dbdjfjrjvebd

There is a simple way to have both. Give people the right to anonymity and also give them personally the right to wave that right. This protects people both ways.

Spilling something is an accident. Other things can be mistakes but not accidents.

I think its legally required in many places. In others it is about not being sued. And for all kitchen staff it is fairly important not to poison people!

I agree the idea that a defence contractor might be working together with the Pentagon is totally preposterous. </sarcasm>

The developer gets paid partly by the adverts. Getting paid is integral to my job satisfaction...

I actually don't work on any ad supported products. That improves my job satisfaction even more.

Except that the DMCA troll just repeats the takedown notice. What should happen is that a lawyer making fraudulent DMCA notices should be held liable.

On pass by reference.. I really miss Fortran's intent(in). You get a reference to the data but it is immutable... I would like if Python had something similar...

In short no.

a.com does not match b.a.com

Only if the certificate is *.a.com does it match b.a.com

b.a.com can have its own certificate.

Unless there is no opt out.. Unless the data is for core functionality, a lawful purpose you have to have consent. I would consult a lawyer on this if you have any doubts. I suspect Microsoft have done already though.

Ignorant/mistaken good intentions can do great harm. The difference comes when someone is told that they are doing harm. Do they stop or carry on?

> the entire industry are sold itself to GraphQL.

Which industry? I presume you don't mean software development which has largely ignored graphQL? BTW I speak as an early adopter who has used graphQL in production.

Hence "a lot" which allows for other processes. We agree.

You could apply a tarrif on the licensing fees? This might upset the WTO.

Yes but a lot of that is done by allowing large companies to offshore their profits.

Did you not know that the old Firefox had much more functional vim emulation add ons?

Fine. BUT sites should be responsible for the ads running on their site and held financially or criminally responsible. Adtech is infested with intrusive tracking which is legally dubious in my jurisdiction. To say nothing of the security implications of allowing random unvetted transient 3rd parties to run code. At this point I see a good content blocker as a security measure more than an ad blocker.

The main point is auditability. Closed source libraries can have errors that can't be audited by the scientific community.

My customers want their customers to have a good experience and to feel safe and secure. They want to follow the law. They also want analytics. By following a standard that complies with the law here in Europe they get some of both.

I mean that I am knowledgable about Python builds. You are knowledgable about Golang. Neither skill is special. With Docker I don't need to learn as much about FooLang's build process to contribute to a project using FooLang.

I can build any python project in 10 mimutes (and not pollute my global environment). I can't do that with Go or C or C++ or Ruby or php. I can if they are dockerised.

You are prepared to make compromises which we know threaten democracy. Things like secret ballets are not a lofty ideal but a fundamental component of an election. Non secret ballets instantly compromise an election's integrity.

Please study some history on elections before making dangerous suggestions.

The OP says app delivery but they actually talk about development builds. Dev builds are another area where Docker/containerisation helps. Dev builds are just as annoying with Golang as Ruby or Python. In fact build awkwardness is orthogonal to static vs dynamic typing.

The technology to do this in an acceptable manner does not exist.

"We" have no idea how to build a secure electronic voting system to decide who the next government will be.

NB in an election of a government there is no central trust store. And everyone (including your grandad and thick cousin) need to understand the process and be able to verify it.

And this is how to retain users. Although you might struggle to sell support contracts with preferential access to bug fixes...

This is a good way to increase your churn. If your product has known bugs affecting my workflow that I have reported and you have not even responded to (a valid response could include instructions for preparing a patch/PR or even a message saying needs more info) I will always be looking for alternatives. If you are adding pointless features (to me as a user I started using the product with the existing feature set so new features are most likely pointless to me) at the same time I'm really starting to wonder about just forking.

And people are quite OK to trust these. In these cases there is a central authority from which trust can be established. Voting is the opposite. During voting the central authority is being changed by the man on the street. He therefore needs to understand how it works otherwise how is he in control?