white-flame

The site does NOT directly generate revenue by providing a service to their visitors, nor even by selling space to advertisers. The site generates revenue by selling to 3rd parties intimate access to its visitors without the knowledge or consent of the "average" visitor. It is broken in principle, running afoul of the nature of marketplace regulation and privacy rights.

This is just "the ends justify the means", because the consequences fall on the visitors, not the site owners, advertisers, or data brokers. It's a disgusting, predatory rationalization for offloading the damage while reaping the rewards.

Patreon on its own delivers hundreds of millions of dollars of funding a year. Web ads existed long before individualized tracking, and still are that way in pretty much every other medium (print, billboards, broadcast media, product placement, etc). Independent journalism existed in websites, blogs, pre-monetization youtube, etc as well. Heck, SV investment is available and all about spending money without any real revenue plans anyway. :-P Just this one very particular ad model needs to be ended for everybody, big and small, and the advertising market still has everything else covered. The "big money" sites also still need to monetize somehow (and much more voraciously), and wouldn't be allowed tracking ads, either.

If you can't make money without violating your audience, then you don't get to make money at it, and all scales should be held to the same account if it is genuinely considered an issue of rights.

It has nothing to do with being coercive, or any such specific facet of any implementation of rights violation. It's about being a rights violation, full stop.

Regarding options, in the current model it is generally unknown to the user what is happening with their seemingly private, personal, and "lock icon" encrypted activities on a site. While some here might consider it a "fair exchange" to give up PII in exchange for website services, the vast majority do not understand or even perceive that, and it is not an informed exchange at all. It violates the user, both in the nature of the exchange and in the privacy implications. It is a type of interaction that should rightly be barred in the absence of understanding and explicit, intentional consent.

The idea that a site should automatically generate revenue simply for existing, especially when it's relying on unwitting invasion of visitors' privacy in an increasingly illegal manner, is ridiculous at best; malicious and predatory at worst.

Slavery and child labor were also just "part of the business model".

Some business models are predatory societal negatives and should be done away with at a government level of respecting individual rights. Behind-the-scenes tracking and data brokering are in that class.

Does placing an order on a website, then sending a check in the mail still count as e-commerce?

While SICP is certainly a great book, more direct to the topic would be a different classic:

Norvig's Paradigms of AI Programming is purely about creating logic & unification systems in Lisp, and the foundation of many codebases still in use today.

https://github.com/norvig/paip-lisp

and shot up after this layoff reporting.

Tangential, but is the spelling "buss rail" used in any widespread sense? Buss is affection, bus is shared transport.

> If your boss is an asshole and the company doesn't give a single lonely shit you don't owe it "common decency".

The important word here is "common". Precisely and pedantically, if you think it's only earned by some, then decency is uncommon for you.

I love watching crackpot conspiracy videos on YouTube, especially flat earth & moon landing denier stuff. Beyond just the curiosity to dissect their weird contrived explanations, there's tons of interesting scientific & historical context to be learned from the counterpoint experiments and such. I hope it will still be generally available & in the sidebar if you're already watching such content.

Also, generally speaking, you really should block youtube cookies. The recommender doesn't seem to track your history then, and the entire experience is FAR better, simply recommending associations from that single video, instead of always trying to railroad you back into where you've historically spent more time.

Yes, I thought maybe this would be about a speedrunner for the Hitman games.

Bulk used Lego sells pretty consistently around $10/lb. Certainly less than retail, but never un-sellable. Of course, selling piece-by-piece on Bricklink will net more, for more work.

Especially when compared to pure "collectibles" that are past their peak, they're much more regular in value and always sell.

However, it is quite easy to pick up two standard wall warts of the right amperages, and reuse the old PSU's cable.

AWS Lambda already solves #1 by simply reusing the existing language instantiation across calls, as far as I can tell. That pretty much percolates out to solving most of the other complaints that this document muses about.

But the larger issue is that not all systems are the same. They're not designed the same, don't deal with data in the same way, don't have the same performance bottlenecks, etc. If the author got their pet "One True Runtime", especially with a specific encompassing model of data interchange and orchestration, it'd be perfect for them, but have impedance mismatches with lots of other projects. If the """Cloud 3.0®™©""" standardized on such a model, it'd be too overfit compared to general use we have today.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. That compatibility information is what needs to be captured, and is outside any future preference that the program was originally built to.

Instead, most automatic systems just blindly say "this version number is newer, so use that" and break everything. Programs were built to a specific version which worked, and only those versions compatible to that specific version should be used.

> When building a project against a framework...

That still implies active maintenance, ie doing new builds.

If it's assumed to work with the "latest version", but then breaks in the future, it is a decision outside of the build itself as to which version of the library it should link up with.

The only thing that should be baked into the software is which specific version of the dynamic lib it was compatible with, then externally the system can determine which most-recent version of the library is still compatible.

Never, because "perfect" in terms of entertainment, "wow" factor, and endearment is a moving target and a product of the times. If things get overplayed, they get stale.

So we constantly get new songs that reuse the same familiarity in different ways, but not literally the same replayed song.

I think the two terms used by you and the parent don't always overlap neatly: "your family" and "those you love"

Many millions of people (or more) have the same lucky factors that you list, and don't have the same success. Hence, those might not have been the most critical factors.

This isn't necessarily different for game development, but it's different for Game Boy scale hardware, where there is no scheduler/kernel/OS/anything. You manually have to halt the hardware if you don't want the CPU to spin, and busy-loops were common on home computers & mains-powered consoles of the same era.

Sure, but just because we relate to them more doesn't affect the ethics of killing other things that are just as alive but are simply less relatable. This has been a strong theme in the progression of civilization.

Ending life to feed our own is how much of nature works, and we have to deal with being a part of that in our ethical thinking, regardless of how associated we are with the life we're ending.

It's simply something to think about: Most people are as flippant about ending the life of a plant, as some are about ending the life of an animal (or various different species of animal, including fish & insects).

If you're not cooking, but are concerned about health, how are you eating that you somehow escape vegetables?

The thing is, "healthy" is often associated with freshly prepared foods. The non-cooking-yourself option for (hopefully) freshly prepared food would be reasonable usually sit-down restaurants, most of which offer plenty of vegetables because they're cheaper than the main course. And of course, delivery is an option.

(Obviously, "freshly prepared" as framed in opposition to pre-prepared with additives, handling, and ingredient selection focused more on the taste & texture surviving longer term delivery and storage.)

Animal cruelty laws also police an active precursor behavior that might easily turn into human cruelty, which is a justification that really has nothing to do with the animals themselves.

Consider that killing a living thing to eat its body is not unique to "meat", nor is raising it in a controlled environment for the purpose of consumption. Fish (as is sometimes classified separately) and vegetables are living things raised and killed for consumption of their bodies as well.

I believe reconciling all of these as ethically equal (including raising the ethical weight of killing a plant as equal to an animal) is important for sanely dealing with our natural ecosystem of food. The "aliveness" of plants is continually researched and shown in a positive light, and it's hard to draw a clear and reasonable line between "life that is acceptable to eat" and "life that is not acceptable to eat".

When you look at the spectrum of life and how ethically impactful killing it for food is, it tends to follow anthropomorphism and social compatibility with humans, which doesn't seem objective enough to be pursued for widely-accepted ethics, but merely for local cultural acceptability.

> eye-catching design

> To design IBM Q System One, IBM assembled a world-class team of industrial designers, architects, and manufacturers

> ...industrial and interior design studios...

> ...manufacturer of high-end museum display cases...

They are absolutely talking about the aesthetic housing design, not the actual quantum engineering designs. About the closest they get in the Design section is talking about it being airtight and accessible for maintenance.

The omission is that it's simply recursive.

You might add the digits up to 36, whose digits then add up to 9. Simply reapply to the sum if the sum has more than 1 digit, and you'll still arrive at 9.

Not really least-bad, probably just most unique. Almost every other style stops and resets after someone hits the ground, so BJJ went where the others didn't.

It was the same as Ronda Rousey dominating women's matches when that section of the UFC started up. It doesn't mean that Judo is "better" than the other styles, the other competitors simply didn't know what to do with it, and now they do.

It certainly has parallels to trendy new software engineering styles "dominating" the field, though I'm not sure they lead to any more real "victories" compared to actual combat. Just because the time runs out on a software project doesn't mean that anybody actually won.

Thinking of a more inquisitive/questioning head tilt, usually it also involves the chin going down, so I'd disagree.

Games should also be challenging, and there can be many ways in which "challenging" can manifest.

Drakengard (the first of the series) was written in response to the flippant way many games are framed: You usually score higher the more enemies you kill. Yoko Taro thought that only an insane person would actually think that way.

So he created a game where the main character is literally broken and insane, killing huge swaths of enemies in a continually escalating apocalypse beyond his control. Throw in additional party members who are also broken and insane, and some point of view personalities commenting on how utterly horrible everything is, and on if the player is as insane as the character is.

It's not a great game and quite dated, but definitely has a message to explore which makes traversing the horrible contexts worth it. He went on to make Drakengard 3 and the related NieR games as well.