intergalplan

6 ms·

1.
by intergalplan 5y ago
> Specifically, how would a protocol prevent motivated companies from tracking your personal information? They could still try! But you'd have options. Take email, for example. I cannot imagine something like that coming into exis
2.
by intergalplan 5y ago
Look up what the Apple's tracking-prevention policy prevents for users that don't opt-in to tracking. You cannot ban generating device or user identifiers with OS permissions alone. Prevent using the built-in ones, sure, but fin
3.
by intergalplan 5y ago
Usenet, email, http, XMPP, IRC, et c. Yes, just like those. In combination, that bunch is already not too far off. The trouble is that anything trying to do that is competing with "free" spyvertising services, which have no ince
4.
by intergalplan 5y ago
Notably, however, a competitor need not target the same level of profitability. Now, whether asking users to pay for a social network at all is a viable business model, is another question.
5.
by intergalplan 5y ago
You can't realistically keep apps from tracking users without permission unless you're rejecting apps that are discovered to be doing that. If they have network access, they can track. The behavior is too abstract to be handled
6.
by intergalplan 5y ago
I've always taken Zuck's infamous "dumb fucks" comment to come from a place of astonishment, more than malice. Posting tons of private info under your own name online was strongly against Web norms at the time, but all
7.
by intergalplan 5y ago
"Social" should be an Internet protocol. The only reason it's not is that we basically stopped making protocols (well, ones that gain any meaningful traction, anyway—I'm aware there are some lightly-used efforts at socia
8.
by intergalplan 5y ago
A really good point, and all the more reason to make developer-visible async behavior something the developer has to to ask for , even if the call is in fact async under the hood and might let, say, code handling another request run while
9.
by intergalplan 5y ago
It's bigger than that: iOS is big enough that Facebook charging on that platform would be an existential threat to the company. How? It opens up the perfect opportunity for some competitor burning VC cash to swoop in and grab a ton o
10.
by intergalplan 5y ago
IMO it was always a fundamental mistake to force the programmer to deal with the event loop by default. Run async in the background, but present as sync to the developer unless otherwise requested, would have been a much saner design. Unles
11.
by intergalplan 5y ago
The notion that people making $350K are having a particularly rough time is nuts . As for inflation, it's threatening to price people under your $150k/yr cut-off for "hardship" out of decent housing even in mediocre cit
12.
by intergalplan 5y ago
Sure looks like capital chasing returns in the face of weak—or at least insufficient, for the amount of capital available—demand.
13.
by intergalplan 5y ago
Why would it be? A lot of JS in the wild favors putting everything in objects (maybe not explicitly, but they end up doing it a lot anyway) so gets away with a lot of "const" use that still lets them mutate the values of those obj
14.
by intergalplan 5y ago
3% accidentally hit the wrong thing but didn't bother to fix it. The other 1% is developers who need to be able to test ad tracking in their apps.
15.
by intergalplan 5y ago
The work seemed to pointedly avoid micromanaging, by instead finding out how to open up the correct pathways between cells in a region and instruct them to become something else. No need to say "OK, these cells need to become a ret
16.
by intergalplan 5y ago
> The mechanisms in the body that grew out your more complicated macro qualities are finely tuned to do all of it at once. Maybe we could micromanage it ourselves, but the actual body doesn't know how to do it itself. The linked vid
17.
by intergalplan 5y ago
t͡ʃ, t͡ɕ, ʈ͡ʂ all sound so close to my poor ear that I'd struggle to articulate the difference. They sound like exactly the same thing at slightly different speeds.
18.
by intergalplan 5y ago
Gmail's so bad now that I only use "classic HTML" Gmail in the browser, and native clients (Apple's Mail, for example). I have no idea how they managed to make a relatively simple "web app" so huge and heavy.
19.
by intergalplan 5y ago
But you don't need to run a giant spying system to make that happen, so the companies whose moat is their giant spying system don't want to even try that. They also happen to have all the users/eyeballs (they need them for
20.
by intergalplan 5y ago
The collection is per se harmful as long as warrants exist. Beyond that, it's an open secret (as in: it's been mentioned several times in available documents, but never deliberately disclosed or extensively discussed publicly, s
21.
by intergalplan 5y ago
Time dealing with our shitty medical billing system is a huge hidden cost of it. I'm also not sure how well accountings of US healthcare costs factor in things like the hours HR folks spend negotiating rates, or government folks in a
22.
by intergalplan 5y ago
From what I've seen there are about four kinds of approaches to Agile, in the wild: 1) "We love agile! We have coaches and everything!" (terrible) 2) "We're agile-ish." (we have performative, hellish standups t
23.
by intergalplan 5y ago
For me, the question becomes—if we must write applications to one target that's going to run on a server anyway—why oh why must it be web tech? The whole appeal of applications (not documents) in the browser was that they were (kinda,
24.
by intergalplan 5y ago
Being actually-correct about one's historical analogies and still making them work (or even finding that they don't! Gasp!) is harder than repeating "common knowledge" tales or fudging things to fit your narrative while
25.
by intergalplan 5y ago
Exactly. The tech is farcical (surely even a proponent of them can see that?) but that's not really Mighty's fault. It's bad because their strongest viable business plays seem to all involve leveraging their access to peo
26.
by intergalplan 5y ago
> This product will likely starts as a corporate malware but once the beta is over and their tech is really working at scale (more difficult than you might think) they'll probably give it for free or very cheap. So you think it is
27.
by intergalplan 5y ago
I have trouble seeing how it's going to find a sustainable market except as business spyware/leak-prevention. Which is yet another reason I'm not a fan of the idea. In that capacity it may actually manage to survive and e
28.
by intergalplan 5y ago
Yes! That is definitely a big step in the right direction. It's usually enough to remove at least some of the JS burden on forms. I'm not sure how widespread its use is in practice, though.
29.
by intergalplan 5y ago
TL;DR: 1) Not really, no (Napoleonic and Seven Years' have decent claims to being about as global) But: 2) It's fair to dub it, at least, a World War, if anything is.
30.
by intergalplan 5y ago
Business users looooove drag and drop. I've seen products burn a stupid amount of money to have it, and decision-makers insisting it was a must-have no matter the cost in time and ongoing overhead in time & bugs for everydamnthing

More ›