"Pity the lonely, unloved Facebook network admin"
Pity? Unloved? No, we applaud and love him or her and wish the rest of them would follow suit.
Which is pretty well the point being made a couple of paragraphs above.
40432 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
There's a lot to be said for making PC casings out of plastic or aluminium.
Just a thought - are fridge magnets all or predominantly magnetised with the same orientation? If they're random or better still each ha two poles with opposite orientation (like a horseshoe magnet) then the net field on the other side of the cover should be low to nil.
"Cloudflare and their fans like to use analogies like postal service, road builders, and power companies. Illegal stuff happens and it's nobody's fault."
It very obviously is somebody's fault. It's the fault of those who post the stuff to the website. However the plaintiff's lawyers will argue (to the plaintiff) that the most they can be sued for is pennies because that's all they have but here's a big corporation, Cloudflare. They have money. The fact that Cloudflare is simply, blindly passing 1s and 0s along, just like the ISPs or anyone else in the transmission chain is not made obvious to the plaintiffs until they go to court. They lose but no doubt their lawyers still get paid.
The best way of stopping it would probably be to send cease and desist letters to the hosting companies. That would give them the option of suing if the offending material isn't taken down but unless the hosting company ignores it there's no money to be made out of that.
"I haven't read the full judgment, but the judge's reasoning described in the article is quite different"
I've read it. The judgement is in terms of what the plaintiffs were actually claiming.
The nub of the complaint against Cloudflare AIUI is that it made the website load faster. In terms of the analogy it's like blaming the road makers for laying down black top over a rough track which enabled a faster getaway. Long story short - it didn't make any difference, they'd have gotten away anyway.
"We apologize for any inconvenience that this may have caused."
Not that I have any sympathy for inconvenience caused to advertisers* - the more the better in my view - but this is another victim-blaming pseudo apology. What they're really saying is more like "If you were better organised you'd have worked round it.". They are most carefully removing themselves from any shadow of blame.
A real but watered-down apology would have been "We apologise for causing inconvenience".
* Actually, it's not advertisers caught up in this. It's the advertising industry. Advertisers are the the advertising industry's customers.
There is ample basis for avoiding burning fossil hydrocarbons where substitutes exist. Hydrocarbons are multi-use materials, usable as fuels and as the starting point for industrial processes. In the first role it's often open to substitution, in the second not so often. The stuff that's been burned needlessly isn't available as a substrate. In similar vein the hydrocarbon used to make one-use plastic bags can also be substituted with paper.
You don't need to believe or not believe in anthropogenic climate change, nor do you have to realise change in climate and sea-level changes are inevitable to realise that finite supplies shouldn't be exhausted where substitutes exist.
At some future date, and maybe not that far into the future, our descendants will be blaming us for the sheer waste of current usage.
It's also a nice endpoint when you're preparing a carbon dating sample for the scintillation counter. Char sample to carbon. Heat with lithium to form lithium carbide. Add water (oh, look, South Belfast water supply from Silent Valley has radon in it) to form acetylene. Clean up the acetylene at low pressure given acetylene's tendency to explode. Convert to benzene.
"act as if they apologised when they in fact had not"
All too often the apology is for any "inconvenience" or, in particularly egregious instances, "distress" caused.
No! That's really hidden victim blaming. It's just polite wrapping for "sorry you're such a wimp".
What the apology should be for - and explicitly for - is getting it wrong.
"An ancient network share at Deficiency House only supports the SMB1 protocol."
But does it support non-SMB protocols? I ran into that a few Debian/Devuan generations ago. Then I realised it also supported FTP. KDE's network share mechanism supports that. Maybe Window's does too.
It all seems very vague. Perusing through the linked articles I find it talking about data taken from media. What data? What media? Then it would be processed in the user's device. How? Finally this quote seemed to be their answer to Why?
"The results of this processing might, for example be a profile of the sort of TV programmes someone might like or the sort of theatre they would enjoy."
So it's yet another attempt to double-guess me, rather like $RetailSite trying to sell me a fridge because I just bought a fridge or the garage that started texting me with their new car advertising when I just bought a car from them. It might answer their Why? but it certainly doesn't answer mine.
"sent by means of non-arriving SMS messages"
Just this.
Tried to make a payment this morning. After jumping through the hoops of enter password again and enter two digits from security code again they send a text. Phone which was supposed to be charging wasn't.. Hastily plug it in properly. Request resend. Request it again. Nothing. Eventually 3 texts arrive by which time the payment page has timed out. If I try to go through the whole thing again will it send duplicate payments? Who knows with this wunch of bankers? Thank goodness I still have a cheque book.
"Authentication proves that you are consenting to this security check."
By the time you've entered the password a second time and entered two digits of the pre-arranged security code a second time the SMS, should it arrive before time out seems a bit superfluous in terms of authenticating that you are consenting to the check.
And let's remember that the bank, should they ring you up, will be totally unable to distinguish themselves from any random phone phisher.
They will also fail to reply to any emails requesting that they confirm whether of not the marketing spam, laden with links, sent in their (noreply) name from some 3rd party professional spammer digital marketing company professional spammer is really theirs or not.