throwawayswede

The concept is terrible, whether it was done "as benign as it gets" or not. The idea that this kind of bullshit content (that's obviously only written to be a marketing channel) is accepted as normal is exactly why it's a problem. Your comments only highlights it even more.

> This is a post about a bug in Safari, but if you just want to ship a Phoenix app, the easiest way to learn more is to try it out; you can be up and running in just a couple minutes

I'm sort of sick of this phenomena/trend of marketing/promotional material being masked as technically helpful content.

This is exactly like the appalling methods of native advertising (aka sponsored content), but now used for self-promotion.

Not here to argue. Enjoy your gulag.

Windows is trying to swallow linux. That's all there is to it.

Ffs, can't people just use they editor they want and be happy with it? Does it always have to overcome and take over every other editor?

What the fuck does "the new emacs" mean?

He'd be horrified at what Reddit has become.

I’m curious if there been any mention of AR/VR in sci-fi or popular culture in general in a positive light? Almost all I can think of is dystopian and does not invoke the positive imagery that Fb seems to be playing at.

Who’s their target market?

Yeah that’s a weird attitude to have, the only reason there are users who feel personally hurt by the attitude Mozilla has been taking for the past few years is because they know things could be going way better.

No one is arguing that telemetry can be helpful but forcing users into it while acting holier than though is not just shady, but very much scammy.

The whole structuring difference between the foundation and the corporation sounds a lot like a tactic to push for some things under the non profit front and others under the company front, aka scammy.

All this turns on alarms in people’s heads… in a way I don’t find it weird that you guys still don’t see it, this is a sinking ship, and you’re going to think everything is going well until the last breath.

No. Mozilla is actually helping Google build and maintain a monopoly on search (for money) and is accepting the scraps that Google leaves on the table from the browser market.

Mozilla has continuously and repeatedly fucked up when it comes to defaulting to grab telemetry and shady deals with Google, to asking for money while spending way too much salaries for its execs for a supposed non-profit corporation (that is exempt from Federal income taxation).

Although I'm a Firefox user, it pains me to say that I can't wait for the day where Mozilla and Firefox dies. At least it'll hasten the rise of a new effort. And I'd take anything other than Chrome or the Edges of the world.

I'm still hoping Brave will wake up and properly fork Firefox and give Mozilla the big FUCK YOU.

Edit: a special ps to down voters: Fuck Mozilla and its CEO.

The one thing that's more annoying than Facebook are the whistleblowers of Facebook (like that frances haugen character, which I'm fairly certain is a spook). Such a cheap and condescending group of people who think they know more than the rest.

I'm happy that Emacs community doesn't have a lot of those who think that "everything should be easy" and that working hard to learn something is a waste of time by default.

Emacs is great with or without your usage of it.

Who comes up with garbage naming techniques such is 5D? What the fuck do they expect people to think when they hear that?

Inception level guessing and assumptions you're making all in this thread.

I don't think it's not considered real work by engineers, but by non-engineer product managers.

The point is not in explaining "bad faith", but in explaining how and why the comment you're replying to is "bad faith". Was not clear to me at all that you were being sarcastic.

So should be quoting HN rules without explaining exactly and very specifically how and what you're referencing applies.

I'd agree, but only for journals funded with public money. Otherwise, no, news shouldn't necessarily be free. And this is not "news" exactly. Analysis articles cost money to produce and write, their authors should be allowed to ask for as much money as they see fair (just like how a webdesigner asks for as much as they see fit) then competition takes over and the free market does its thing.

Ban those journals that cut both ways in money making, but don't ban paywalled websites. Could possibly be a filter but then that's out of HN's scope. Your best option is to block them yourself (which I already do.)

Can't read because published on reader hostile platform.

Only initially, then he turns out to be a douche.

Both of these look like “cool hacker names” from a movie…

> I personally would remove this post altogether, given it violates copyright.

Good thing tyrannical people like you are not the moderators here.

You're not. That's not what I said. There's nothing wrong with calling someone's behavior (emphasis on "behavior") a bit dickish! We all do it.

What's ironic is that the first thing you see when you hit wired.co.uk:

> Wired

> We and our partners store and/or access information on a device, such as unique IDs in cookies to process personal data. You may accept or manage your choices by clicking below or at any time in the privacy policy page. These choices will be signaled to our partners and will not affect browsing data.View Cookie Notice We and our partners process data to provide:

> Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Select basic ads. Create a personalised ads profile. Select personalised ads. Create a personalised content profile. Select personalised content. Measure ad performance. Measure content performance. Apply market research to generate audience insights. Develop and improve products.

It really irks me that they blind to how majorly hypocritical they seem when write stuff like that on a crappy journal like this.

Technology journalism died in early 2010s and never came back.

Mentioning a moderator is a calling for moderation action. If you just wanted it reposted you could’ve just repost yourself. That would’ve been the actual “additive action”.

I’m aware of the practice. Copycats will copy. You could’ve reposted but you chose to call the cops.

True, and I’m not arguing that this person deserves more (or any) credit than the other, my gripe is with calling for moderation straight up as if he’s almost calling the police. I should’ve made it clear that that is the dickish part imho

The point is not in giving credit, but in taking credit away. All these boards are based on luck. Trying to argue agains why one got up and the other didn’t isn’t constructive. It’s verging on toxic imho

Again, for the millionth time, the issue is not that they had to comply with the law. Stop pretending to misunderstand, all this bullshit is quite obvious.

Proton mail lied, and then pretended like they didn’t. They decided it makes sense to sacrifice a customer on the account of their own fuck up and false promise.

Proton mail is a shit company, and more and more I’m convinced they’ve bought shills to go out and divert attention.

In the world of security, proton mail is a less than a zero. Their main clientele will be in the same scam business they are.

Stop intentionally missing the point. It's not about them complying with the law or not, it's about them promising something that they did not deliver on, regardless of whether they couldn't because they didn't know or the lied, it doesn't matter. Customer confidence won't be partially restored without them owning up to it. First by fighting it in court, not pretending like it's all been out of their hand, then by having their system implemented in a way where they could even start secretly logging their users (even to comply legally). Hiding behind fine print and ambiguous wording (like "oh, we said only by default").

ProtonMail fucked up. Badly and majorly. So far the only thing they've proved is that it's not a their main tag line "Secure Email. Based in Switzerland" is basically meaningless bullshit. It's not secure, and they'll backstab their customers without even putting up a fight. There's no sugar coating it, and there's no way to take it back, there's no way to distract the community form.

Their reputation is as good as dead. I feel bad for people who still use it as a "secure" email.

Lol, dude, you're missing the entire point. I understand it hurts to learn that a company you've been paying turned out not to be what it claims to be, but no one is "tossing around" wikipedia links other than you. And you're doing it sort of badly, the link you tossed is equivalent to just throwing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security in an argument.

Same. I haven't tried that many different vendors, but Linux on Lenovo's is by far the most supported of all the Asus, HP, Sony, and random others I've tried. At least with onsite support the technical person understand and knows what they're working with.