Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | 47282847's commentslogin

> Until GDPR web professionals fought tooth and nail to keep modal dialogs out of web applications, mostly successfully.

Like the comment above rightfully states, GDPR does not require banners at all. It’s up to the site to decide if they want to (ab)use collected data for other purposes than what is required. If it was the goal of “web professionals” to avoid modals like you say, it could perfectly well be achieved also today. Also, don’t you remember all the popup dialogs and modal ads and “in your face subscribe to our newsletter before you can even see our content” that sites had, well before GDPR? So many that browsers had to basically disable popups? So much for “tooth and nail”.

None of the sites I’ve ever built require any cookie banners. Never have. I would refuse to build something that does, because the use cases that require them are unethical, unnecessary, and a cancer for society. Very simple.


What about AWSALB? Google Analytics? I'll agree I don't like the "third-party" aspect of GA but users of the most rudimentary product of that sort want to know how many unique visitors that got in various time intervals.

How so?

He has very selective skepticism. It always applies when talking about US, Israel, and others on his list of bad guys, but is mysteriously dropped when discussing whether e.g. Khmer Rouge are "democratic" or whether Russian invasion of Ukraine was "provoked" by US.

He has double standards and cherry-picks for everything. He selects sources, dishonestly. Quotes people out of context, makes wrong moral equivalences.

Any tyrant or autocrat who opposes America is somehow not that bad. For example: The Cambodian Genocide by Khmer Rouge in 1970s were exaggerated by "Western propaganda", The Srebrenica Massacre, some killings but not genocide.

Russia. He argues that the U.S. "provoked" Russia by expanding NATO eastward. Russian attack against Ukraine was American fault. In his logic superpower like Russia should having a "neutral" buffer zone is a legitimate security concern. Smaller European countries can't have their own sovereignty. They must be either US puppets or part of reasonable Russian sphere of influence. At the time he is against US sphere of influence in the South America.

You must also have noticed that he never engages his critics honestly. He just dismisses them as "elite propaganda".


he's a sophist. not terrible like Jordan Peterson, et al. but he is a sophist 100%

  Noam Chomsky, the man who has spent years analyzing propaganda, is himself a propagandist. Whatever one thinks of Chomsky in general, whatever one thinks of his theories of media manipulation and the mechanisms of state power, Chomsky's work with regard to Cambodia has been marred by omissions, dubious statistics, and, in some cases, outright misrepresentations. On top of this, Chomsky continues to deny that he was wrong about Cambodia. He responds to criticisms by misrepresenting his own positions, misrepresenting his critics' positions, and describing his detractors as morally lower than "neo-Nazis and neo-Stalinists."
From the intro of a lengthy examination of Chomsky on Cambodia: https://www.mekong.net/cambodia/chomsky.htm

I am not a fan of any person as idol or hero, we are all children of the same flesh, but I am a fan of Chomskys work and thought processes. But even if you disagree on his positions, any involvement in Epsteins narcissistic games just don’t fit his life story and his writings at all, whereas it makes perfect sense to me that he and his wife fell for it and really assumed good faith. Which is, ultimately, at the core of his belief system and transpires from all his writing. I did in the past, until I got hit hard by how cruel and dark some people can be who I considered to be close friends. So, overall, I totally believe them, I wish them all the best to recover, from deep in my heart, and I am certain they will learn a hard lesson from this, and will try to make up for their mistake of putting too much trust in other people’s hands. Which is sad but the reality of the broken state of humans who have survived unspeakable cruelty in their childhood and have not received the necessary support to process it. Like Epstein and Trump, to only name two.

(For transparency: I met Chomsky twice.)


> I've no idea which movies are a similar anthem for 2000s/2010s hackers. Let me know.

I really like Halt And Catch Fire but it doesn’t count since it also depicts the 80s. So, since Mr. Robot already got its mention, how about Silicon Valley? ;-)


Huh? Last I looked, roads are paid for by the general public, not (car) road users?

You need to run it on MacOS if you want it to interact with iMessages and such. And people are likely not proficient enough to set up and connect everything without GUI.

Oh, so, it's just a way to have it parse iMessages when the laptop is off, basically? (I'm trying to think of special mac only services that the AI bot will check, but I can only come up with iMessages).

EU technically doesn’t require government-issued ID to fly either. They often don’t check for ID at all, and in cases where they do, legally any card with your name and photo on it would work for this „identification“. EU generally doesn’t legally require you to carry ID - but they can and will hassle you more and more if you don’t.

“Burning wood at home produces more pollution than road traffic” https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjdne9ke0m1o

“Residential wood-burning is the biggest source of particulate matter and soot/black carbon in Europe” https://www.fern.org/publications-insight/latest-evidence-on...

“domestic wood-burning is the largest source of particulate pollution in the UK. Only 8% of the UK’s homes burn wood, but this accounts for around 21% of the total PM2.5 emissions, whereas all traffic on the UK roads produces 13%” https://medium.com/the-new-climate/why-the-environmental-mov...


[flagged]


> I breathe in smoke every day through the copious amount of weed I smoke

It shows.


Yes clearly your anecdote is irrefutable proof.

[flagged]


You’re the one claiming smoking cigarettes don’t give lung cancer and it’s all a big conspiracy to mess with you.

So the onus in on you to show that smoking cigarettes doesn’t cause lung cancer despite the overwhelming amount t of scientific evidence that it does.


[flagged]


Do you really think your aggressive behavior will convince anyone that you’re fine and healthy and it’s just everybody else that isn’t?

presuming your suggestion is correct (that forum goers are indistinguishable from walking echo chambers) , wouldnt screaming at forum goers just end up with a scream being returned right at you ?

Allergies only show when there is something to cause the irritation. Without irritant no allergy.

I honestly don’t know what is political about saving resources and our planet. The details on how to do it are potentially politics, but that’s not what the SDGs are about.

It's a 42 day old account that complains about "UN ideology". Just flag and move on.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: