unpopular42

> I've had this (non-Asus) router for three years. I've never updated the firmware.

Botnet operators are very grateful for your cooperation, you are helping them a lot

Wait, if we did that, how would we silence people we disagree with?

Well, in this case it all boils down to a personal choice of what you label "reasonable".

If you sell at BOM + labor + reasonable profit margin, who pays for R&D and who covers the risks? This makes no sense

No chance if the competitor next door pays $300k

> No one would ever buy that hammer again, right?

I mean, you might not, but I don't see telemetry as such an evil. It does help make the product better. So "no one" is a bit too strong here, try "no one with my mindset" ;)

I wonder how do they plan for those requests to be authenticated. Easily proving that you are you over the internet is not a solved problem.

No, people won't consume less, as long as they have the same disposable income. Unless you mean that this will hurt the economy and people will become poorer. In that case yes, they will consume less, but not sure how it can be seen as a nice side effect.

I prefer relevant ads to random ads. Therefore no thanks, do not ban personally targeted advertising.

Give exemptions to people with true professional needs, as determined by the party

Musk, Byrne, maga and a couple of heads of state. Maybe some of them are not great people in your or author's opinion, but it just reads unnecessary and petty.

So many random personal insults in the article. Why? They certainly don't make the article better

Define "custom"

Probably. Might depend on your terminal emulator. See, for instance, CVE-2019-9535

Except that people don't actually want that, if they did, they would read it. They just got confused by the signup form and accidentally left the checkbox checked

I'm curious. Isn't low open rate pointing to the fact that people don't want to read what you send them? How is this marketing email different from spam?

Well come on, imagine flour was a bit more sticky and if you put 1kg in the bag, only 900g is usable because the rest sticks to the walls. Would that be 1kg bag of flour or 900g bag of flour?

> we just don't have the ability to vote

Well, you can ask your representative to represent you, right?

I live in a place with direct democracy and it's much less regulated than the UK. Therefore the link between having the ability and actually regulating more is not obvious to me.

> anti-democratic, and anti-capitalist to allow misinformation on products

Is it though? I mean, it might be bad, but I don't see how it's necessarily anti-democratic, as it has little to do with the governance model.

There's nothing bizarre here: there are enough people in those democracies, who believe regulating this is either not a good idea or not high enough priority

Would that mean that the flour that sticks to the packaging walls does not count as unusable?

Same thoughts. Someone's got to get emotions under control

Next week it will snow again, we'll all go skiing and forget this

Wtf is "be artists" honestly? This is not a church choir. Top bands are commercial enterprises and are able to attract top talent (singers, musicians, audio and light engs, etc) because they get paid well.

Why is it a poor proxy though? His father provided those services and passed some of the resulting wealth to his son. The quality of the proxy doesn't change depending on who's spending. Whatever the son spends, the father can't spend anymore.

Note that one of the strong drivers making people take risks, work shitty jobs, and otherwise do things that others don't want to do is exactly this -- providing for their families.

Which research do you mean? Please point, thanks

> wealth is a poor measure of the amount of services provided to others

It's the best we have though.

Otherwise, should we also randomly distribute best homes, or whatever else is in limited supply?

He hasn't. His father has -- obviously.

There is no "market" serving people, only other people do. Are you proposing to force them to serve cheaper or perhaps for free?

Now, why is that a bad thing?

Not everyone can live in the best location, not everyone can drive the best car, not everyone can attend the best concert. There is no other way when many people want something that is in limited supply - someone will be left out.

Wealth is a proxy for the amount of services provided to others earlier, so why giving tickets in exchange for that is less fair than giving tickets to the one who clicked first?

Alternatively, s/where the best performers work/where the best performers run from/