csuwldcat

I totally plan on using a child leash when I take my 2 year old to a massively crowded place like a zoo or amusement park. Is that really frowned upon?

While I detest Trump and authoritarians in general (which Hillary is really just a different flavor of), I don't think you're statement holds water here. California, where I live, is the ultimate nanny state - we've criminalized the everloving shit out of everything. California has 3x as many laws on the books than the next closest state in volume, and it makes many activities, business and personal, very complex.

'Progressive' ideology places the State in greater and greater control over defining most aspects of life, and tends to turn to law and mandates more frequently than other ideological systems. This naturally drives the use of state mechanisms as a means of operation and resolution over non-legal communal resolution between individuals.

That's why you never initiate aggression, unless in fear of immediate harm - but if someone initiates it with you, be well prepared to drop them.

I think you're equating collectivism with community, and the two aren't inextricably linked.

Collectivism is the philosophy that a central set of practices and behaviors be enforced across a group, placing the group's will (often via force-backed punishment) over individual beliefs and choices. That's quite a bit different that a close-knit community that features voluntary interaction for mutual benefit.

The latter form of true community is great, but in the US we're gravitating more and more toward forcing views about safety, security, and social behavior on others through criminalization of once ordinary personal choices.

"Where did this collective insanity come from?"

From the paternalistic insanity of authoritarian collectivism.

The shift toward more laws, police incidents, and over-regulation of ordinary parental duties isn't isolated, nor is it surprising. The US is a country that has been on the path of abandoning individual liberty in favor of paternalistic, authoritarian statism for decades. The real irony is that people are expressing dismay about issues and outcomes such as this, while in the same breath supporting piles and piles of evermore invasive laws that dictate how others should live their lives. When you replace the state as the primary actor in so many areas that were once the role of parents and community members, you get the state handling things the most common way it knows how: by force and criminalization.

Your entire comment is founded upon the assumption that the law is the arbiter of right and wrong, and that because it exists, it should be followed - it is not, and we shouldn't. Here's what Jefferson had to say about the law: "Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual."

For over 100 years there were laws in the South that made it illegal to racially integrate businesses and public places. It was the government that kept this horrible practice alive; a free market would never have tolerated such inorganic demand suppression (as evidenced by the state of the North).

Most people are so trusting of statism and its hamster wheel that they never take the time to actually contemplate what most "laws" really are: subjective shit a group of people decided to write on dead trees and direct squads of soldiers to force on you under the threat of violence.

It's as if supply is meeting demand, remarkable, truly remarkable ;)

Yes, Firefox for Android still uses Gecko.

No, that's easily solved: you can set the product the button purchases (obviously), and the day after the API is made available a zillion little intercept-button-push-then-scrap-n-compare projects will pop-up on HN that find you the lowest priced product just in time when you push the button.

"It is just that regulated (I prefer the name public but anyway) markets offer the possibility of legal defense by definition." - I think you may be forgetting an entire area of the judicial branch: Civil Court. You can, in fact, sue a business for: representing their product incorrectly, providing service other than described, not sticking to the contract you signed, etc, etc.

We could just as easily simplify, streamline, and reform the civil tort system to allow people to file and address legitimate issues quickly through organic, judicial means. But instead, people, for god knows why, believe it is easier and more effective to have politicians appoint a bunch of crony farts to pass hundreds of thousands of pages of regulation that make the 95% case of good business operation harder, while most often failing to catch/fix the 5% of time things go wrong.

Le sigh, I digress.

"without evidence that you actually violated a law" - oh, you mean the laws/regulations written by politicians who do so at the behest of entrenched, crony corps to control markets, suppress innovation, and defend their stagnant products/services?

You talk about a wonderful land of regulated bliss, but in reality, this sort of crap is most common result: http://reason.com/reasontv/2014/08/18/locked-out-melony-arms...

"But at least all punishments imposed by the government are subject to the court system" - Guess what? There's this nifty thing called civil court, and if we just made filing legitimate small claims easier, faster, and more effective, people could use this outlet to organically push back on bad behavior without the need for centralized regulation.

I'm pretty sure comparing the addition of 'fucking' as a crass emphasis on the seriousness of someone's medical condition, with saying it excitedly when happy about a product or service you're enjoying, is drawing a flagrantly false equivalence. But heck (fuck?), that's just a reasoned, logical, non-PC take on this - three things that are sadly absent from much of the population these days.

The addition/counter to the Physical Web proposal I have been discussing with Google prevents these kinds of security issues in many locations/places: meet Geo-Origins --> https://github.com/csuwildcat/geo-origins/blob/master/explai...

I have been discussing this proposal with the folks at Google, and generated an additional proposal, Geo-Origins, to address some of the issues Physical Web introduces: https://github.com/csuwildcat/geo-origins/blob/master/explai...

Geo-Origins brings the trust model of the web to the physical world, and allows for more frictionless interactions in many locations.

It does not support IE9.

It's not a lot different, in fact, they've just remade our X-Tag components into heavier, less DRY, less modular copies that range from 40-60% larger than their equivalent X-Tag originals, while at the same time managing to reduce browser compat and feature coverage (for ex: Brick Deck lacks the transition support X-Tag's provides, and it's actually larger!)

Compare it for yourself:

Brick Flipbox: https://github.com/mozbrick/brick-flipbox/blob/master/src/br....

vs

X-Tag Flipbox: https://github.com/x-tag/flipbox/blob/master/src/flipbox.js

-----

Brick Deck: https://github.com/mozbrick/brick-deck/blob/master/src/deck..... AND https://github.com/mozbrick/brick-deck/blob/master/src/card.....

vs

X-Tag Deck: https://github.com/x-tag/deck/blob/master/src/deck.js

Not sure Brick is now "more modular" and "lighter", without X-Tag - in fact, it's quite the opposite. They've dramatically increased the weight of each component, and constantly repeat the same code over and over, much of which is derived from X-Tag's internal methods:

Brick Flipbox: https://github.com/mozbrick/brick-flipbox/blob/master/src/br...

vs

X-Tag Flipbox: https://github.com/x-tag/flipbox/blob/master/src/flipbox.js

-----

Brick Deck: https://github.com/mozbrick/brick-deck/blob/master/src/deck.... AND https://github.com/mozbrick/brick-deck/blob/master/src/card....

vs

X-Tag Deck: https://github.com/x-tag/deck/blob/master/src/deck.js

-----

The above examples call into question the claim that the move was to increase modularity and decrease weight - clearly that isn't the case when you actually look at the code.

X-Tag author here.

A big part of their switch seems to be a result of interpersonal issues with the X-Tag creators. After I left on less-than-good-terms with a handful of folks at Mozilla, they decided to ditch a library that makes components small, modular, and DRY, for what appears to be spite. The new Brick code base is over 2x heavier (despite being billed as a "lightening" move), each component is 40-60% larger (with a ton of repetition and use of X-Tag code), and the browser compat range has been reduced greatly.

They never reached out to the X-Tag team before posting this - it contains glaring inaccuracies and negative sentiment toward X-Tag.

I'm deeply disappointed by their poor open source behavior, and general lack of courtesy.

GPS need not be always on, the platform can minimize activation of GPS in a variety of ways. All current systems for location-based triggering are non-starters - they each fail in one or more of the following ways:

- Forces apps to be the trust layer, which prevents wide-scale, predictable content delivery

- Eliminates the ability to do seamless, proactive push content from LBTs

- Requires the existence of walled gardens and vendor-dictated management layers that encumber the system and creates gatekeepers

This system solves all of these things for locations that can be tied to their owning origins.

Please continue the debate, I want to hear everyone's feedback.

I'm not quite sure why you'd need all those layers of misdirection, this eliminates all of the complexity. If the platform knows a region in space is tied to an origin - like a Target store is tied to target.com - you have everything you need to enable seamless push notifications directly from the beacons.

Here's how the system works:

1) User walks into the store and receives the first ping from a beacon (or other location-based trigger)

2) The platform/UA shows a bit of UI asking the user if they would like to receive LBT content from the entity - for example, Target.com.

3) There are 3 options: disallow, allow for this location (aka: "Just this Target store location"), or allow for all locations (as in: "Allow notifications from all Target store locations"

4) After selecting to see notifications for the location, or all the entity's locations, the user no longer needs to do anything, they just receive content directly from beacons within the location.

This eliminates the need for every app to listen for beacons, and beacons can now pass content URLs, which the platform/UA can open directly. This way, there is no vendor or walled garden dependencies. The system grows organically, and scales without micromanagement.

Do you understand how that works? I can try to answer any other questions you may have.

This is a mechanism for all web apps - even 100% clientside, packaged apps - to do crypto-currency payments using the emerging Web Activity API. The API is supported in Firefox OS, and will soon be available in the Firefox browser on desktop and mobile.

A few of us at Mozilla are throwing together a prototype just to prove the system works well, we'll post back here when we have tires to kick.

XUL is only used for the external chrome interface of the Firefox desktop browser, let's be clear not to commingle the technology used to build the UI of Firefox with the standards-based technologies that power web apps/pages ;)

Sad that this PSA even needs to be written, but alas:

* NO, open web apps that run on Firefox and Chrome are in no way linked to non-standard markup languages like XUL. *

Please disregard any users who have made this fallacious assertion.

When you say:

"(2) stick to standards (e.g., using HTML now instead of XUL)"

and

"(3) if your system isn't getting traction, retry in 10 years?"

It sounds like you are claiming Mozilla is promoting the use of XUL as a mark-up language for web apps, which is completely, unequivocally, 100% false. Hopefully this is not what you intended, because it would be an unfortunate case of FUD-spreading.

Support is already under way for slider in Firefox, and the rest of the input elements are in development. Why don't you contribute to the project instead of shooting off crass remarks about what "other people", "those people", or "they", need to do.

The problem is, there isn't anything else kinda similar - Web Components will enable things that are impossible for libs like jQuery Mobile and jQuery UI to do presenting (with any degree of sanity). The Web Component APIs will also allow us to optimize the code paths most important to component development, again, something that will never happen for random UI framework X, Y, or Z.

We for starters, this entire component package is lighter than some single jQuery UI plugins. It is declarative, something jQuery UI simply cannot do as it is designed. Web Components APIs are landing in browsers, so these code paths will be highly optimized as time goes on - jQuery's plugin code path will not be.

Yes, Brick is a set of components developed with X-Tag (the web components sugar library)

Polyfill != works back to the stone age, it just means providing backwards compatible functionality. Aside from that, there are some polyfills that aren't even technically possible, or would destroy performance, in older browsers