zenexer

30 ms·

271.
by zenexer 6y ago
It's one of those situations in which one organization does it and everyone else realizes there are no downsides. It's probably more sincere that we'd like to admit. Sure, there might be a liability aspect to it, but why w
272.
by zenexer 6y ago
I’ve had the same issue with Google recruiters. I imagine they copy each other’s tactics. One time they asked why I turned them down; I was more than happy to respond. Haven’t heard back since.
273.
by zenexer 6y ago
> anything running on your device Cellebrite isn’t meant for use with devices you own; it’s meant for use with devices seized by law enforcement. I’m not so sure that qualifies here.
274.
by zenexer 6y ago
“We?” I made plenty of money off cryptocurrency, and I certainly don’t support this stance. I will never understand why such blatant toxicity is considered acceptable in many corners of the cryptocurrency industry.
275.
by zenexer 6y ago
They elaborated on their stance in a duplicate thread. I doubt I’m misunderstanding.
276.
by zenexer 6y ago
Based on OP’s comments in a duplicate thread, I strongly doubt that.
277.
by zenexer 6y ago
All of the bullets in your comment explain why Ripple is bad, and you’ve somehow twisted that logic into justifying that it’s good with your last sentence. It’s elitist at best, outright evil at worst. I’m not really sure what goal it serve
278.
by zenexer 6y ago
If something is so problematic as to be worth lying about in the first place, why tell your friends? People generally don’t go around bragging about how much porn they’ve pirated. I suppose I’m just reinforcing the “don’t get caught” mantra
279.
by zenexer 6y ago
“Private financial gain” and “commercial advantage ” are so broad that a decent lawyer could probably convince a carefully-selected jury that just about anything falls into one of those two categories. We found Google’s ad tracking code in
280.
by zenexer 6y ago
That’s nonsense. How are they going to know if you’re lying? Polygraphs are overpriced placebos.
281.
by zenexer 6y ago
Looking at the text of the law, I disagree. It doesn’t require that the service be commercial. The criteria are loose and broad enough that while they may appear to target platforms, they could certainly be abused by creative lawyers to tar
282.
by zenexer 6y ago
If I were to share a Plex server with some friends, and that Plex server were to primarily include pirated content (say, whatever we couldn’t get through other streaming services), I’m sure an argument could be made that it’s public and is
283.
by zenexer 6y ago
Google Voice is back. They forced everyone off of Voice and over to Hangouts; now, they’re forcing everyone back.
284.
by zenexer 6y ago
More importantly, any reasonable IP-based approach would have a lot of false positives. What if there’s an RSS service like Feedly running on the same cloud?
285.
by zenexer 6y ago
So what? This is a legitimate question, not a dismissive hand-wave. So what? What does this mean? Is this bad? Why? Surely all that plastic doesn’t stick around forever—I’m fairly certain I don’t have any PVC pipes in my gut, though it’s be
286.
by zenexer 6y ago
#4 was more to avoid being noticed by someone like me before they’ve had their morning coffee. That being said, if anything does go wrong, and you’ve ramped up slowly, at least it gives autoscaling time to respond. Generally, though, unless
287.
by zenexer 6y ago
Indeed. That would’ve been nice. It may even be there, but there was so much other junk on the page that I could barely tell what was the article and what was an ad on a mobile device.
288.
by zenexer 6y ago
Glad to hear it was fixed, although it's unfortunate that such an error was published. Mistakes do happen, I suppose. His articles are usually pretty thorough.
289.
by zenexer 6y ago
> I would think you could obscure whatever marker you use fairly easily, any basic encryption should work. Indeed, you can, and there are situations in which it makes sense. However, it doesn’t really help when it comes to detecting abus
290.
by zenexer 6y ago
That’s a shame. I’m glad it was fixed, though.
291.
by zenexer 6y ago
There’s also the issue of CGNAT. If you rate limit too strictly based on IP address, you harm users who are stuck with CGNAT, especially in Asia and Africa. India is particularly problematic. As for stuff like Luminati, if you’re being suff
292.
by zenexer 6y ago
> Also - on the custom UAS: Unless you're trying to make it easy to get blocked/identified then don't take this advice. I can’t speak for other sites, but we’re pretty good at picking up on crawlers that don’t have a uniqu
293.
by zenexer 6y ago
This person used a new IP address for every single request, so that won’t work. And that’s a growing trend.
294.
by zenexer 6y ago
While that’s true, not everything can be cached, and many websites run expensive code to assign a session to each new “user.” Larger sites generally learn to avoid that or have the infrastructure to accommodate it, but even moderate-sized b
295.
by zenexer 6y ago
Tricks like that don’t work with sites that are receiving a lot of traffic. Also, the exact solution you’ve described is a liability—IP addresses leak when people send each other links, and having unique URLs like that can cause issues with
296.
by zenexer 6y ago
I wouldn’t put Catalin Cimpanu in that category. I find his articles to generally be technically-accurate and thorough. Everyone makes mistakes, though, and he’s certainly gotten a lot more popular following his transition to ZDNet. (Perhap
297.
by zenexer 6y ago
Catalin Cimpanu is one of the better journalists, and is usually quite good when it comes to technical accuracy. If the article ever had the quote you included, it appears to have been removed and replaced with a fairly thorough explanation
298.
by zenexer 6y ago
> The ex-Googler reflected that he missed the possibility of pages that link back to each other, causing "infinite recursion." Although tangential to the billing issue, this is reckless. If you’re building a crawler of any kind
299.
by zenexer 6y ago
A core tenet of this article is that a quarter of COVID-19-related deaths may not be reported as such. This appears to be determined by comparing this year’s death rates to previous years. This logic seems faulty. During the first wave, the
300.
by zenexer 6y ago
I’m fairly certain the parent commenter was being facetious. It’s really hard to comprehend why powerful people are willing to impose such devastation on humankind; the parent is mocking their thought process, with a touch of rather dark hu

More ›