Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment odd narrative (Score 1) 35

I've seen hints of this sort of belief before, and I want to understand it, but it seems so incredibly sheltered and naive that I have trouble believing a large number of people actually hold it.

For starters, your implicit assumption seems to be that "MAGA" == downwardly mobile white folks. That's part of the coalition, yes - but the dominant caste is wealthy suburbanites - we used to call them "white flight" voters. Think car dealership owners and dentists. The kind of people who can afford to fuck up boats at "Trump Yacht Rallies".

The second is that somehow condescension and ridicule somehow uniquely attaches to this segment. Hate to break it to you, but that is most people's normal. It is privileged white folks who are learning what it is like to be treated like everyone else, and are reacting to that.

The third weird thing is an utter failure to notice that these condescending "captains of industry" are all MAGA supporters. Trumpistas who think this way are literally cheering their own subjugation. MAGAts are being led around by the fucking nose. It would be hilarious if they weren't taking the rest of us with them.

Comment Re:Rent-seeking (Score 5, Informative) 412

That design assumed a dispersed network. The networks have gotten increasingly concentrated. If there's only one connection, you can't route around it.

OTOH, SpaceX might reap large increases in business, because they would be the only route that wasn't broken. (I don't think Iran has orbital capability.)

Comment Re:Everyone knows these are bad news right? (Score 1) 60

You're assuming that everyone is one extreme or the other. And not only is this wrong, there aren't only two sides, no matter what the news says.

OTOH, Flock *seems* to be an example of the "benefits of the surveillance state". I.e., we only hear about the generally approved of uses. If you were to believe that those were the only uses, I'd think you a simpleton. And it's impossible for me to make a decision that they're a good thing without knowing what those other uses are.

Comment Jailbreak no longer implies ilicit (Score 1) 40

"Jailbreak" definitely implied something illicit in 1974 when AC/DC performed the song, but in 2026?! No. Jailbreaking is totally legit 99 times out of a hundred.

Jails were once respected because they were a product of society's consensus. When DRM appeared, jails became anyone's restrictions, with no societal inputs and no claims to legitimacy.

If you break out of the county jail or federal prison, that's a whole other thing than breaking out of your neighbor's sex dungeon. And almost all the time we talk about "jailbreaking" now, it's analogous to the neighbor's sex dungeon. Nearly everyone would agree it's legit to leave, and any illicitness is on the part of the captor!

Comment Sorry, it violates Terms of .. what? (Score 2) 40

[I]t's important to note that jailbreaking a Kindle might violate Amazon's terms of service.

Isn't the context here, that there is no service? I suspect that whatever terms the two parties came to agree upon, Amazon is the one who has initiated the violation of those terms, by ceasing to provide service!

Comment Re:Indeed, who cares? (Score 1) 99

It's $10 for one person, but take 1 million people, and it's $10 million

Right, that's why this makes sense for Gmail. The spreadsheet says make the free tier extraction percentage number go up, and they value noncomplying users' time at zero. The math should is different for company-internal email.

The operative question should be, how much do you want to spend on employees sorting email instead of writing code or whatever you hired them to do? Because that's how you're buying your disk storage savings.

Different places have different considerations - as I mentioned above, my employer now clearly values reducing litigation risk over my productivity. In the past at startups, my decision was to give folks huge quotas and treat it like any other capacity management problem for scaling/budgeting.

There has to be some limit, and if someone somehow bounces off of it nobody thinks it unreasonable to tell them to fix it. And anyway there's usually a reason like a misconfigured something that infinitely-spams about whatever it is upset about. Otherwise they can worry about work instead of email management make-work.

Comment Indeed, who cares? (Score 5, Interesting) 99

When I was directly admining systems, I didn't have time to argue with people over a couple dollars worth of storage.

I also didn't want people wasting time worrying about quotas or other artificial limits unless they were abusive. (The dude who wrote something that was authing against LDAP 10s of millions of times a day got a talking-to.)

A lot of people confuse "I can't imagine doing or needing X" with "there is a good reason to deny the ability to do X." Honestly, I think most people are Doing It Wrong, most of the time. So? If they're getting shit done, none of my business until they are making unreasonable demands that impact operations. And 100G of mail is peanuts.

My current complaint is the opposite - I can't keep mail longer than a year now, lest it be discoverable in some potential future lawsuit. I've gotten better at predicting what I'll need to know later, but still miss things I should have saved somewhere, and that absolutely damages my productivity.

Slashdot Top Deals

The meta-Turing test counts a thing as intelligent if it seeks to devise and apply Turing tests to objects of its own creation. -- Lew Mammel, Jr.

Working...