Re: I wonder why that might be?
It's a lovely bit a propaganda.
33 publicly visible posts • joined 29 Dec 2015
Yes, compare governments with freedom of speech enshrined in law and enforced in the judicial system with... what? Russia's kleptocracy? How many people has Putin disappeared?
Kaspersky is an imminent threat. He was trained at a KGB school. Antivirus has total control over your computer. Kaspersky just came out with a product for running critical power infrastructure that can be wiped out with a single update from central command (or the FSB). It's not too much to ask to have government facilities controlled by homegrown products, at the very least not a product in control of the Russian government, who has been interfering with democracies all over the world through its psyops attacks the past six years.
Or it could be that Russia is perpetually looking for a villain so it can play the victim and distract its people from the ongoing theft at every level of government which is led by a former KGB agent. It's got a world class disinformation structure now and it's infecting every bit of the internet. Look at how many pro-Russia posts have suddenly appeared on this thread and been subsequently extreme-upvoted.
Russia is far more likely to incite a revolt, change the shape of elections, steal former provinces it claims as its own, and sow discord abroad - as it has been doing for years now - and then use a bogeyman such as the U.S. to try to deflect attention from its kleptocratic oligarchy. They then claim "what about..." when called on their actions. All psyops, and very sophisticated ones.
The government's run by a former KGB agent. Kaspersky trained at a KGB school. I can't tell if a lot of the people posting here and upvoting and praising Russia while "whatabouting" the U.S. and U.K. are actually Russian trolls, but I find it highly suspicious.
Will you guys stop saying that "all the code that depended on it broke"? It only would stop the package manager from installing or updating that package or packages that depended on it. All it meant was that developers couldn't push out an update unless they had a local repository or didn't update packages depending on it. Yes, it is used in a lot of packages, but it wouldn't have "broken the Internet" by any means. Nothing that was already built would have been dependent on running by that package being in the npm repo, ergo nothing would have stopped working suddenly. It was a minor inconvenience at worst that made Kik look like a corporate bully and the npm people look like shills.
That's part of the issue with a capitalist system - you usually have to sell or be selling something in order to keep the money coming in. Depending on the goodwill of passers-by to regularly donate money or whatnot doesn't work on any sort of scale. Even "free-to-play" games have to offer some incentives (while hopefully not crossing the line into "pay-to-win") in order to get money flowing in. And even then the ratio of people who pay vs. people who will never pay is < 10%.
There's no clean one-size-fits-all solution for monetizing internet content other than advertising at the moment. And basing it on traffic (e.g. Youtube) ends up with more and more clickbaity headlines or other dramatic b.s. to drive eyeballs which turns people off over time, or makes them immune to it.
That's for _one_ ad? What about sites that have 20 ads on the same page? I've sat there and watched as my ad blocker counts up in the hundreds for blocked scripts whilst trying to read an article on some sites.
They should also be releasing standards for affiliate and revenue sharing, TBH - simply making the ads less annoying isn't going to solve the problem, the core issue is how sites get money for doing what they do. Without turning the internet into a clickbait-y headline-filled mess, as it is currently becoming. Headline is misleading or has nothing to do with the actual content of the article? No problem, it still generated hits! User leaves site in disgust? We don't track those metrics.
But but... creativity! And visual engagement! And conversions!
On the plus side, the IAB is at least honest-ish that they've taken it too far. They are pretty slow to react though - ad blocker use has been rising for years - and they're just now reacting because others have been doing it instead of them and making money from it. Which makes their self-flagellation a bit disengenous in context.
There's a reason they have 40 different standard sizes for ads, though - they didn't start with that many - over time these specifications get more and more complex as people seek to stand out so they complain and otherwise "influence" standards-boards like IAB.
Their previous solution - which is still ongoing - is to hide ads as "sponsored posts" or other less-obvious methods of getting brand awareness, e.g. buying off blogs or specific bloggers as paid shills for their products, often with undisclosed conflicts of interest. Making these LEAN standards is the public-facing "friendlier" ad unit, while the real manipulation occurs behind the scenes.
This article is rather rich (strangely Andrew's arguments about copyright supremacy/anti-Google screeds fall even flatter when defending a large corporate entity like Getty Images which is backed by an even bigger corporate entity The Carlyle Group).
This is a copyright complaint Getty knows they can't win if they argue it as such, so they're hijacking the "anticompetitive/monopoly" argument against Google in the EU. There's so many stock photography sites out there now that they have a vastly increased competitive market. 60 million images doesn't mean 60 million _quality_ images. Maybe it should?
This article seems a bit "won't someone think of the children and the small businesses?!" to me. It's the line that some groups throw back when they are actually trying to manipulate the plebs into working against their own interests. Are you sure this isn't a sponsored post by the RIAA or some other giant copyright/trademark mill?
We're constantly reminded through of how easy it has become to use the DMCA takedown notice procedures to silence dissent and eliminate unfavorable opinions or news (or the threat of a lawsuit, which is a related issue). The burden then falls on the person making use of the content, whether through fair use or other legitimate means, and in those cases it's rarely the giant companies feeling the effects. The giant companies are the ones using services to generate automatic DMCA takedown notices. Bots talking to bots. You're also arguing that Google could easily filter content if it wanted to, but it isn't for commercial reasons. I'd be interested in knowing how many takedown notices are actually filed by individuals or small companies vs. behemoth or paid watchdogs who are scraping the internet looking for infringement.
The problem is that any system such as the DMCA itself and the DMCA takedown notice system that makes it easy for solo dude to assert his rights makes it exponentially easy for huge corporations to abuse and use as a hammer. I have no clue how to fix that.
For client side JS, competent devs compile it into a bundle anyway and load it server side. Everyone wants you to use their CDN for some reason though.
The node package manager (npm), though, is abominable and incredibly easy to break.
I also think it's bullshit that the npm maintainer re-published his packages - if they give him the ability to unpublish his work, they are giving him the agency to do so at his choice. Someone could publish a new left-pad that does much of what his script does instead. Then he could sue them for trademark infringement and create a constitutional crisis.
My last company uses Zoho Vault and it's got some really, really annoying limitations - such as not being able to use most punctuation in the "Title" field of secrets among other usability problems. And it's integrated rather halfassedly with the other Zoho Products so there's compatibility problems and "I can't figure out how to remove this person from our "Company" profile so I can re-add them to Zoho Vault fix whatever the issue is" sort of issues.
As far as encryption and security, who knows - but if you ever have a problem, good luck getting support, as that is equally atrocious.
I use 1Password. I switched to it after needing something friendlier for a coworker on a project. It's been pretty good and the support is fantastic (the owner's really responsive).