Trombone12

You better pay reviewers anything at all if you want them to produce few type 2 errors.

I think generally people tend to assume that colleagues aren't dishonest, and mostly peer-review is supposed to catch honest mistakes.

You could try working without any faith in your colleagues of course, but you are probably better of switching workplace if that sounds like reasonable behaviour to you.

On the plus side, I'm guessing your CRUD app hasn't killed, maimed or otherwise destroyed buildings and lives for several years. (If nothing else because you just finished it)

I'm sure lots of safety margins built into bridges are also respected due to liability concerns, but I don't mind the insincerity as long as the margin is actually there to protect me when needed.

You are free to feel different of course, both in the case of bridges and in the case of people.

Uhhh, it seems like you are making a baseless extrapolation, would you like to try again?

Please explain how the observation "it doesn't go into the positives of a CoC", is equivalent to "forcing an event to adopt a CoC".

That Code of Conduct feels more like it is about burying someone else's head in the sand:

> Have you considered, that they are either having a bad day, are a bad listener, or possibly, you are wrong?

Uh, yeah, great advice to have in the FAQ for what is supposedly your anti-harassment policy. -_-

Maybe they didn't have a green card or something? Honestly, action by law enforcement is unlikely to be due to a Code of Conduct except as a trigger for violent behaviour.

In practice you can probably get away with explaining some fairly general rules that cover most of day to day life early on and defer detailed exception clauses for later.

Explaining all the rules is what school is for, basically.

Or maybe its just the childless Americans (raised in a culture where spanking is widely accepted) that upvote the tough line on child discipline.

I mean, your original post was really about how to enforce rules, though you spent most of it conjuring up the image of publicly annoying children and then assuming their parents don't set any rules.

Somewhat surprisingly you also describe how the same parents that supposedly don't set rules clearly trying (but failing) to enforce said non-existing rules...

Just say what you mean: you make your children obey you by physical means.

Wait, you advocate for a law that would grant citizens the right to rewrite server responses on the wire? Because the context here is action against sites where no physical or legal person associated with the site can be found within the EU, so its either blocking server responses or rewriting them in flight...

Please control your hyperbole a bit, or do you really oppose sunglasses on account of how they filter spectral information?

I don't think the internet has been a uniquely free medium, they all start out unregulated after all. It has been the most unregulated medium recently, this is true, but also a nearly vacuous statement since its the only really new medium for mass communication recently.

And anyway posted letters are still a very free medium, with better privacy assurances than email ever had.

If you don't believe in the government being worth your trust, you either need to fix the government or go off grid: at the end of the day even the internet is still just people interacting, and where you have people you will have something like a government.

I know the days when only nerds like you knew about it and society at large neither knew nor needed it seem romantic now. But today the net matters to a lot of people, and they bring with them their trusted tools for defending their interests.

Go visit irc if you want those heady days where only things you didn't like where censored.

So now the anti-trust of 90 Microsoft and IE 6 counts for nothing it seems.

Excellent science writing! It is rare to see such quality here.

Eh, seems fine to me that you can add on extra punishment for not simply owning up to the crime, it's not like avoiding to be caught is a desired behaviour.

In the country that elected Trump they are probably safe by virtue of their anti-establishment persona.

I think developing infrastructure with the express goal of evading law enforcement* _is_ very shady, and then proof that they did just that is indeed proof that Uber is shady. I agree that there are other reasons beyond their dedicated law-avoidance infrastructure to consider Uber a shady company, but this leak alone is certainly enough _proof_ to label them as shady.

* even if it is simply by adapting pre existing infrastructure created for a benign purpose

Note that all those computers shared the same bus, and so that the complete system wasn't as redundant as hoped as this story[1] retells:

"At 12:12 GMT 13 May 2008, a space shuttle was loading its hypergolic fuel for mission STS-124 when a 3-1 disagreement occurred among its General Purpose Computers (GPC 4 disagreed with the other GPCs). Three seconds later, the split became 2-1-1 (GPC 2 now disagreed with GPC 4 and the other two GPCs). This required that the launch countdown be stopped.

During the subsequent troubleshooting, the remaining two GPCs disagreed (1-1-1-1 split). This was a complete system disagreement. However, none of the GPCs were faulty. The fault was in the FA 2 Multiplexer Demultiplexer. This fault was a crack in a diode. This crack was perpendicular to the normal current flow and completely through the current path. As a crack opened up, it changed the diode into another type of component ... a capacitor.

Because some of the bits in the signal are smaller than they should have been, some of the GPC receivers could not see these bits. The ability to see these bits depends on the sensitivity of the receiver, which is a function of manufacturing variances, temperature, and its power supply voltage.

From the symptoms, it is apparent that the receiver in GPC 4 was the least sensitive and saw the errors before the other three GPC. This caused GPC 4 to disagree with the other three. Then, as the crack in the diode widened, the bits became shorter to the point where GPC 2 could no longer see these bits; which caused it to disagree with the other GPC. At this point, the set of messages that was received correctly by GPC 4 was different from the set of messages that was correctly received by GPC 2 which was different again from the set of messages that was correctly received by GPC 1 and GPC 3. This process continued until GPC 1 and GPC 3 also disagreed with all the other GPC."

[1] Adapted from https://c3.nasa.gov/dashlink/projects/79/wiki/test_stories_s...

I know of whole demographics who don't even get cars because they can take the bus.

Yes, because offshore tech support is free...

He certainly tries to get pity, however awkward the attempt.

I'm pretty sure the writer himself isn't moving, his linkedin implies he mostly does consultancy: so probably he's just moving this factory and suffering some extra travel.

I find it very upsetting that they even faked the block of wood!

The Summary: "this most recent report is a significant improvement, but has many shortcomings. Questionable subjective techniques are used to infer the “thrust” from the data. Other likely influences are not quantified. But also, despite those inadequacies, the possibility of a new force-producing effect cannot be irrefutably ruled out. This is intriguing, but still falling short of defensible evidence."

The highest the actual summary reaches is "But also, despite those inadequacies, the possibility of a new force-producing effect cannot be irrefutably ruled out."

No, that is obviously a mischaracterization of my statement. Not only is the missile crisis a quite separate event than the imposition of sanctions, I was not discussing the agency of Castro but your assertion that the US had no agency over its foreign policy towards Cuba once Castro had power.

Yeah, 4200 is way less than I expected from Pinochet's reputation. Works out about 50 % worse than Castro on murders alone (counting "disappeared" equally to other killings) on a per year basis. Not sure how to count the torture, maybe as fractions of a killing.

I'm also surprised that the population isn't more, Chile felt like a "big" country to me compared to tiny Sweden, but 11 is not much bigger than 8. Though by now it's 18 and 9 millions, so I child deaths seem to be down in Chile since the 80's.

End of life is 2020, and this release is from June, so it's a bit surprising it shows up on HN now.

10k over 50 years? Wow, that's a lot less than I imagined from how he is described as a mindless killer, and the dictatorship as drenched in blood.

For comparison Puerto Rico have had about 10k murders in the last 15 years alone[1], and that's in less than half the Cuban population.

From 1998 figures[2] and 2002 population numbers I guesstimate that officially about 820 murders occur per year in Cuba, and the 10k in 50 years evens out to 200 per year.

[1] http://www.estadisticas.pr/iepr/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=nf...

[2] http://www.sld.cu/sitios/dne/buscar.php?id=3297&iduser=4&id_...