brainfire

You have to read the rest of the comment too. "HTH"

Seemingly-genuine comments like that could be a plausible future step for escalation of advertising.

I'd guess there are people who would "rent" access to their active social media accounts to a company operating a bot capable of writing subtle "recommendation"-style comments. Sort of a merger of blog-comment-spam-bots and paid "influencer" posts.

But what if it's not enabled? We see traffic from newish IE browsers that have TLS 1.1 and 1.2 turned off. We actually got user complaints that one of our sites stopped working when we turned off TLS 1.0.

I have no idea why they would be set up that way, but it's clearly out there.

My understanding is that this is just the OS trying to fetch a known page over HTTP and, if redirected, assuming it got a login portal and presenting it to the user.

I assume this can continue "working" (with your noted caveat that it doesn't even always work today) forever, as the process that checks doesn't need to understand HSTS or to ever try HTTPS, regardless of what actual web browsers start doing.

You seem like you might have this backwards. This isn't a clause creating the option of arbitration in the face of an otherwise guaranteed trip to court - you already have that option. This is a clause removing the option of going to court.

Yes, costs can be kept down by requiring things stay out of court. This is at the expense of some of the normal guarantees you can expect from our court system.

If that's okay for you, and you're in an equal bargaining position with the other party, go wild. You're not in an equal bargaining position with the banking industry when a majority of banks start adding the clause to their T&C.

If we take as true that our legal system doesn't work and is host to numerous "frivolous lawsuits that can cost companies literally hundreds of thousands or millions of legal fees" then I can understand favoring arbitration as a way to protect companies.

However, I don't think that premise is true. I trust the open, standardized, and (mostly) consistent courts to fairly apply the law. While some lawsuits seem frivolous on the surface, I've consistently found that when I learn the details there is a good reason they proceeded.

It's an argument against using red as the only warning sign.

Compare to Chrome's https indicator- it turns the "https://" part of the URL green (which I can barely distinguish as different, so it is useless to me) and adds a padlock icon.

Colorblind-friendly graphs might use both color and symbols to distinguish elements.

Everybody who isn't colorblind anyway.

Haven't tried in the preview build but this is still the case in the recent Windows 10 build I have.

If you draw the line there you're probably running a dozen "logging services" on any given system.

I've spoken to customer support at Google several times for their music service and ChromeOS.

Can mobile even be first-class with blockchain like it is with cloud?

The general guidelines are in the policy [0], linked from the launch announcement [1], but each agency's CIO is responsible for the particulars at their org. If it's not a new project post-August it won't contribute to the 20% so it might not be reviewed for release without someone suggesting it specifically, I would guess.

[0] https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda...

[1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016/08/08/peoples-code

The 20% number is part of the initial 3-year pilot program, not necessarily the ultimate goal. That's also the mandatory minimum, with agencies "strongly encouraged" to release as much as possible.

See the policy [0], linked from the launch announcement [1].

[0] https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda...

[1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016/08/08/peoples-code

That is a great point in favor of it being a hit piece, because that's wrong - rndmize pointed out below [0] that it's a misinterpretation of the report.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12862065

Surely missing features would make it the "lesser version of something else."

Weirdly, "subscribing"/"supporting" RPS doesn't seem to remove the ads, or if it does then that's not indicated on the page about it.

The bad idea is being sent a (potentially interceptable) SMS with a code.

The Estonian method is described as using a private key present on the SIM card, just like a normal smart card used for authenticating/signing.

I can play this game too.

Only 31% of rapes and sexual assaults against women are committed by strangers. [0] An estimated 10% of female murder victims were killed by a stranger. 29% of male murder victims were killed by strangers. [0]

But sure, move the goalposts again. I'm confident you can find a good factoid to support keeping the "wrong sorts of people" (if you know what I mean!) out.

[0] https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fvv.pdf

I don't disagree, but it's not a double standard to be more irritated by apps that get in your face and drain additional resources.

Google's apps don't run unless you launch them.

The web is not your personal money generator. It's a place I go for information. I'm sorry that your fellow developers have made it such a user-hostile place that projects like AMP that defend the user experience make it harder for you to make money. But maybe if you're only interested in publishing for the money, I'm not particularly interested in courting your continued participation.

You're literally proving the grandparent comment's point- the best you can come up with is a baseless accusation.

I'm highly skeptical of the claim there would be "armed resistance" to the House choosing McMullin to be president.

Specifically, the HeLa line (human cancer-derived) is an exception (not sure if it's what you were referring to): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HeLa

Where/how?

Allowing women to dress inappropriately has a societal cost greater than the life of one child. Many lives could be ruined by the moral failures encouraged and enabled by bare flesh.

I think it's a stretch to think most reviewers will care about the legality (especially because it's pretty unlikely to get enforced against them) but it may get the "career reviewers." I wonder what proportion of these reviews are from those "whales."

This is directly due to the (in my opinion unethical) actions of established companies (like Pebble) treating it like a trendy preorder store. Kickstarter themselves have been clear on this since launch.

"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"

"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."

"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"

"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"