ars_technician

>you aren't really affected negatively by them doing it.

Even if you are fine with your ISP committing fraud, you are negatively effected by the complexity (points of failure) and latency this adds to the network.

Did you even read his comment?

"dig @www.facebook.com news.ycombinator.com" does not use the ISP's DNS servers at all. It sends a DNS query to Facebook for Google, which should normally fail. His ISP hijacks the request and provides a response. In this scenario, the advice in your comment is pointless because they will hijack requests whether they are directly to authoritative servers or if they are to recursive servers.

Why do you keep posting this? It's irrelevant because the idea isn't to hide what site you're visiting, it's to prevent the ISP from modifying the DNS responses. Signing DNS responses would be helpful if that was actually enforced anywhere.

DNSCrypt is a perfectly fine solution for this threat model.

>All you've done is add an additional third party that can view and log what you're doing.

You forgot the part where it's protecting against trashy ISPs like the one in this article.

The alphabet isn't restricted to English. Also, see: punycode.

It didn't happen, so all it takes is your imagination! :-)

Are the workers so stupid that they think shipping empty boxes is normal?

>Even with just names discrimination has been shown to occur at places like universities

Source? Also, universities are much different than ycombinator so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

>I dislike the "talking head" approach to serious topics.

Similar to your unsubstantiated comment about Ayn Rand?

And you think you would survive by doing nothing and letting them take control of the cockpit?

Do you not think someone would spot them sawing the door open? Also keep in mind that pilots are FLYING THE AIRPLANE. They can just start to do maneuvers that would make it impossible for attackers to even stay at the cockpit door, let alone take it apart.

>1.)The fact the female founders are asking for this, tells you that they don't feel on par with the way things are being done today.

How many are asking for this? Where are your stats?

They would be a laughingstock if they did implement a voice adjuster. It makes it appear that rampant sexism is such a problem that they have to implement protection against it.

That's probably related to the user base of scale being orders of magnitude smaller. The network externalities of a large language user base give it incredible inertia that makes it very difficult to change.

>How? How does your brain get to this point? I'm just sitting here floored that I live in a country where a non-zero amount of people feel the way you do.

If you are really are floored by this, you have a very weak sense of perspective. These conclusions are all very easy to get to if you follow this notion that members of terrorist organizations must be killed. If you set that as an unmovable goal, you will very quickly end up at these types of conclusions.

Try to gain some perspective. Just throwing a fit of incredulity doesn't help any arguments because the other side usually feels the same way about you.

>They dare not do the same against, Russia, China or even India.

Is there proof that terrorist organization leaders are operating in those countries unchecked?

Why? It's just a strawman.

Ridiculousness is just a subjective opinion though, that's why it makes such a terrible argument. I think it's ridiculousness that McDonald's doesn't have free refills in the UK, but I doubt many UK residents feel the same way.

You bring up an important point. The people pushing code.org assume people have the same 'operational' level of knowledge that a standard power user has.

We should be teaching people how to run virus scans and backups before writing an application that prints a colored letter to the screen.

Sarcasm is a tool for someone that can't actually come up with a counter-argument. It's an appeal to absurdity combined with a strawman. Exaggerate the other side's point until it sounds ridiculous and pretend that's an argument.

Throwing a tantrum isn't adding to the conversation. I stopped reading after the third 'fuck'.

So? That's not solved by a bitcoin voting system either.

I have never heard of macaw.co. I think your idea of developers that care about web design is flawed.

Yeah, I don't understand how a company essentially paying bloggers to create links to their site is a legitimate method of ranking in a search engine. That sounds fundamentally broken and far from 'organic'.

It doesn't work if the user hasn't visited the site before because the HSTS header can be stripped just as easily.

The pain with running an exit node is the shit storm you can bring down on yourself if someone grabs child porn via your node.You can end up with all of your equipment siezed for quite some time until they figure out it was from tor.

It's not. The US naval research lab still helps develop it.

Being violent is not a choice, you are just forced to be violent by circumstances. /s

No one cares as long as you are using HTTPS, which is the point.

If you aren't using HTTPS for all of your site, you are vulnerable to MITM attacks.

It may have been a little harsh, but I think it was necessary to point out that it wasn't true and that he wasn't just posting some hack or workaround.