So when you say "literally ALL" - taking care to capitalize "ALL", mind you - you really me "some", right? Because you yourself said that "Toyota and a couple of other companies" weren't doing it. I'm curious to learn who those other companies are, because after your use of "literally ALL", I don't know if "a couple" to you means "a few" or "most".

I'm not quite sure where that applies in this analogy. Is Apple preventing Epic from selling Fortnight elsewhere? Isn't Fortnight available on a wide range of platforms, including Android?

Yes, Ford should be able to stipulate that they are going to take a 30% cut of any Michelin tires that are sold in Ford's stores. Michelin can (and should) sell their tires elsewhere, and some of those stores will probably take less of the revenue. If Michelin feels that it isn't profitable to sell tires in Ford's stores, they should stop doing that.

During an internship, I was tasked with testing a device driver for a tape library. There were a set of commands that you would enter and it would trigger the little tape robot to perform some task, or data would be written/read to tape. One of the commands involved entering some text. Grasping for something to enter, on a whim I typed in "segmentation fault". The code crashed.

Of course, the issue was actually that the developer had assumed that the text entered wouldn't exceed eight characters, but I always get a good laugh when I think back on that.

I can trot out my usual question: is this gonna change how anyone votes? Seriously, is it?

I'm relieved that you trotted it out. With many of us having a financial incentive to create a political divide on what has historically been more of a technical issue, it's heartening to know that we have such a reliable trope. "Is ____ opinion on ____ going to change how anyone votes?" is flexible enough that we can use it on a range of issues. Net neutrality, race, equality, climate change, livable wage... it doesn't even matter what side of the divide you're paid to push. Just invoke that question and you can dismiss the entire subject for enough of the readers to turn the tide.

I read the summary and came in to make similar criticism to pretty much all of the comments I've seen so far. I mean, white on white on white? It seems ridiculous.

But then I looked at the before and after screenshots and I have to say... the after seems much more straight forward. Having dealt with a number of email apps, the after looks simply like a list of emails. The before looks... weird. The red portions are super exaggerated. It's not bad by any means, but the red seems like overkill to draw attention to the search and the new email areas. The new design actually makes it much more clear that it is a search area.

I'm no fan of redesign for redesign sake, and I'm definitely sensitive to changes in any website/app that I rely on. Still, this one seems like an improvement despite how it's positioned in the summary.

But then you wouldn't need to also carry a knife!

Interesting points.
1. A government worker shouldn't have a high-end luxury SUV.
2. Given that the woman was stressed, she should have obviously sold the high-end luxury SUV - despite the fact that she hadn't missed a pay check.
3. If you're going to own something expensive, you had better have enough money that the prospect of being out of a job doesn't make you stressed enough to bring it up during smalltalk.
4. Getting a car detailed is a wasteful thing for a government worker to do. That's better reserved for other people who were at the full service car wash, like you.
5. You're aware of actual cases where government workers watched porn in the office and only got a slap on the wrist.

The issue that they seem to be trying to address is to expose groups that are coordinating an agenda under the guise of seemingly unrelated actors. This doesn't seem to be about saying "we don't like what Group A is saying". Rather, it seems to be targeting "Group A is pretending to be Group B through Z". This isn't necessarily about news either. The examples that have been published tend to be false flags. A group pretending to be a particular organization pushing a particular message, holding a rally, or doing something outrageous. In some examples, a single group is pretending to be two conflicting organizations, with the impersonation attempting to create divide between the two.

This doesn't need to be about foreign actors either. If political parties, advertisers, businesses, or even lone wolves are engaging in intentional deception in the origin of messages, that seems worthwhile to at least publicize.

Your post seems to suggest that people can only choose a single issue to focus on, rather than targeting multiple issues. If someone were championing vaccines to prevent the flu, would you write a similar long post using your data to point out that accidents and suicides cause far more deaths than influenza?

I'm not throwing my hat into this whole gun control debate, but I just don't understand what sort of point you're trying to make with your post.

I'm not expecting the cost of my internet to go up or the general speed to change. The ISP has no reason to raise that cost or to limit my speed simply due to the change in rules. The price increase and speed change that I'm worried about is for the services that I consume via the internet - Netflix, Youtube, Amazon, Hulu, AppleTV rentals, etc. What I'm curious to see is: 1. Does the price of services that I'm using go up? 2. Do these services maintain a similar quality of service as they do today? Will I be able to rent a movie via AppleTV and have it still be instantly watchable? Will Netflix and Hulu still stream at a watchable rate?

As you say, time will tell. Some of these effects may be difficult to measure for the layman though. The speed test against a "speed test" site probably doesn't change. Raised cost for a watchable Amazon Prime streaming video might be spread across the general cost of goods from Amazon.

98% slashdot, 2% everything else.

Is the 2% when we actually click the link to RTF article?

Sure, I can somewhat sympathize with him - right up until the point when he wrote the letter. That was the point when he became an active player in bringing a large swath of his coworkers down.

I mean, is this guy's experience that different from any of ours? We're mostly comp sci or engineering majors of some sort. Sure, being a CS major wasn't outlandishly cool, but really, was there a major at your school that was really considered cool? Yeah, a lot of people may have flocked to psychology or business, but I wouldn't say that exactly made it cool.

But, sure, I'll give you that society doesn't exactly hold IT-related interests on a platter. But what does that mean really? Some jokes in movies and TV shows about nerds? Maybe women don't flock to us? How many times do you really experience an active outward action where someone belittled you for being in CS/engineering? A few jerks here and there? Those are the people he should be mad at - the people who actively picked on him and made him supposedly worthy of our compassion.

And now, he is one of them. He is the active voice who told his female coworkers that they couldn't cut it. How is this different than the jock who shouts "nerd" at a group of CS students eating lunch? Yeah, he isn't the first guy who made them feel like that and he won't be the last, but he is the guy who did it.

So, we have an individual who took it upon themselves to actively strike out at others, and they're being called out for it. Good. If some jock made the mistake of writing a manifesto that CS majors are pansies, I'd hope they'd get the same.

Wait, we need the hunting, right? We've all heard that hunting is necessary for a healthy population. Surely someone has been hunting at Chernobyl in order for the animals to better off.

Check out https://soylentnews.org/ if you are looking for a new place. It reminds me of /. from 10 years ago, in particular the GUI and interactions. I currently find it marginally useful, as there aren't nearly as many comments on stories as there are here, but hopefully that will change over time if the community grows.