132 karma · joined March 14, 2016
Yes because I really wanted to see that thing. If I get 404 on something I want to see I will try through Tor and I will try with at least a few circuits. And if Tor gets through I then usually test with other networks just as I did with this.
I know that many people probably don't do that and you have a valid point with the masking but a better solution would be stopping censorship, not a new errorcode
First time I saw it was in December and after that in January, both on the same site. The site that was blocked was archive.is.
This block was targeted at Finland and none of the different Internet connections I tried could get to the site, I tried my home connection, cellular and connecting from my school network. It's a shame that anyone even thought of censoring such an useful tool for history and other legitimate uses. I wrote a thing about it to a Finnish newspaper and a few weeks after that the block was gone. I suspect that the newspaper conatcted archive.is and it was removed so they don't get bad publicity.
It was kind of ironical that I had to subvert the archive.is censorship to read an archived version of a thread discussing web censorship in Sweden.
I think this error code is a bad idea as it legitimizes censorship.
Are you telling me that a new CSS framework that will save you two lines in your CSS files is insignificant? Or a new <insert the current language that is hip>-style language in <insert a number between 1 and 100> lines of JS!
Surely these are the greatest inventions of our time.
The signal on HN has started to decline tho. Things used to be better. It's kind of inevitable for online communities tho.
It probably does.
Why would anyone even want anything like it?
E: Nice to see again how childish HN is, downvoting when someone points out that the thing is broken and asks a serious question. This is why I originally left this place.
LXC containers aren't app containers. It is intended to be used with regular installs, not with single applications.