1,283 karma · joined October 13, 2016
I'd agree only with the default front page/subreddits. There are still a plethora of smaller community subs in Reddit that are thriving and useful.
Unfortunately it takes a lot of informed curating to know which subs to ditch.
The link you provided basically says it only matters if you are a patent troll.
I've designed a few loot tables and the Gambler's Fallacy is a criticism I often have to deal with when people don't understand why a given item hasn't dropped despite them having killed a mob enough times to statistically warrant it.
Just applying Hanlon's razor here.
So thanks for the easy points!
For what it's worth, it should be capitalized but I suspect Americans don't formally discuss themselves in the third person enough to have that grammar rule down.
They have of course been able to encrypt individual emails for at least a decade with their CAC/PKI by checking a box in their email client.
After re-reading the article they never make any mention of existing crypto practices... Seems like purposely misleading or sloppy journalism.
However in the origin article they link to there is a useful gem:
> "STARTTLS is an extension for the Post Office Protocol 3 and Internet Message Access protocols, which rely on username and password for system access," the spokesperson wrote. "To remain compliant with DOD PKI policy, DEE does not support the use of username and password to grant access, and does not leverage either protocol."
I'm not versed in those protocols, but if that statement was true at the time it makes sense to me that the military wouldn't take a step back to using passwords when they already implemented physical tokens (CAC+pin) DoD-wide.
I was picking out some new darts at a billiards store and me and my buddy were discussing what size, weight, etc. to get (i.e. "best practices").
The owner laughed and said the only thing that matters in picking a dart is how well you can hit the target with it.
This way I can develop standards for my team, which as of now really doesn't have any.
Not saying it's the only factor, but when connections are built via real-life relationships instead of communities of interest and then sprinkled with automated personalized content aggregation perhaps you end up with an environment where everyone seems to live in their own bubble of information overload.
I'll have to start testing dependencies there.
So far the only real solution I've come up with is to do a signals review (github? issues? downloads/day/ etc...) and then review the code block by block carefully examining any complex or potentially dangerous code.
It works, and you learn a lot about the packages and why they depend on each other, but at the same time this process is exhausting.
What would be a godsend is some major security brand who can vouch (even at cost) for a given version of major packages including their dependency tree.
As you said some devs/apps are better off without GC, but also I imagine competition would more or less ensure the most performant or overall effective platforms would end up being the de facto standards.
And some platforms (e.g. React, Vue, etc.) may find one GC tends to work better than another for them or want to implement their own.
I'm not sure if WASM can host libraries on CDNs, but if so once a user has that stuff cached from one site or another bloat wont really be a problem either.
I wish the OP article had done something similar. As is, it basically just hand picked percentages from separate sources and paired them with vague calls to action leaving me wondering what the raw data looks like.
The rough TL;DR is good teams have all members speak up when necessary and good psychological safety, defined as the feeling that you can be wrong and you wont be rejected, punished or embarrassed for it.
It's been my experience that the people on the ground know what's wrong with the company, they just don't have the authority or vision to do anything about it.
Then look for the most common threads and how to tackle those.
Naive, I know. But it's what I would do.
The most balanced source I found was an NPR article that questioned the accuracy these claims, but not necessarily the conclusions.
http://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2013/02/03/170851048/do-we-...
I'm interested to see what sources others might find.
The reason states are having to step in however is precisely because in the world as it is the FCC lacks both the teeth and the interest needed to push regulations or law that technically minded and geared towards consumers.
ISPs want the FCC in charge because with them at the helm the uniform national standard would be "up to" means "under ideal conditions you could get this speed", in which case all we've done is barred states from forcing ISPs to either deliver on their promises or advertise their real rates.
At least if a few states get the legislation right others have the opportunity to learn from it and adopt similar laws.
All said I doubt consumers will notice at all. They're perfectly used to different regions having different speed offerings and all they will do is continue to compare what is offered to their home.
It strikes me as an eerie feature in that semi-autonomous means you're not controlling the car but at any moment you may have to jump in generally unaware of the forces the car/tires have been experiencing.
It just seems like a major mindset shift from mostly idle passenger to active driver and offhand I feel like until the car can reliably drive itself I'd rather just drive the whole way.
ISPs know even most savvy customers wont be able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are being throttled/not receiving their promised bandwidth and so they use that grey area to say "Yeah, must just be that server or a router or something."
Knowing when you are allowed to record someone, what divorce means for you, how your housing taxes are calculated and a million other things are already confusing and yet that's not justification to just plow over state laws because people are confused.