reginaldjcooper

Next up on Fox News; we'll relabel public healthcare programs as "entitlements" and explain why drug addicts and lazy poors don't deserve them. And is your child in danger of a non-traditional marriage? Find out at 11.

I've read if wind, solar, and/or nuclear were subsidized even a fraction as much as oil is, they would be equally cheap. Is that way off the mark?

I'm fine with that as long as they are required to unlock it after the the "rental" period.

I have a lot of second hand experience that shows this will work fine up until the meddling kids.

You can't even post a, "this is not advice but here's what I am doing..."? That seems overly strict.

There needs to be a cheaper way to challenge patents and force the USPTO to do a thorough job of it. If the obvious option is always, "nope, challenge", and the usual outcome is, "hm on second thought it doesn't take a rocket scientist to come up with scan-to-email"; patent trolls would find some copyrights to troll or move into a related field like blackmail.

You're literally calling people sexist for writing their observations of animal mating behaviors.

False, and wow. If they observed human males yelling in the direction of their travel, their voices amplified by massive cheeks that females lacked, why would they not make the same conclusions?

It's not sexist to reject the absurd premise that behavior is unaltered by testosterone and estrogen. It is sexist to exclude people because of their gender or shame people because their behavior doesn't fit their gender role. It's nowhere near sexist to write observations about animal's mating behaviors.

I wish you could have written this without the ad hom implication that men who like certain colors are necessarily both effeminate and puerile. If Josh Kerr fucking loves pastels that doesn't make him any less of a man.

That's awesome, I'm glad you like it. Now that you mention it, I recall thinking of the keyboard cover as a great idea.

I guess many things you list are orthogonal to what I would want it for (and I am quite pleased that there's no more Flash), so I don't see it as an improvement to the iPad, nor is it any more open.

I certainly wouldn't trade it in for a Surface, I might trade it in for an Android.

All the stuff I get is either free-as-in-libre or something my wife is going to enjoy using. Surface is neither, with the bonus that whoever was in charge was clueless enough to load it with 40G of software.

Yes, everyone who disagrees with you is doing the internet wrong. FFS

I give replies like that to my brothers when I'm gaslighting them and they are trying find proof I'm lying.

I would argue, as a modern professional, propagation of your FQDN is also very important.

I don't trust websites to not spam me and I don't trust them to not share my email with other spammers. I would never give my email to some unknown character. It's not an unreasonable position.

I think that is over-reaching, too.

But pragmatically, the more data they have, the more likely you are to show up as a false positive. Worst case; you handle something in a hardware store and it's later made into a bomb by a third party. You're going to need a solid alibi for that one.

Or you get placed at the scene of a protest even though you weren't present for it. Now you're on the terrorist list.

Additionally they can catch you more easily for victimless crimes, like if your fingerprints are on a bong they collect. I figure it's easy enough for them to stick you with a felony even without actively helping them get more data. So I'm trying to minimize the felonies I can be stuck with.

Isn't it fair to be disappointed? They dropped the visual upgrade and introduced dozens of new bugs, forcing developers to put in some serious hours. And the result is what?

The best feature released is downloading new content in the background. That's wonderful, but not enough. iOS background processes are still crippled, so I can only have an open socket in the background if it's part of a VoIP app. And for some reason the VoIP flag also signals that I want the app to run on startup?

I don't see why we should care about iPhones or iOS anymore. The latest upgrade is a fingerprint scanner and it's faster. Ok. The operating system finally drops the idiotic skeuomorphism and lets people share photos with Apple's version of NFC. Includes a 2D game engine. Great. Oh beacons? Wonderful, now we can opt-in to targeted localized advertisements.

I'm more interested in getting a device that doesn't force its requirements inbetween me and my workflow. That means widgets, sideloading, intents, and applications that can edit the same files. Removing the animations or reducing their duration (jailbreak an iPhone, install the Accelerate package, and tell me that isn't a much better experience).

On iOS you still can't even delete their default apps if you don't want them. I thought Apple was supposed to be about style? My old iPod Touch still has a folder full of apps I don't want. And an empty Newsstand.

Apple is for children and the computer illiterate. The only benefit of iOS over Android is that you don't need to be totally vigilant over what you install. But the cost is living in a walled garden under the watchful eye of your nanny. I'm disappointed in iOS and the iPhone. They are becoming increasingly irrelevant. They're going to find that the preferred style changes over time, whereas Android is going to have a technical fan base for quite a while even after the "massive screens" fad dies down.

the last time one of these came up I learned about bash's vi mode:

    set -o vi

it's awesome

They probably are fully aware that nobody reads the clickwrap, that's an interesting point. It would be interesting to hear what a lawyer says about that. I don't think it's a truly reasonable defense and I wouldn't want to rely on it. (If we're thinking "ideal legal world", then I'd like clickwraps to be human-readable and people to actually read them.)

But I think there's a very clear distinction between a simple agreement with the original and with altering the DOM. If you are clever enough to alter the DOM you definitely know that the alterations are not going to be sent back to the server. You also know that agreeing will let you use the service because the server will think you agreed to the original. That seems like a clear-cut case of fraud to me. I don't see why an agreement to the original contract is invalidated because you weren't offered the opportunity to make a counter-offer (I agree that's a shitty situation, though). That's why I think it's like a contract in the mail; you get an offer and you can agree to that or not. You can make a counter-offer but it will be binned.

Consideration isn't solely concerned with monetary purchases, is it? I imagine they can construe your incoming data as valuable. It would be interesting to know if sites like Reddit can claim user interaction has inherent value for the site and for the users. I guess the EULA would be granting you license to use the software, but would not give any additional value to the developer so consideration does seem to invalidate that.

You're probably right that a ToS is going to be hard to uphold in civil court.

Anyway, thank you for elaborating, I'm glad to get a better understanding of your perspective and contract law.

Well I think the burden of proof is going to be on you if you are found willfully using the service afterwards. Otherwise you're probably right.

If you agreed to a ToS by clicking yes, and the ToS allows them to install malware that's a failure on your part to read it. If your child clicks it, you probably have recourse in civil court because a 4-year-old is not able to execute contracts. Most ToS's include a clause that they can change it at any time; you might not be legally bound by the new one, check that with a lawyer.

It seems like you are angered that you have to enter into a contract before using software, and you would prefer to just click "accept" and have that magically not be interpreted as you agreeing to the terms. "I'll use it but I don't accept the terms". I'd like that too, but I'm afraid that's not how it works.

Those are incredibly interesting talking points. If you had a bi-monthly newsletter I would read it. Do you discuss languages anywhere in particular?

Has it? I think it's very pragmatic to want control over your hardware and the ability to repair problems or add functionality as desired. If you consider it from what is best for society as well, it's very restrictive to have hardware where the software cannot be modified.

I've noticed typically I agree with your views, but on this case we diverge.

I think it's reasonable to assume that when the service cannot be accessed before the accessor clicks "agree", and the accessor clicks "agree", that constitutes a valid contractual agreement. It's no more silly than mailing in a credit card application and being bound by those terms.

The fundamental attributes are present. There is a contract and you can agree to it or not. Your interaction with the company is viewing the terms the lawyers wrote and agreeing to them or leaving the website.

Inciting a lynch mob is conspiracy to commit murder, so it's not a restriction on free speech that would prevent you from doing so.

Telling everyone an applicant has HIV is disgustingly immoral but I don't know if/why you should be barred from doing it. That's a much better question than the lynch mob.

The problem with this analogy is that trespassing on a physical property and altering the user agent when making a query to a public server are totally incomparable.

It's more like you're handing out personal documents on the street to everyone with a mustache and some guy comes up with a fake one and you get tricked.

They should go with "studies have shown that chemical X (found in tuna) can cause male genitalia to shrink by up to 17%". People don't care about dying 10 years sooner, but they do care about having bigger penises.

Please no :) just rely on us to downvote these people on HN, then you can spare at least some of the readers the pain.

I don't even understand, it's not like it's conversation or even funny, but X in X immediately results in someone announcing their awareness of canonical jokes. "yo dawg i heard you like plays so I put a play in your play to inception the king."

But now we can all crack it safely from the trial version.

I have no idea, they are all bad apples, aren't they? So I'd be picking a lesser evil in protest of the US. Canada? Germany? I think HN user sneak moved there. Iceland?

Or if it were allowed, they'd have to be criminally liable for not enforcing a constitutional law in addition to being criminally liable for enforcing an unconstitutional law so it would be twice as ridiculous to expect anyone to be capable of doing their jobs.