2,643 karma · joined January 10, 2016
The other important thing about congestion pricing (as described in the article) is that it completely destroys privacy.
It's the reverse of a pump and dump scam. It has happened every quarter for the last 21 years. I honestly think it was something SJ cooked up. It started happening just after he returned. My guess, he got John Dvorak in on the scam. That guy's 'beleaguered Apple' PCMag trolling was instrumental in driving the price down for years. Everyone would parrot it. Then, "bam" Apple produces a great quarter. I wonder if JD still does that schtick... You can make money without fail by buying on the dip before earnings announcements and selling on the news.
https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Facebook-cafeteria-worke...
People cheating on their income taxes to the tune of thousands of dollars a year each in free lunches are now more likely to comply with the law. This seems like a step in the right direction.
https://www.androidpolice.com/2016/03/29/amazon-updates-its-...
Since when? Is this extension now broken?
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/smart-card-connect...
No, sorry, you are wrong.
How are users going to differentiate between a webauthn permission request and a webusb permission request? The later can be used for phishing attacks, which appears to defeat the entire purpose of having a U2F key.
You might think so, but not really. Any app you install on Android can watch what you do online in any other app, with no permissions at all.
https://hackernoon.com/android-gives-apps-full-access-to-you...
I'm not surprised if you don't know about it, because it was [dead] on HN as soon as it was posted... which should tell you a bit about the echo chamber you're in here.
I'm going to guess: lack of load testing. Something I imagine you still need to do in Rust too.
OpenJDK is GPL. If you comply with GPL, no. This is the problem, Google copied and did not comply with the GPL. Their other option was to pay Oracle/Sun a licensing fee for a commercial license. This is exactly the business model many GPL users follow. Ruling otherwise makes this business model invalid, but it also creates a double standard.
Consider a programming language where you program in types, like Idris. The case is more obvious here. The API is a program. The same applies to Java too, but that seems less obvious. The API is the program that produces compiler output.
If you've ever wrestled long with getting a program to compile, you realize it's non-trivial to wrap your brain around complex types. The API is a language and the compiler is a runtime producing output. I can design my API in something like Java and return null from all the methods while I do it. The compiler will still produce expected results when I try to string bits of it together.
For most languages, this work is hard, because everything is a runtime error from the compiler. There are elegant and inelegant ways to solve certain problems. The API determines that. It is itself a creative endeavor.
Google was given the opportunity to license the API. They still can under GPL, but that means complying with GPL, which they evidently did not want to do. Ruling in favor of fair use here creates a vague double standard. Business models like that of MongoDB, who releases their code under GPL for open source projects and charges a license fee for private projects, would become questionable. "Well, you give it away already, so it's fair use to use it any way we like without paying you!"
Have you ever tried to write off open source work as a donation? I don't think this works the way you want it to. Software isn't a donation. Software is speech. Phil Zimmerman proved that rather nicely when he printed PGP as a book.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-yaverbaum/is-snapchat-pe...
It's not bad or good. It's new rules, and people will figure out how to play by them. If hosts become more liable for what people say, maybe we all go back to self hosting. In my opinion, that would be a net positive, if you can excuse the pun. Right now, the rules allow corporations to control speech. I think less of that is a good idea.
#createFacebook before you can read #deleteFacebook
Gerrymandering indeed.
The science is settled. We have a model for proof.