cronjobber

6 ms·

1.
by cronjobber 9y ago
I stand corrected, RFC 4038 seems to be what I was looking for. But it seems to be a late addition, and OS support is optional. If developers think moving their apps to IPv6 is too complicated, I can't fault them.
2.
by cronjobber 9y ago
IPv6 could have done three things. First, embed the "legacy" address space. Second, have legacy-to-legacy connections use v4 on the wire. Third, strongly encourage existing user-maintained configuration (config file formats etc.)
3.
by cronjobber 9y ago
It sucks at being compatible with ipv4. The "billion dollar mistake" :-) It also sucks at having software/hardware stacks nearly as well debugged as those for ipv4, which means running ipv6 at all is a security risk. Nobody w
4.
by cronjobber 9y ago
"We" don't have to move to ipv6, even if "they" have to. The internet can plausibly support both protocols forever.
5.
by cronjobber 9y ago
From the article: "It’s not like they’re bumping it by a buck and making a little bit more money. They are really tanking sales and it kind of has a ripple effect to us, being a small company trying to do demand planning" The re
6.
by cronjobber 9y ago
For entertainment purposes only: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4042194/Facebook-fac...
7.
by cronjobber 9y ago
Google introduced and normalized the spyware/adware business model. Nothing but fawning adoration from programmers. Microsoft copied the model for operating systems. Token resistance from programmers. Kite copies the model for programm
8.
by cronjobber 9y ago
> Economics and politics haven't caught up with this yet. That seems unlikely. Political and economic leadership throughout the "White West" has been subsidizing and expanding the non-productive underclass for decades.
9.
by cronjobber 9y ago
> but what solution do you have? It isn't easy, but as long as nation states are plausibly more powerful than Google, we—humanity—can hope. Use antitrust to inhibit moves like the one under discussion. Use privacy legislation to plu
10.
by cronjobber 9y ago
You are wrong, like most homeopathy critics. Have you ever observed typical homeopathy users—middle to upper-middle class mothers of young children—in their natural habitat? I have. They're all "true believers" in that they r
11.
Technologies which did not live up to the hype(scottlocklin.wordpress.com)
3 points by cronjobber 9y ago|0 comments
12.
by cronjobber 9y ago
Most of your comments would be vastly improved by omitting the reams of repl output.
13.
by cronjobber 9y ago
Because my reading of the article is that Google doesn't restrict the policy to Google ads. > publishers have to also be responsible for any ad networks or affiliates they have on their site which could use these methods That may or
14.
by cronjobber 9y ago
Antitrust regulators should look into this one. EDIT: ...because the policy punishes advertisers use of other advertising providers.
15.
by cronjobber 9y ago
True. Sadly. Alas, while Russian (and Chinese) general disinterest in f'ing with you does help, their equally developed general disinterest in your well-being means they might have incentive to sell or trade with entities more...
16.
by cronjobber 9y ago
> What do you think? I have no way of knowing how such changes would affect the wider installed base of FSet. All I can tell you is what I'd prefer myself. I wouldn't mind, and actually prefer, if the default SEQ would signal a
17.
by cronjobber 9y ago
You are right, the 1960 paper describes a language that is a pure functional language. I think it even was the first published pure functional language (pointers to earlier work welcome, of course).
18.
by cronjobber 9y ago
Does Clojure predate FSet? If you hadn't written "now" here, I'd have guessed otherwise. My only complaint about FSet would be map default values; not necessarily the fact they exist, but (1) when using defaults, that tw
19.
by cronjobber 9y ago
Dupe, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14697330
20.
by cronjobber 9y ago
Incremental recompilation isn't fast enough to wait for between keystrokes, so in-process servers would run in their own thread. Along with accounting for arbitrarily incompatible language runtimes and memory management schemes, wouldn
21.
by cronjobber 9y ago
> Some population groups are surviving hybrids but the percentage is very small The pure genotypes were obviously out-competed, surviving Europeans and (East?) Asians are descendants of hybrids. Aside 1: > Asian is much less AFAIK, it
22.
by cronjobber 9y ago
Timing. Where do you think G slots in the timeline, relative to the Latin classics?
23.
by cronjobber 9y ago
How's wot? As far as I have been informed, [1] surviving Europeans/Asians are Neanderthalized (hybrids), and [2] no pure Neanderthals are living today.
24.
by cronjobber 9y ago
And yet Neanderthalized hybrids are the only known survivors coming out of whatever happened between those species.
25.
by cronjobber 9y ago
> But we need a common API ... so that people can use their favourite tools Yup, that's exactly what made the internet great in the good old days. But how do you monetize users who get to use their favoirite tools instead of your
26.
by cronjobber 9y ago
Sure, G wasn't "originally" part of the Latin alphabet—until they invented that letter.
27.
by cronjobber 9y ago
For a little language I designed, I decided that keeping the evolutionary pathway open means introducing new keywords once in a while. But we don't want to break existing code; code is expensive. Valuable. We don't want to break
28.
by cronjobber 9y ago
If humans had parasites that would encourage them to be altruists against their interest and for the sole benefit of their parasites—which is of course implausible and hypothetical and absolutely not even possible—would they make us downv
29.
by cronjobber 9y ago
I'll take this cum cranulo salis.
30.
by cronjobber 9y ago
Sure about the G?

More ›