MiddTech

Lack of a robust and universally available/adopted mechanism for sharing, standardising and utilising said wheels. In addition, an ecosystem and/or culture that supports such a universal standardisation.

This is assuming that standardisation is even the answer, i can state subjectively that there is no currently acceptable universally applicable method for implementing authentication/authorisation; and that's just one example.

There are auth standards, sure, even good ones, but implementing said standards across the entire galaxy of development environments,architectures and business limitations. Good luck with that, i really mean it, solve this and you'll never have to work again.

No github doesn't count, it's not universally accesible, nor is it viable for some Even if it did, it's still only the availability part.

TL;DR; shit is complicated. https://xkcd.com/927/

Money

Yeah, full protection from repercussions by the american government. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_...

Unless of course he's violating any (or lots of) the exceptions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce...

As spotify is not the american government it doesn't really apply here.

In addition even if they were the american government, that would only apply in america, which is in fact, not the entire world.

I agree it's almost certainly true that it's just a made up term that happened to be what they picked that particular day and it stuck.

Its probably a failure of imagination on my part, but how does it promote systemic racism? At this point isn't it just part of the lexicon ?

I'm possibly missing something but i can't see an actual rebuttal to the comic ?

Perhaps it's my reading of the comic. I'm seeing a comment about software engineering as a profession in relation to other similar "engineering" fields, specifically about them being less mature/regulated/proffesional. Then a reference to how software running voting machines is terrifying, the article then goes on to deatil why that's the case.

The details of why e-voting is hard are interesting and raise some good points, but it's in no way addressing the "claims" in the comic.

I agree with you on that first part , it was a contrived example to illustrate the point, but in practical terms, not so helpful.

I also agree with subjectivity as being it's own interesting topic of conversation.

Universal imperitive to prevent outbreaks having no possible subjectivity though? that's just bait.

I'm not arguing that taking a stance is bad per se, i'm arguing that almost anything you might want to take a stance on is subjective.

As an example: Reduce harm: depends on perspective (define harm?), timeframe, priorities. Avoid collapse of what?, current society? which one? all of them ? Maximise benefit is the same as reduce harm in its subjectiveness and "everyone" is a big ask given that some perspectives on certain points are potentially mutually exclusive.

A somewhat topical example would be:

"Let everyone get covid-19 by not imposing measures designed to stop the spread, that way the stock market takes less of a plunge because [Insert economic reasons here]" vs "Impose measures to follow the model that most analysis(from current data) agrees will minimise the loss of life, at the cost of the stock market taking a hit"

How do you maximise benefit for both parties in that case? only impose half off the measures? who decides what is the fair middle ground ?

Problem with that is that "best possible outcome" is all about perspective.

I'm not sure if there is a subjective way to quantify such a thing without first taking a stance.

Once you take a stance, the only difference between you and the existing WHO is the particular stance you have taken (assuming it's a different position)

Makes sense, but how would that be labelled. Any documentation or written/printed representation would need a label (preferably a consistent one).

Taiwan, China or just Taiwan?

What happens if you need to display a map of a contested area? any represenation you show will raise the hackles of some nation state or other.

"Which country it is shouldn't matter much." is an admirable goal, but at the risk of being pessimistic, it just isn't how nation states work.

The new ghost 3.0 release is pretty fancy wrt to the styling and layout defaults.

For various subjective reasons, i've not used medium extensively so i can't compare like for like, but from what i have used it's not significantly better than ghost on the usability/styling front.

> It's affecting the quality of the web that you, as a user, are browsing.

Any numbers to back this up?

(also while I'm asking for numbers how about "There is no doubt that this has affected the revenue for website owners negatively regardless of the size of the website." ?)

>The proposed solution is to maintain a global whitelist that each ad blocker is forced to respect.

I personally can't think of an effective way this could be achieved. Getting even a small proportion of the world to agree on a single whitelist would be difficult if not impossible; who would maintain it, who would decide what was whitelisted and what was blocked? not to mention any actual legal issues across any sort of jurisdiction.

But assuming you could, what mechanism could be used to stop people loading extensions and apps into their browser? Then, for the more technically savvy users, how do you propose to block the use of something like a pihole (https://pi-hole.net/) or equivalents ?

This all assumes that blocking the ads is even a problem (for the quality and stability of the web) in the first place and without a solid range of evidence to back it up, it's anecdotal at best.

Pure conjecture, but i'd guess there is probably evidence to support declining advertising revenue that might possibly be partially attributed to adblockers, but I doubt its the only factor( or even the biggest ).

"This is wrong because i believe it to be so, based on my personal beliefs, therefore you should too" is almost the very definition of a subjective argument. Though i admit i may have entirely missed the objective statement in there.

In this vein ^, what are his thoughts on Von Neumann probes?

I'm currently in a group matched by the service and its working fine for me.

There was a significant delay between signing up and being matched but i am fairly certain that was due to massive demand when it first opened.

The others in my group had no such delay.

If you know other people who might be interested in doing a mastermind group with you it might be better to group with people you know.

In my case it was worth it to use the service, YMMV

Edit: dammit, double spacing

Sounds like a "mastermind" or something approximating one.

There is a service for matching people together for masterminds - > https://mastermindjam.com/

Just to be clear, there is no requirement to use a/the service, if you have people you know that works too.

There is a lot of information around about structure and potential pitfalls as well as their solutions.

Edit: No explanation

Edit: Clarification