oconnore

There seems to be a bit of irony citing whatwg in your attempt at shaming here —- the standard that was created to be a living document tracking what web developers and browser creators were implementing in the real world.

I’m not sure there is a good reason to require web authors to type an extra 5 character prefix every time they want to attach data to an element. This is supported by the fact that browsers can figure this out.

Could you select a random group of individuals up front and then bid on their collective participation in a poll (say, beyond 95%, you all get $10)? You might have to pick a few groups and bid between them.

Is anyone surprised though? This has been the Google status quo for over a decade now, and there is no indication of intention to change, ever.

Density isn’t always that important, for example the Huntorf Plant uses a gigantic underground cave to store 800+ megawatt hours of energy.

http://www.fze.uni-saarland.de/AKE_Archiv/AKE2003H/AKE2003H_...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_energy_storage_proje...

I agree -- the whole nicety of CGI is that the web server creates your application server process for you, and then you get a very simple one-request = one response interface. Lambda/Function implementations do this right, and also support multiple requests per process, so the overhead can be more manageable. People who are nostalgic for CGI ought to be running something like OpenWhisk (or using AWS Lambda), not FastCGI.

If you're going to all the trouble of creating a FastCGI service, you might as well also create an HTTP service and route to that.

Have you ever attempted to get an organization of people to do this reliably?

You build it on SMTP because upgrading clients is easier than doing a clean slate redesign of ubiquitous internet protocols.

Presumably we're discussing how an open protocol addition might gain any traction at all over walled garden protocols like Slack -- and in those cases you want to maintain as much compatibility as possible.

"Federated SecureEmail 2.0" would be dead-on-arrival, where "Secure Client on top of bog-standard email" is ever so slightly less DOA. You get to re-use the existing identity/routing system, existing servers, existing authorization, etc.

I do think there ought to be a way to do good cryptography in email. Email is not going away anytime soon, so giving up on it as a legitimate place where cryptography is needed seems too ivory tower for me.

The “dead simple solution” is to just run the Signal protocol over SMTP, although I’m sure it’s possible there is a better design if you were to think about the specifics.

All of these censorship resistant communication projects tend to assume that the network needs to be low latency, always connected, etc. It’s far easier to build a robust network if you relax that assumption, and cheap hard drives + e2e encryption mean you ought to be able to route a large volume of private p2p messaging / email in addition to any curated content that’s distributed more widely.

https://boingboing.net/2018/05/03/inside-cubas-massive-weekl... https://www.wired.com/2017/07/inside-cubas-diy-internet-revo... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Paquete_Semanal

How about a web browser?

The Nytimes.com front page is 4.66 MB. A Quantum McEliece key is 8373911 bits (per wikipedia) or almost exactly 1MB. Therefore if my connection to Nytimes.com was over McEliece based TLS -- it would be a 21% bandwidth increase. I doubt I would notice.

Julia has a full power macro system with “normal” syntax.

Many systems don’t do TLS in process. TLS proxying is probably more common for systems deployed in the cloud (e.g. running nginx on the same node, or using a cloud load balancer).

AWS and GCP don’t even give you a way to install a cert yourself— you MUST use an ELB or bring your own certificate.

Similarly, I wish Regex engines had built in “partial match” support — i.e. is there some suffix that can be added to this string that results in a match?

I wrote something like this in Haskell for doing path traversal (descend into directory, or skip?). But it seems like a straightforward API addition to expose valid/non-valid states.

The numbers are based on confirmed cases. The task of confirming cases is not a trivial matter -- you need test kits, and someone to administer them, and the virus doesn't wait around for you to test for it.

Shouldn't this be benchmarked against WebP instead of (obviously much worse) JPEG?

American Test Kitchen has a gluten free cookbook with recipes for bread, pizza, pancakes, etc. It’s really good, and very informative.

This doesn’t make any sense in the context of tools like Snowflake and BigQuery, where the allocation of compute is separated from the data itself. You can scale each of these use cases independently without cross-domain impact.

The data lake model seems to be more about not wanting to commit to a warehouse (for example: future proofing, looking at non-relational data, etc.).

I think you might be overthinking it. Just drop cache after publishing.

Maybe you’re doing something more complicated that isn’t amenable to pseudo-static?

In a previous life I worked on a site that had a private Wordpress instance that was scraped and cloned to a more or less static site.

You can either do this explicitly using a small scraper tool, or implicitly using aggressive reverse-proxy caching rules.

Javascript + BigQuery (SQL) is great for working with Google spreadsheets.

Community discussion seems like an interesting vehicle for article micro-payments.

Could someone try to negotiate a pooled deal with the WSJ based on a valid HN cookie with >X internet points? Or just a single subscription with the agreement that it would be scraped and self-hosted by the community?

Why do people ever think that one or another extreme is the most optimal solution? In real life the answer is basically _never_ "go all the way".

By this principal, the right answer is probably along the lines of: a few services, carefully curated. Something like "macroservices (plural)".

I love the idea of a web of documents, but I would love it even more if it was a web of documents you could edit collaboratively.

First class support for Google Docs/Sheets/Slides style creation, with a clean default read mode would be perfect. An open web born out of Libreoffice rather than out of Blink/WebKit/Gecko. Secure, federated document access with easy long term caching/archival of static versions.

That’s exactly why newer biofuels rely on sources that don’t require high investment crop land — e.g. switchgrass and other “weeds”. You could also plant switchgrass in highway medians, for example.

Common practice is to ignore diversity (to the extent possible) in assessing, but not in sourcing.

It’s not just TOS violations... I can’t get into my google account because they locked my password and don’t recognize any of my current devices. The account isn’t even suspended, they just have no support team so I can’t recover my account in any “algorithmically approved” way.

If you were ok running your previous apps you should also be ok with gathering usage data for a week before the OS attempts to do a hard cut-over to a more secure model.

For personal archival I think Blu-ray is still best. I think of it as a supplement to S3 or Dropbox. Even if you end up re-writing discs it is very cheap per GB, and 25 or 50 GB discs are comfortable for “normal” personal sizes (my entire file set that I care to keep around is around 100 GB — mostly because I’m not careful about deleting old node_modules from ancient projects I’ve done)

Ok, so now those s/SWEs/operations/ folks had nothing better to do than reinvent the wheel.

"Exciting" technologies tend to keep you up on the weekends. The opposite of: BoringSSL.