dmatech

7 ms·

1.
by dmatech 10mo ago
https://dns.he.net/ does. Each record can have its own secret. You can also use this for things like A records to do dynamic DNS.
2.
by dmatech 10mo ago
Primarily because it encourages people to keep doing this performative stuff, think they're actually helping people, and take resources away from more meaningful work. By resisting these efforts, I'm preventing what would likely
3.
by dmatech 1y ago
In theory, the actual individuals are still bound by state law, but the supremacy clause allows federal laws made in pursuance of the US Constitution to preempt those state laws. Of course, these laws still need to be "necessary and p
4.
by dmatech 1y ago
There's some really interesting stuff about how that works here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/56392846/7077511
5.
by dmatech 1y ago
This is why it's absolutely essential to always be aware of which types are value types in the .NET type system. Attempts by either users or the designers to conflate or unify them are ill-conceived. The nullability semantics could h
6.
by dmatech 1y ago
Providing a platform for defamation and other tortious speech is generally legally protected under §230. They still have to respond to court orders and DMCA requests, though. This is how sites like Kiwi Farms remain online. That said, co
7.
by dmatech 1y ago
Are there any POSIX or ISO guarantees on "FILE"? I think it's safe to assume that it isn't an incomplete type, but all functions that use it operate on pointers anyway. Storing a copy of a "FILE" object mig
8.
by dmatech 1y ago
The amusing thing is that even today, there's a "blink" method on JavaScript strings. It's totally useless today, but it's still there for whatever reason. In fact, they don't even HTML escape the argument, s
9.
by dmatech 1y ago
Windows actually created a new process type for this: Pico processes[1]. This allows WSL1 to perform quite a bit better than Cygwin on something like Windows XP. 1. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/archive/blogs&
10.
by dmatech 2y ago
The consequences for following an illegal order include being sued, being held in contempt of court, or being criminally prosecuted by a subsequent administration. They don't have the same immunity that presidents do because they don&
11.
by dmatech 2y ago
In the USA, both are true. Civil servants can (and should) refuse to follow an order they think is unconstitutional, illegal, or simply unwise. But this won't stop them from being fired for insubordination. I don't think the co
12.
by dmatech 2y ago
It allows links to bsky and Mastodon posts, but it doesn't auto-summarize bsky posts at the moment.
13.
by dmatech 2y ago
Yep. It's probably rooted in our psychology as primates. I'm not saying this is good, but psychology is often ugly. Men want to compete for status against other men. If women are present, it's not quite seen as a venue for
14.
by dmatech 2y ago
Ordinarily I'd agree, but I don't think these degrees are being marketed as vocational credentials like you'd see at a vocational school. If you get one of the more questionable humanities degrees and expect it to get you a
15.
by dmatech 2y ago
T&S departments generally exist for one reason: to manage reputational risk. This sometimes involves legal risk, but it usually just means preventing relentless hit pieces about your company enabling something portrayed as horrible. T
16.
by dmatech 2y ago
Security features should be free or a lot cheaper. But compliance? Heck no. Customers with compliance requirements are the ones with some group demanding they prove that they're adhering to numerous (sometimes contradictory) policie
17.
by dmatech 3y ago
The major questions doctrine itself is a relaxation of strict separation of powers. Normally there is strict separation between lawmaking, judicial functions, and enforcement. MQD at least allows the "minor questions" to be exce
18.
by dmatech 3y ago
No, but it's perfectly fine for lawmakers to make laws setting these standards (ideally with the input of experts). That's how we get local building codes. The ultimate power to make policy choices should be made by lawmakers who
19.
by dmatech 3y ago
Open plans have visual and auditory distractions. Cubicles with decent walls at least eliminate the visual distractions. On the other hand, glass-walled offices might have decent soundproofing but have the distraction of people constantly
20.
by dmatech 3y ago
They don't necessarily need to be big offices. It's just that corporations generally do seating based on seniority and status, not need. They have tiny cubes for worker bees and giant private offices for the queens. Even small o
21.
by dmatech 3y ago
Nobody is going to opt in to having their data used for advertising in exchange for nothing at all. It will eventually be held that it's abusive to even give people that option. So the obvious solution would be to take away the optio
22.
by dmatech 3y ago
I'd argue that Facebook itself is protected 1A speech (as are the recommendations of the YouTube algorithm). It's not a consumer product, and it's not a defective one. Parents have parental controls, and they should educate
23.
by dmatech 3y ago
It's someone else's fault. It's even their problem. But it's still your problem too so long as it affects your business.
24.
by dmatech 3y ago
You could, but now you have three addresses per node instead of one. Plus, the mechanisms for assigning those addresses are weird compared to DHCP and static assignment. I get that it facilitates packets being routed reliably, but some of
25.
by dmatech 3y ago
That's why I beg UI designers to avoid that color combination. It's very difficult for me to read without getting eyestrain. Here's another example that you can try at full size with both eyes open: https://twitt
26.
by dmatech 3y ago
I've personally never had trouble going to a restaurant or other place with restrooms for customers, but I'm sure things are very different in places known for people who are homeless, drug-addicted, mentally ill, or criminals. If
27.
by dmatech 3y ago
Americans are a peculiar people. You might save a few lives in the short term by censoring ideas that cause harm (which are usually legally protected even if they're false). The problem arises once people get wind of the fact that th
28.
by dmatech 3y ago
It's an interesting edge case. It's pretty clearly completely legal in the USA, though the content is grossly offensive. Some of the individual posts are almost certainly defamatory, but §230 shields the site itself from that li
29.
by dmatech 3y ago
This is actually completely legal in the USA. It might be illegal if you are doing it with the stated intention of facilitating targeted harassment, but just posting personal information isn't a crime. If it were, the media would b
30.
by dmatech 3y ago
It would be better to call a lawyer or the police. There's no AUP or TOS for the entire internet (aside from stuff that endangers the network itself), and I'm strongly opposed to any efforts to create one.

More ›