet Order. 1) A ban on circumventing net neutrality at the point of interconnection. The FCC order said it would do this using Secs 201 and 202 (Title
203.
by rsingel 8y ago
This study conflates starting any business with a starting a startup aiming to raise VC $$ and become a $100M+ business. I'd venture there are hell of a lot more startups now than there were 15 or 20 years ago. Other data indicates t
204.
by rsingel 8y ago
This is untrue. The FCC's mandate to oversee broadband is clear. The 2015 rules on the solid legal foundation of Title II were upheld in court twice. The FCC has repeatedly acted to ensure net neutrality, including a 2005 action agains
205.
Net Neutrality needs your help in California(medium.com)
2 points by rsingel 8y ago|0 comments
206.
by rsingel 8y ago
"The article states that net neutrality "prohibits [ISPs] from charging unjustified fees on Internet services". No, it doesn't. They can charge whatever they want for their services. They will increase the price of inter
207.
Startups: Supporting Net Neutrality Isn’t Political; It’s Pragmatic(medium.com)
1 points by rsingel 9y ago|0 comments
208.
by rsingel 9y ago
This is ridiculous. Prosecutors now have so much more information left as breadcrumbs; GPS locations, tower pings, metadata, emails, social media posts, etc, than they ever had before the rise of smartphones. It used to be easy for people t
209.
by rsingel 9y ago
I disagree with that interpretation. "After all is said and done, after all the regulatory cant has been translated, and the smoke of agency expertise blown away, it remains perfectly clear that someone who sells cable-modem service is
210.
by rsingel 9y ago
I would hesitate to say never. When the Supreme Court allowed the FCC to designate cable broadband as an info service (Title I) in 2005, the majority basically said the facts at the time make it plausible to call ISPs that way because, we

More ›