487 karma · joined December 27, 2019
And verses are not disconnected logical propositions, they are a structure between a sentence and a chapter aka. a paragraph. If anything - the grouping of verses into chapters is far more arbitrary than that of sentences into verses.
Getting paying subscribers to change their subscription method is huge friction and risk of churn, the more revenue you already have established on substack the bigger the risk cost of trying to move away, aka the boiled frog business model.
Except the entire model of substack is based on writers not having access even to their audience's mail addresses.
The only asset a newsletter author has is his audience - with substack they won't even have that, in fact their publisher agreement explicitly prohibits the authors from asking any sort of contact information from their readers.
What does it mean that Yossi and Oran are taking over as maintainers - are they doing so in their personal capacity or as employees of Redis Labs ?
How are potential conflicts between the business interests of Redis Labs and the interests of the community to be identified and resolved ?
Who will own the copyright over the newly submitted code and are there any safeguards against future versions of Redis being released under licenses more restrictive than the current one ?
He is dishonourable, untrustworthy and any privacy posturing made by him and google should only serve so as to make their often-involuntary users that much more wary.
There is nothing particularly thriving about it. There are just a lot of them because it costs almost nothing to incorporate a company and 'startup' sounds cooler than a 'small consulting business' or a 'software house'.
Can you name many EU startups that IPOd or got acquired for an impressive amount during the last decade or were even considered "unicorns" at any point by anyone other than themselves ?
In any case, Section 230 isn't about startups per se but specifically about 3rd party content providers - know any such companies that are EU-based ?
> I think we could use more hate speech protection, when I see reports that as much as 60% of the tweets in the current U.S. political conversations are done by biased bots.
Have you considered the possibility of those reports being disseminated by biased bots ?
> And no, I am firmly against EARN IT and the other 230 attacks. We need internet legislation that is thoughtful, created by technical SME staffers and constitutional law SME staffers, not broad-brush legislation pandering to votes, FUD, or special interests.
You sound confused. How do you expect those hate speech protections to materialize if not by modifying or cancelling Section 230 ? I mean there's always the option of cancelling the 1st amendment - no one seems to like that pesky thing anyway today.