jsmthrowaway

The best is hand exercisers for an entire 30 minute 1x1. That was my first 1x1 with said manager after I got reorganized under him. He tried to hand me a really awful Excel project at minute 29.5 after asking me what SRE means and what I do for the first 29 to a wonderful squeak squeak squeak soundtrack, and I immediately handed him my badge and left the premises. (True story. Not proud, but I couldn’t stay sane 30 minutes, let alone 30 quarters.)

The meaning is that capitalist structure and incentives will necessarily lead to exploitation of culture. There is no moral dimension to this statement: it is merely a causal relationship based on how commerce works, how human psychology and purchasing behavior works, and what art and culture are widely accepted to mean. Commerce does not accommodate our ideas about cultural enjoyment very well due to the way it fundamentally functions. Them's just the breaks, and it's no more punitive to point it out than saying water is wet.

That meaning you're touching on by asking, which is what commerce means in relationship with the arts, is graduate-level theory that you could doctorate in, and remains one of the most debated topics in modern times with the unique twist of cultural leaders outside academia usually being the voices that teach us well. Try concretely defining cultural exploitation, for example, in a way that sets aside personal perspective on the concept. I'd contend it's insoluble.

There was a bit of victimhood in the narrative, particularly around the extramarital affairs. That was my ex-wife's favorite film so I've seen it several times, and I finally deeply read about Kahlo (the Trotsky story especially intrigued me), and the impressions and conclusions I drew regarding some of the portrayed events didn't jibe with how I interpreted them in the film.

Even without considering historical accuracy, after a few viewings, it becomes clear that the film is not well made despite Taymor. I think at the time it was an awards darling because, though it seems much more pedestrian now, a studio system film about a female Mexican cultural icon was even more unlikely to see the light of day then. I remember discussion around it highlighting its progressive nature, so that likely framed reception of the film, despite the occasionally clumsy script and at times loose interpretation of the subject matter. To be honest, when I saw this link pop up on HN, I immediately thought of the film as an example, rather than the Barbie (which is even worse, but oddly, I can't verbalize why).

As for Weinstein, that attributed pull-out quote, if accurate, stands alone to demonstrate thought behind the portrayal. I'd say it's fair.

Many figures are tough to interpret beyond death, to be fair, and maybe we're all wrong about her. Who knows. Arguable she'd find us discussing it amusing.

All more plausible than EMDrive, it turns out.

The article is a slightly edited transcript of what aired in the TV package and appeared in the teleprompter, which is the only strategy most local newsrooms can afford to do. Write once, publish twice. It’s not print journalism, it’s copy intended to hook television viewing interest, and that style does work.

If local news quality bothers you, be more bothered that the person who did the translation almost certainly pulls minimum wage, while the slightly more notable person reading the same thing negotiated a significant contract. I used to write these for $9.50/hour in 2005, for a producer pulling about $13, while the anchor reading them and doing approximately nothing else was arguing over $5 million in their renewal. And the gutting of local hadn’t even started yet. Now most shops can’t even afford photographers and have their reporters shoot their own stories, probably close to minimum wage themselves if they’re fresh from J school.

You think you’re going to get Peter Baker quality reporting in that scenario? You think that newsroom is empowered to develop source relationships and produce reporting that effects social change? They’re covering a shipping overcharge in an investigative feature, for crying out loud. The stylistic technique is far from why local news is ridiculous, and that’s a very shallow assessment.

There’s a clear path to fixing local news but the market won’t permit it, on account of it being a market, not to mention the whole battalion of news directors terrified of change and wondering why their 1994 Eyewitness News rundowns don’t work any more, all the while sweating about how much more the only marketable face is going to ask for when the next book comes out. A lot of it is self-inflicted, but a lot isn’t. But don’t worry, it’ll die. The aforementioned anchor reminded me of this when I was reconsidering the industry again. He now does real estate and begged me not to go back.

The disengaging prophecy is fulfilled! For my next trick, I shall make this subthread disappear!

(Focus, people. Stallman’s commit bit. Stay on target and let’s figure this thing out. Did we get closure on the apt-get cow, or are we tabling that?)

Counter to your glorious Fahrenheit 451 perception of either contemporary society or our future one, it’s just as dystopian to permit humor to be used as suppression of a marginalized subset of people. It is perfectly acceptable to expect that people not discriminate against others that are unlike them, in any way, lest that be a possibility. The key to humor that is actually funny is understanding that, particularly how the word I intentionally emphasized applies to comedy.

(Not saying that happened here, just reacting to your broadening to “policing humor.” Humor is also, you know, funny. That did happen here. Stallman should stick to his day gig.)

> I guess I understand the downvotes here

You’d be surprised. It bottomed out at -3 and is now oscillating around 0 and -1. That’s a surprisingly encouraging sign.

I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment of a problem. I think the industry’s reaction to it is an even bigger one and it’s right here, in this thread. Or lack thereof.

I’m much more concerned about him playing the “childbirth is far more traumatic than having an abortion” card in the discussion about the patch. Until this moment, I wasn’t even aware that was a card. It’s difficult to fathom the logic that would arrive at that statement making sense to someone typing it, particularly a person who will never experience the situations upon which he’s speaking conclusively.

You’re right, the conflict is elsewhere. However, something about Richard Stallman making that statement, which marginalizes the intense conflict women often feel over intentional abortion in their own lives, not to mention traumatic abortions brought on by rape or medical issues, really speaks to a yawning gap existing between him and empathy for other people. It seems to imply that he thinks women leveraging their right to choose are pleased or joyful that they can do so, and this distantly makes the joke worth keeping. He might be pro-choice, and keen to defend it, but the way he defends it models an entire cadre of people who look up to him. He’s speaking from a position with multiple layers of privilege, on account of his stature, race, and gender, and basically saying “abortion, no biggie, right?” How does that help us recruit women in tech?

Did my nose find it, or do we care more about who maintains a C runtime?

Immediate future prediction: -4 on this comment, a disengaging reply from you, a barrage of comments below me lining up to defend Stallman (likely calling him Dr. Stallman) or tell me I’m misinterpreting a direct quote and/or its context, and I sign out again and return to dormancy and lament this community’s symptomatic demonstration of this industry’s faults: it’s about who runs glibc! That matters! Ignore everything else, it’s a tizzy! Just look at the top thread. Not an abortion joke, an abortion law joke. That makes it all better.

Edit: Oh good, we are on to the apt-get cow.

You sure? You literally said, "sounds like far from a revival," and cited population to make your point.

As always, those of us who live here or nearby (in my case) understand what's happening in Detroit, and are more than happy to watch everyone else in the country dismiss it and look for the negative statistics. Detroit is one of the only cities in the country that seems to attract this mid-brow "are they really improving, though? Yeah, right" dismissal. As someone on the ground, if you want the negative statistics to rally around, start looking at the racial inequality of who the growth is benefiting; that should give you something to talk to your friends about at the coffee pot for a few weeks, at least. (The good news is we've quietly become a champion for diversity in government throughout the metro area and, potentially, the state soon enough.)

Meanwhile, we'll keep working on it. For example, pretty much all of us understand that Detroit needs to decrease in physical size. That's already underway. Statistics don't really account for something like that. The foodie neighborhoods where a SoMa resident would feel at home? Can't really capture those effectively in stats, either. How blocks of what used to be abandoned buildings are now yielding economic crops? On, and on.

You don't snap your fingers and reinvent a city overnight. I left, then left SV to return. Interpret that accordingly.

The horse's mouth, in this case, speaks nonsense. Multiple /24s were announced more specifically to the DFZ, and that has absolutely nothing to do with Google's DNS resolvers. "Simply a falsehood," indeed.

https://twitter.com/InternetIntel/status/988792927068610561

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/04/suspi...

(I agree entirely, but one should endeavor to make that statement the truth to avoid the sharp end of the stick.)

Bram Cohen didn’t go on Hacker News and invalidate every safe harbor a defense counsel needs, either. Just to be clear, you’ve said, in writing, on behalf of your company, that you are aware of illegal activity happening on your network, that you’re okay with it, and that you monitor the network on which illegal activity is taking place and have determined the legality thereof (enough to know a minority is illegal), and to ice that holy shit cake you even fired a warning shot at pharmaceutical regulators planetwide.

That manner of legislative and regulatory flout is a heat-seeking company missile, and can only end with your eventual incarceration.

Abort thread. Talk to lawyer about further HN commentary. Your discussion here is plainly legally actionable by any investors concerned about your fiduciary responsibilities, and this page will almost certainly be printed out as an exhibit in several legal proceedings, some potentially criminal. I appreciate and respect the change you’re trying to drive, where you’re coming from, and your optimism, but you really, really need to understand the peril you’re in, as unfortunate as it is.

I’m dead serious. DPR got life without parole. They’re not messing around.

Repeat after me: I have no knowledge of illegal activity taking place on the platform, and condemn it.

Keep in mind a lot of folks in this thread might be suddenly realizing they have reduced ocular ability at night, a likely common condition that pretty much nobody is aware of when it’s minor (because it’s not obvious something is amiss; maybe it’s just that dark). I agree with you that streetlights and headlights are almost universally sufficient in my experience. If they’re not, it’s worth getting your eyes checked out for light sensitivity at night. You never know.

I’m not sure a typical eye exam checks for it, either, because none of the tests I can think of seem like they’d be useful.

(As usual, an even keeled comment based on family experience is -2 and rapidly being silenced with zero feedback inside 5 minutes, which makes me wonder why I contribute to this community at all, probably time to stop)

Which is a dangerous family of opinions to apply without fully understanding them, as asking for a lawyer when they’re at your door inquiring about a missing neighborhood kid is probably counterproductive and escalates attention on you unnecessarily. It’s a fine opinion when common sense is involved. I don’t have a problem with the sentiment, just watching people who digest YouTube and shout “where’s your probable cause” at the poor guy looking for gypsy moths at the California border.

(Yes, I’ve seen that on 50 in Tahoe.)

Depends on what you mean by “going ethos.” Healthy perspective on an employment relationship from your perspective, yes. Anathema to a large number of Silicon Valley startups where you will likely get branded as neither a culture fit nor a team player, as well, yes.

It’s wise in the Valley to hold such an opinion but not make it very prominently known. There are a number of people who want your job and will say something more palatable to your employer, and eat your free meal while shipping a feature at 10pm because they buy into the posters on the wall. Many allegations of ageism (but not all) can probably trace back to something like this, in my uninformed gut opinion, because you will almost certainly get replaced by a new grad when the hammer falls. I don’t even see it as personal, but a demonstration of incentives: they can get a loud 40 from you or a quiet 80 from a newly minted BSc. QED.

Just decline invites and push back on over 40. Expressing that attitude at a typical company within this audience basically paints “please lay me off” on your back. When you’re getting into post-senior titling, or you’re really specialized in a tough req to fill, is when that approach becomes more feasible.

No. It supports no wildcards at all.

Even better would be doing it on a device. It's a reason to have an intelligent router on your network where you run a custom dnsmasq or whatever, then you cover your phones and all the hootenanny that comes with a digital life. Like your fridge.

Keep in mind that not every helicopter spoiling your waterfront is sightseeing. Public safety, medical, and even private travel helicopter flights are very common in New York, so if you ban sightseeing you’re still only part of the way there. I’d suggest that it’s really just the size of NYC causing the annoyance that you experience.

Look at the bright side: they aren’t Hueys. You’d probably lose your mind if a squadron of angry Hueys thumped up the FDR on the deck. At least the average 206 or Eurocopter you’d see is designed to be somewhat reasonable.

Helicopters already descend safely during power loss with autorotation, which every pilot trains. The landing site, failure of a float, and doors off operation were bigger problems here, as well as the passengers not knowing how to rapidly get out of their harness.

From the look of it, the pilot actually did alright, and successfully autorotated to a landing he expected to work. The aircraft had other ideas.

Sadly, the downside of the consumer data culture in which we live is that you don’t really get to make that call. It seems like data is really an all or nothing game at this point, regardless of how society feels about it. Not sure how to change that, either, and I don’t personally think legislation is the answer.

And he's dead. What more do you want? We're all human beings. Can't you put it aside for two seconds?

Come on, man. His body's not even cold and it was well-known that he was experiencing mental health issues, potentially his entire life, including discovering he suffered from Asperger's after an involuntary hold (that he described himself). Your venting isn't actually far from that diagnosis making sense. Is this really the time and place for this?

He had been involuntarily held more than once, and described his diagnosis of Asperger's to more than one publication. There were questions about the story he told, though, based on records not matching up with his narrative; this, to me, indicated a man not well, who needed help more than anything. I hope he was getting it.

That said, I think it's inappropriate to speculate, particularly when the circumstances likely involve mental health. We should really just celebrate Adrian and send our best to those who survive him, as well as take the opportunity to mention that mental health is extremely important in our line of work (and not!) and you should never feel bad for seeking help or fall victim to the stigma. Code can wait; you and your brain can't.

Tragic loss, way too young.

I interpreted that commentary as referencing a new library similar in architecture, like an implementation of S3 that lives locally in the software and is modeled after SQLite. Not “let’s rewrite SQLite” like everyone else seems to have run with.

Please. Cryptocurrency advertising, the domain of “the next Bitcoin” and “100,000% return on ICO” scams, is an odd hill to die on in the pursuit of grandiose claims of “democracy and the rule of law”. Google can accept or deny any advertising they choose, and statehood and governments have nothing to do with it; I anticipate your “but First Amendment” reply and challenge you to think about to what relationship a Constitutional amendment applies. I don’t see people appealing to Westphalian sovereignty and The Rule of Law when Google doesn’t accept pornographic advertising, do you?

There is neither law nor regulation in the United States or California demanding that advertising be accepted and served outside of certain limited scenarios, such as elections. Anticompetitive concerns are handled via other means and do not apply. So, yes. They can. And their doing so doesn’t undermine democracy in any sense. If you believe this incorrect, the courts are at your disposal.

Do you have any idea how often the networks reject television advertising, by the way? One national spot I worked on took five tries to be accepted for air. Advertising media needs a rejection mechanism (else you’d get Bud Light ads on the Disney channel), and citing a civics lesson to lament it is just silly.

A perfectly viable option that is called 'shadow mastering'. dns.he.net lets you do it for free.

What the gently caress does encrypting an HTTP connection have to do with morals or age? You are way outside the realm of making sense, man, and offer commentary that is openly harmful to securing the Internet. Please step back and revisit your woefully misinformed opinion on this.

Most people who advocate for security, including myself, have worked on small teams and understand the resources involved. Putting a TLS certificate on your shit with LE takes minutes. Doing it through another CA is minutes, in a lot of cases. You spent more time downloading, installing, and configuring Apache, then configuring whatever backend you want to run, and writing your product or blog post or whatever it is you’re complaining about securing.

Honestly, in the time you’ve been commenting here, you could have gotten TLS working on several sites. Managing TLS for an operations person is like knowing git for a software developer. It’s a basic skill and is not difficult. If it’s truly that difficult for your team, (a) God help you when someone hacks you, they probably already have and (b) there are services available that will front you with a TLS certificate in even less time than it takes to install one. Cloudflare and done.

> Security can be a roadblock to releasing valuable software on time and within budget.

Great, you've pinpointed it. Step two is washing it off. Ignoring security directly impacts value, and I'm mystified that you don't see this.

But I guess I'm a zealot ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

ASF has a CLA for every single project, and seems to be doing alright. It also seems like what you call “binding Contributor Guidelines” is basically a CLA.