This kind of thing sounds great on personal projects, but doesn't scale. Like many abstractions, frameworks' biggest benefit is (arguably) making it easier for teams to work together.
I'd guess this is less of a concern than the services people are accessing being slow. E.g. even though I've got FTTH, youtube is still sometimes slow to load the front page.
Fortunately youtube and netflix has a good CDN at our major ISP interchange node as we are about 12,000 km from New York so all our traffic goes via undersea cables.
Cultural changes? How would you build those? The government doesn't control the culture. How would you make it unacceptable? Bureaucrats don't have direct control over that. Also, a bunch of "we need"s about the ideal situation don't do much.
The reason the China contained it is because she is an authoritarian state. While that provides certain advantages in this situation, it comes with certain drawbacks: not being able to access many websites, inability to express your political opinion, inability to own a firearm, being tossed in a concentration camp if the government doesn't like you. This isn't a question of leadership, you're asking the government to do things it literally has no power to do, things entirely outside of the constitution.
> Cultural changes? How would you build those? The government doesn't control the culture. How would you make it unacceptable? Bureaucrats don't have direct control over that. Also, a bunch of "we need"s about the ideal situation don't do much.
We have a federal government. A federal government can spend money, including on marketing. Remember WWII propaganda, some of which people can still recite to this day, like "loose lips sink ships"?
A federal government can pass laws that require workplaces to take certain actions (temperature checks for employees, WFH for jobs that are capable of doing so). A federal government can pass regulations requiring public gatherings to take certain security actions such as taking visitors' temperatures with a contactless thermometer. A federal government can spend money to have factories produce a very large number of face masks and contactless thermometers, and can coordinate with states to distribute them to population centers.
> The reason the China contained it is because she is an authoritarian state
Yes, thanks for stating the obvious. If you notice I didn't suggest we restrict travel between states and cities, or that we lock people inside their homes, or that we should register every location that a person goes to so that we can quickly identify who they've been in contact with should they test positive for covid-19. These are the more authoritarian actions that China has taken.
In fact, lacking the authoritarian actions, we need to try even harder at the non-authoritarian stuff. Which we aren't doing.
They really should have given some actual information, i.e. how the information was stored. I want to know what algorithm was used, not how "it was securely stored so people still can't take your money" or some other corporate-speak intended to mitigate the damage.
Copy-paste from another thread, cause it's still relevant.
Urban environments aren't really "nice". For all I hear about the joys of urban living, as espoused by others, I haven't enjoyed it much. Public transportation is crowded and smelly. Fat people take half of my seat (not nice to say, but I'm not sure how else to put it). Things are small, which for a taller guy like me, is pretty tough. As in, every thing is tiny. Living spaces, shops, streets. Streets often have trash strewn on them, and don't smell particularly good. I have to keep one hand on my wallet. Sometimes, hobos get aggressive. Not as much as an issue for me, but I'd hate to be a 4'9" lady. Keeping pets is hard. Cooking food is hard. I didn't have kids, but those I knew had a hard time with them. Things are very expensive. It's loud. There's a lot of traffic. Some times (all winter and some times in summer), it's bad weather for walking. I guess I shouldn't be complaining, since I at least didn't see much in the way of human feces.
This is not to say there aren't up-sides. I like the food, and there are interesting people. It's also much easier to find certain things; for instance, a few major cities still have serious "maker shops" with tons of electronic components. Smaller ones or sub-urban areas often can't accommodate them, as they are in low enough demand that serious density is required.
I like sub-urban living and empty green space. I can hardly blame people for moving out, if it's viable. The above applies differently to different cities; some are better, some are worse, but all have most of these problems in the urban core. Considering how expensive it is to live in a city rather than a suburb (especially if you're talking a similar amount of land), I don't want to pay more for less.
I agree with you in principle one-hundred percent. However, at the time that was written, there was one key difference: entitlements. Once the government started taking on the burden of providing a safety net, we lost the ability to admit every one. This was somewhat mitigated in the twentieth century by the sponsor system, but this is gone now, too.
I wish we could let every one come here and make himself successful, but I don't foresee entitlement spending ever gong any where but down. I don't take the position of limiting immigration for idealistic reasons, but because there is a limit on how many resources we have.
Early compared to what benchmark? You’re treating as axiomatic the idea that your taxes are only “supposed” to be due on tax day, which is not grounded in tax law at all.
DEF CON has a lot of informational talks where research is presented. Going to villages also sometimes gives you the opportunity to join a team and learn new stuff. Research is also presented at black hat (though not necessarily as much, it's more for "suits"). Shmoocon and bsides, too.
I'm not sure if this is more security-related, but many of the top security conferences have lots of useful stuff there.
Because they would have to spend years in court litigating whether or not that was slander. Consumers have also been shown to respond better to positive causes than negative ones, and a non-profit funded by these guys is better equipped to spin it as a positive "working for a better future" type thing than them all running "Amazon bad" ads.
Just think of the press that an ad slamming amazon for that stuff would get. Plus you can avoid slander by either doing a real test or just by not naming amazon and implying it’s them.
Some quick backstory as to why I just posted this: I originally submitted it almost three months ago [0]; it was quickly flagged down as a "conspiracy theory". I don't necessarily agree with everything here, but don't think it's that. I'm posting again in light of rms' recent expulsion from almost everything, because I think the increasing "corporatization" of OSS stuff will lead to him eventually being kicked out. I'm certainly not sure of any of this, but I think recent events make this article particularly pertinent.
Definitely not a conspiracy in the crackpot sense, but one in the "organized subversion" sense. I posted on the Amazon walkout thread as well - software orgs are becoming too focused on politics. Of course some politics is to be expected, FOSS itself is somewhat a politically-motivated movement, but the end goal is apolitical.
Really this deplatforming is getting ridiculous, and the only goal it achieves is dumbing down society by merging all social environments into one so they have less to assess about an individual
