cthor

This is already possible if you look through the revision history and talk page. Outside of very rare circumstances, contributions don't get redacted.

linode has a $5/mo plan

That masonry layout diagram is horribly deceptive. The boxes aren't to scale at all.

Every officer on the scene at Uvalde knew there was a shooter in the classroom. Gunshots had been heard by people on the scene. Eyewitnesses on the scene had seen a shooter entering with weapons. Children in the classroom were calling in from their phones.

If the only information police had was a phone call from an anonymous VOIP number, then they'd be comparable.

School essays and actual essays aren't even the same thing.[0] It sounds like a more didactic use of these kids time would be arguing on forums about their favorite anime.

[0]: http://paulgraham.com/essay.html

The self-claiming thing has at least been done already (through the use of online music labels): <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mz14Ul-r63w> and <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieErnZAN5Eo>

YouTube doesn't let just anyone make ContentID claims and start trolling. You do need to jump through a few hoops to get an air of legitimacy first.

GP refers to "last decades" but that source is from 2011 with data ending at 2009. Do you have data for the last decade?

Ratio of women:men using the service.

Say there are 10 women and 30 men on the service, and each woman matches with 3 men. 30 matches total. Assuming equal distribution, the men have 1 match each.

You can also then have a more extreme distribution. 3 of those men could have 10 matches and the other 27 have zero. Median man has zero matches, 80th percentile ("top 20%") has zero matches.

Blogs are perfectly capable of embedding media as appropriate, including videos.

On the contrary to your suggestion, blogs (or more specifically, webpages) are what can do more than anything else, since they can also feature interactive media. See <https://ncase.me/trust/> for an example.

Whether or not this is expected, standard, or the author thinks it's worth the effort is another thing.

The main antitrust complaint against social media giants is that competitors are either acquired or bullied out of the market.

The only reason this hasn't happened with TikTok is it's based in China.

Setting the alt attribute to whatever input generated the image should cover that.

That the mere existence of rules is not enough. They must also be enforced.

Basically, I think you're letting Valve off the hook. Sure, the competitors shouldn't cheat, but Valve should also make sure they create an environment in which cheating isn't incentivised. In the world of software, a few years is a long time. Leaving a known bug that gives a massive competitive advantage unfixed for that long borders on negligence, especially when the fix is relatively trivial.

Are you also under the impression that most Olympic medalists aren't doping?

Following the rules doesn't get you very far when cheaters don't get punished.

It's Wikipedia's fault that search engines are filled with blogspam?

Modern fascination with samurai is less idolizing and more fetishizing. Plenty of people telling stories. Not a lot practicing the art. And those that do are (rightfully) snickered at for taking seriously something that is supposed to be mere quaint fascination.

There's no reason the number of humans dealing with these problems can't scale alongside the number of humans creating them.

But it's a lot cheaper to pay for a few really expensive programmers to make a just-good-enough AI than to pay for thousands of human moderators. So we end up with a stupid computer creating tonnes of human misery all for the sake of FAANG's already fat profit margins.

SSPL isn't being used as an alternative to permissive licenses (e.g. MIT). It's being used to shore up the holes that AGPL doesn't cover[1], to enable the business model of "free for small guys, paid for by the big guys".

People want a license that says something like, "you can only use this if you also contribute to the commons, or if you pay for the privilege not to". SSPL is an attempt to be that. Maybe it doesn't do that job well, but don't confuse it as competing with permissive licenses.

[1]: https://writing.kemitchell.com/2018/11/04/Copyleft-Bust-Up.h...

You also need DDoS protection. Cloudflare has booted people off for naughty speech before and got away with it, so no reason to expect anyone else in the game wouldn't.

It's not as though it's some herculean task to get your writing hosted somewhere without ads and trackers. VPS providers with 1-button WordPress installs are dirt cheap. Netlify and GH pages are free.

It's slightly easier to post stuff on something like lithub (or Facebook, Medium, etc.), but then how much does one really care about this if the excuse is that doing something about it is a minor inconvenience?

People want their cake and to eat it to. They want don't just want to get read. They wanna get paid for it. Too bad the marginal value of any particular writer is about the same as it costs for hosting them. Zero. So we all get barraged with endless crap because fools still think writing essays online is a serious career path.

(The serious career path here is making middle brow YouTube video essays. Still questionable, but at least you might get paid.)

Could just turn the knob on your oven's timer and use a measuring jug.

It's probably related to their policy of preferring secondary sources[1]. (Without a link to the article in question though I can only guess.) You could argue this is a bad policy, but it's certainly not a new one.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research...

Doesn't have the tactile feedback of pencil and paper.

Needs additional software and mental overhead to get the sketches on screen.

One step at a time.

I know multiple people who use voice assistants like Alexa that are effectively wiretapping their house. When asked how they feel comfortable with that, they say, "Well, my phone's already compromised anyway..."

I think people do care about privacy, but right now they just don't see any practical way to make it happen. The root of it all is the smartphone itself, because "Don't use a smartphone" is not a serious option.

Geopolitics is a little more complicated than phrases we tell children.

At the core of it, the kind of protectionism China has engaged in is defecting in a prisoner's dilemma. If you play always cooperate against a defectbot, you're going to lose eventually, even if you start very far ahead.

Even GitHub Pages behind Cloudflare is capable of issuing a 301.

Still no support in any mobile browser. 35% isn't a lot of coverage. And of course Safari is a holdout -- they haven't even adopted VP9 yet.

If the rules were decided by the English Wikipedia community following their process for making such decisions then this would be a meaningful criticism. But this is an edict from the WMF ivory tower. To say it's representative of the Wikipedia editors is a gross mischaracterisation.

From my perspective it's naked entryism, striking at the centralised weakness in an otherwise robust, decentralised system.

You've just given a bunch of evidence that those things are happening despite our benevolent censors' best efforts.

I think giving people the idea that they've stumbled onto dangerous truths just makes them more resolute. Or do you think the issue is they just need to be suppressed even harder?

All the limitations you mention are already explicit in the text.

You have any other studies demonstrating lack of cognitive decline in 22 year olds on 4 hours sleep? Otherwise, you're just poo pooing on someone having actually having done the damn experiment. Yeah, n=1, but it's better than your n=0.

Eldred vs Ashcroft held that the CTEA (Sony Bono act) was constitutional.

This is a good point worth bringing up, since the GP seems to imply it isn't with reference to the wording of the constitution's Copyright Clause.

However, it doesn't answer the moral question of whether congress should have passed that law, or whether congress should pass laws to change copyright term lengths to be shorter. That's not the role of the court.