zapita

33 ms·

301.
by zapita 7y ago
So your answer is no, then?
302.
by zapita 7y ago
Interesting. Would you say the South was an important market for the industrialized North? Would you like to guess whether businessmen in the North invested in the slave trade and grew rich thanks to it? And what do you make of the fact tha
303.
by zapita 7y ago
I’m not arguing anything based on the results of a blood test of one person! And neither should you. That would make no sense at all.
304.
by zapita 7y ago
Are you arguing that slavery did not contribute significantly to the wealth of the North, first by using slaves directly, then by integrating advantageously with the South’s economy and the slave trade?
305.
by zapita 7y ago
> Why do you think the slave-free north was much richer than the south, before the civil war? Because the North had a diversified, industrialized economy, while the South specialized in cotton production. But the North never could have
306.
by zapita 7y ago
> The shortest and simplest argument is that the South barely had the funds to prosecute the war while the North not only could fully fund their war efforts, they had access to extensive lines of credit from other nations. The South had
307.
by zapita 7y ago
First, I'll note that you haven't addressed the "unlimited land" part at all. Shall I conclude that you agree with me, at least, that appropriation of native land was one of the pillars of US wealth creation? > butte
308.
by zapita 7y ago
You're going to have to elaborate, I didn't understand your point at all. I look forward to watching you attempt to demonstrate that appropriation of native land, and free labor from slavery, aren't the pillars on which most
309.
by zapita 7y ago
That's because the U.S. was never decolonized. It just became an independent colonial state, where European settlers and their descendants continued to steal land, kill natives, and import slaves for another hundred years. That's
310.
by zapita 7y ago
Most industrial bread sold in the US has high fructose corn syrup added.
311.
by zapita 7y ago
What built-in “GCP stuff” do you mean? They seem to already be using GKE.
312.
by zapita 7y ago
There are two major terrorist threats in the US at the moment: one is far-right white supremacists; the other is radical islamists. Another comment linked to this GAO report with more data: https://www.gao.gov/assets/69
313.
Spinnaker for Google Cloud Platform–continuous delivery made easy(cloud.google.com)
2 points by zapita 7y ago|0 comments
314.
by zapita 7y ago
Thank you once again for the detailed reply. I appreciate that you have a nuanced position on the topic of Docker security, based on deep expertise. Sadly, that nuance is lost on 99% of the people I see shouting that "Docker is insecur
315.
by zapita 7y ago
Thanks for the detailed answer. A few follow-up questions if I may. 1. Docker does support user namespaces today, correct? Your reply seemed to imply that it doesn’t. 2. Once rootless mode is released in Docker stable, the only difference i
316.
by zapita 7y ago
> But in a privileged container you could still take away capabilites and/or permissions with an apparmor profile. Right, what you want is “privileged except for XYZ”, which is not supported by Docker. That’s a missing feature whi
317.
by zapita 7y ago
Mounting /var/run/docker.sock has always been the same as full host access. That is a well-documented fact irrespective of this particular escape.
318.
by zapita 7y ago
That’s correct. Lxc is not “more secure” than Docker in any meaningful way. They are equivalent in their use of the Linux containment “plumbing”: cgroups, namespaces, capabilities, etc.
319.
by zapita 7y ago
That’s disingenuous. In this issue, the maintainers clearly explain that running your container as privileged is supposed to disable all confinement by apparmor. The bug is that the custom apparmor profile is sometimes applied, when it sh
320.
by zapita 7y ago
I highly recommend checking out https://github.com/docker/buildx . It’s still in tech preview but it’s an exciting look at the future of docker-build.
321.
by zapita 7y ago
Great. What do you propose?
322.
by zapita 7y ago
Your reply is actually a perfect illustration of the problem. Sure, we need to ramp up carbon capture capabilities, and we need to do it fast. That is a great challenge for the tech industry to tackle. However. Carbon capture is not a silve
323.
by zapita 7y ago
Personally I think we should never give up. We are not in a video game with a binary outcome - win or lose. There’s a wide spectrum of possible outcomes, and some involve less suffering than other. I think it’s our responsibility to keep go
324.
by zapita 7y ago
Yes, I worry about that too. But I also worry about the opposite: reinforcing the cynical idea that it’s all pointless anyway, so why bother doing anything. The way I see it, someone who makes the effort to switch to reusable cups is very l
325.
by zapita 7y ago
I think we (the tech and business community) need to face the uncomfortable reality: that the world needs us to be better citizens more than it needs us to be genius entrepreneurs. If everyone on this site simply 1) exercised their right to
326.
by zapita 7y ago
Political action, economic incentives and individual lifestyles are all inter-dependent. We need to acknowledge that at this point, no single action can save us. So using reusable cups may not on its own solve global heating... But neither
327.
by zapita 7y ago
You may find LTSE.com interesting. It stands for “Long Term Stock Exchange”. It is an ongoing attempt to create a new stock exchange, with rules meant to discourage short-term minded investors.
328.
by zapita 7y ago
I’m curious what you mean by “making it harder for the competition or newcomers”. How exactly would they achieve that by lobbying for more effective taxation of the super-rich?
329.
by zapita 7y ago
There’s a YC company called Ysplit which solves this exact problem. I highly recommend it. ysplit.com
330.
by zapita 7y ago
I also switched to Apple Maps and have not looked back.

More ›