codydh

Some feed readers offer a private email address that you can subscribe to newsletters with, and see them alongside your other RSS feeds. My reader of choice (Feedbin) does this. It's one way to at least centralize them all in a place outside your email inbox.

I’m really curious about this too, as I have very similar requirements, and also host on Netlify (where ‘server logs’ don’t exist). The possibilities I’ve come up with so far are:

- Hosting Fathom using Docker someplace affordably. I’ve tried this with Joyent, where I’ve been running a custom Docker container for ~1.5 months with no problems. It should be about $2.50/month, but they offered $250 in free credits for signing up (not sure if this expires at some point), so it hasn’t cost me anything yet.

- Using a very limited custom script with Keen.io to log only the timestamp, site visited, and referrer. It seems that Keen.io has a pretty good privacy policy, and my site’s traffic and my views of my dashboard seem to only cost about $0.01 to $0.02 per month so far, and I haven’t actually been charged that.

Happy to share more detail on the above, and curious to hear if anyone has other ideas.

The cost of your "regulation free zone" will likely be measured in human lives. Does that seem like an acceptable risk?

Safari 12, High Sierra, 2017 15" MBP scores 104. I'm surprised at these discrepancies.

Anecdata, but same story here. It's been syncing "all" my files for a few years now, and I've had no problems.

I always use Apple Maps first, and sanity check what it gives me. In my area most mapping solutions work, but Google Maps will frequently give me difficult (though not wrong) directions. Such as going down three blocks instead of two, skipping an intersection with a light, and instead asking me to turn left across 4 lanes of busy traffic, for no evident reason.

I'm probably in the extreme minority here, but I actually think iOS lately feels too complex. There are still features it's missing that I'd like, but I often long for the simpler days of earlier iOS versions. Too many different overlapping interfaces (e.g. lock screen vs. Notification Center), types of notifications, interaction models (tap vs. 3D Touch vs. hold), and overloaded basic apps (e.g., apps inside of Messages.app)—they all make me feel like iOS is just getting too complex, at least on my iPhone.

Moving to in-house annotators is probably the smart strategy. However, for tasks that are easily done by naive annotators, Prolific.ac might be a great source. I've had good luck getting quality data there, and they enforce a minimum hourly wage that, while not truly livable, is still heading in the right direction.

And I've experienced no such thing.

This argument doesn't make sense from a logical point of view. If all iPhones eventually crawl to a halt because Apple ruins them with software updates, why would that push people to go buy a new iPhone? Wouldn't they look elsewhere?

You're right that Apple services don't integrate as nicely across non-Apple platforms. (Isn't that true of many things?)

However, to dismiss it as a marketing scheme is somewhat disingenuous. It may achieve that, but there are plenty of people out there who simply think they make the nicest hardware. The tight integration is icing on the cake. I own almost entirely Apple hardware. If I thought something else was nicer, I'd get it. I don't.

It's common for people to get stuck below or near the poverty line. It's difficult to save for a house down payment (much less build up the credit to get a loan for the rest) when you're struggling to pay for rent, bills, and food. Ignoring this cycle is missing the reality for many, many people.

If I'm following your implication, I think this is less of a slippery slope than you think. When one's ideology is organized around killing people based on the color of their skin, it deserves no space in modern society.

This is so disingenuous. We don't blame capitalism when an industry struggles in Europe or the US. And when the financial crisis hit in 2007-2008, capitalism didn't get the blame it deserved.

This struck me as really odd too. This is one thing I think Apple (and others) have gotten really right. Metal doesn't wear down much from regular use or resting your palms on it like plastic or fabric does.

Points taken. And I agree that we should design systems to work with the natural tendencies of humans. But we can do better than (and I'm being reductive here) capitalism's current "eventually everything will optimize out even if poor people starve to death because they weren't born with money." In fact, I'd argue that 'modern' capitalism really is only activating a small portion of human nature (that is, the self-interested part), and shielding us from those aspects of us that are caring for others and concerned for other human beings. When we put everything from the value of private jets to food, water, and healthcare on the same value metric (money), and then tell people that whatever amount of money they have is indicative of what they are worth, it's no wonder we as a society wind up treating people as objects instead of human beings.

Anecdotally, the US is a nation with more than enough food and shelter for all its inhabitants. Yet many people live on the streets, often because they were born into poverty. This goes against most people's "firmware." Yet capitalism takes no account of that part of human nature (I'd argue those parts that make us 'better than animals.').

> you may say that "capitalistic self-interest" is actually rooted in our biology.

I hold such deep issue with this. Sure, there's an aspect to all living beings that they "self-preserve." But you seem to be implying here that it's part of human nature to be primarily self-interested, and if that's a correct assumption, it's one I believe to be deeply incorrect.

We can look around and see people acting in self-interested ways all of the time, but we can also see people doing lots of benevolent, good, supportive things for other people. In addition, it's no surprise many people go around day-to-day acting this way, given that they live in a system which encourages (née requires) them to do so.

Just because people can conform and act within a system, does not mean it is part of their nature. A system that actively encouraged and promoted the common good and communal caring among individuals would likely produce more of that behavior as well. Just because we see one type of behavior or another is not enough to decide that it's human nature.

It's a shame they're being folded into Alaska in the coming years.

I'm curious, are there stats for this that are adjusted for the number of flights/total time of flights/total number of passenger-hours flown? I found one list[0] but it didn't quite give that:

[0]: http://airsafe.com/airline.htm

Is Southwest often that much cheaper? I usually only fly them because they're direct where others are not, but it usually doesn't save me money.

It's always interesting to me how much experiences vary, and how likely it is that our biases also color our perceptions. Almost always when I get on a Delta flight (admittedly I fly them the most), I'll get a friendly hello and what seems like a professional and genuine smile when I get my beverage. My last few experiences on Southwest have been a borderline sneer (if any acknowledgment at all) as I get on the plane, followed by bizarre jokes over the intercom or a round of applause for the plane landing (?).

I agree 100%. I often hear people talk about how Southwest offers such a great experience. I find the boarding process frustrating (and no more efficient, unfortunately) and the staff no better than my usual airline—either far less friendly, or hokey in a very contrived way.

This is an interesting point. Is this because industrial growth happened more quickly? In more concentrated areas?

I'm deeply skeptical that capitalism is a sensible long-term way to run our world. When everything can be made about money, everything is made about money. It doesn't matter how much we've taxed a corporation (especially in the recent environment of skyrocketing corporate profits), if the environment is ruined we're all in trouble.

Capitalism drives the conversion of everything into money, so it's no surprise to me when anything from votes to the air we breathe are turned into money.

You should look into learned helplessness. When individuals have tried repeatedly to no avail, it's no wonder they sometimes stop trying.

I tried a slew of recent statements that are objectively false but that a certain politician in the United States has tried to say are true. Google returned fact checks for exactly 0 of the queries I tried.

I think it sometimes gets lost that there's a difference between being harshly critical of another group's opinions, and threatening or harming another group. There are multiple ways in which they're different, and they're not both free speech (IMO).

I don't mean to be a curmudgeon, but why put out this kind of privacy-minded plugin for Chrome, one of the browsers I'd probably least trust to respect my privacy?

The Economist Intelligence Unit, amongst others, ranks countries on this dimension: http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2017/01/daily-c...