That's because sooner or later every species enters an equilibrium state with the amount of energy available in the ecosystem. In the process it may out-compete quite a bit of other species, and so we speak of 'invasive species'.
One reason for 'even'. Silicon Valley contains some of the richest zip codes, richest corporations and highest paying jobs in the country. Yet all this monetary wealth doesn't seem to help with a major humanitarian crisis unfolding on its doorstep.
Researchers say there are three possible explanations for the anomalous data. One is mundane, 99.98%. Two would revolutionize physics, 0.01% and 0.01%.
I am not a Google employee but Chrome does not send the dnt header in incognito mode. It only sends it when you have it turned on, in which case it will send it in both regular and incognito mode.
I don't think it does. One possible explanation is that they don't want the "Edge Effect". If the header is set by everyone than people will just ignore it. Since Edge started setting it for everyone the header is basically useless already.
It would also provide an interesting way to identify incognito users which chrome has been trying to prevent websites from doing it. Of course it won't be perfect, but probably more than 99% of DNT headers would be incognito if they did this because I would bet that very few people enable it manually.
It takes active effort to break into a house. It takes zero effort to ignore a header. It's more akin to everyone having a sign on their yard that says "Please don't break into this house."
> In a nutshell, no, door to door solicitation isn’t illegal. But if you have a no soliciting sign posted on your property, and the salesperson is refusing to vacate the property, they can be assessed trespassing fines and possible legal charges.
> But if you have a no soliciting sign posted on your property, and the salesperson is refusing to vacate the property, they can be assessed trespassing fines and possible legal charges.
How is this different from when you don't have the sign? Do they get to refuse vacating the property without trespassing in that case?
I'm not sure if they do, but one potential reason not to do it is that setting DNT literally gives the server 1 additional bit of information about your configuration. This could be used to track you more effectively.
1 extra bit is the last of my concerns, there's plenty of bits to uniquely fingerprint a browser anyways. I'd gladly trade one inconsequential bit, which requires malicious intent to misuse, to keep my privacy safe when dealing with honorable entities like, I presume, Google.
Oh, there is so much more that can go into a browser fingerprint. There is no one, single "browser fingerprint." Basically any API your browser exposes can leak information that can be used for fingerprinting. See: https://panopticlick.eff.org/
I don't understand. There are dozens, if not hundreds, or even thousands of bits to use to identify any given browser, but providing one extra such bit that politely asks 'Do Not Track' is now a problem because it makes tracking slightly easier?
Having used both Python and Typescript recently, I largely prefer the consistency of Typescript. [Hey mom, I like cherries better than strawberries]. Having said that, I'd love to have named function arguments in Typescript. Props workaround is, well, a workaround.
Typescript greatest features are optional types and the extensive type inference. On small projects this can work well, but on larger ones I can see overly rigid style guides requiring typing everything explicitly in triplicate becoming cumbersome in an Enterprisey way. Curious what people's experiences are.
Newspeak removes terms from language so that certain ideas cannot be expressed.
This pull request does concern language, yes. But it retains the use of the term "slave" in existing APIs, while updating a script that is named "slaves" to use the term "deps," a term that is already used elsewhere in the API. At the end of the pull request, both terms remain meaningful. Furthermore, no attempt is made to hide previous use of the term - or to prevent using the term "slave" to refer to human slavery.
The comparison is apt IMO, as per Wikipedia pages linked to:
"To meet the ideological requirements of English Socialism (Ingsoc) in Oceania, the ruling Party created Newspeak,[1] a controlled language of simplified grammar and restricted vocabulary, meant to limit the freedom of thought—personal identity, self-expression, free will—that threatens the ideology of the régime of Big Brother and the Party, who have criminalised such concepts into thoughtcrime as contradictions of Ingsoc orthodoxy."
The title right now: 'ZFS Removes References to Slavery'. Probably 95% of the commenters have not read TFA in sufficient detail to argue minutiae details. They see 'language changed in support of the dominant political current' and link it to Newspeak because that's the only frame of reference most people are aware of. It's not like it's an isolated incident, there is plenty of language redefinition, history rewriting and statues toppling as we speak.
> Probably 95% of the commenters have not read TFA in sufficient detail to argue minutiae details. They see 'language changed in support of the dominant political current' and link it to Newspeak
That might be the first Orwellian thing in this thread - people see a thing they've been told is bad and done by bad people and they need to get their Two Minutes Hate out, and they don't have the intellectual curiosity to spend those two minutes figuring out what's actually happening. (Actually, maybe there's a bit of Brave New World in there too.)
> there is plenty of language redefinition, history rewriting and statues toppling as we speak.
Give me specific examples, and we can talk about whether this is 1984 or not.
(I'm aware of some statues being toppled over the last couple of weeks that were originally put in place by people who wanted to rewrite history - and the act of toppling those statues has caused much more public discussion about the subjects of their statues and their true history than the statues themselves ever did. That hardly seems like 1984 to me. I'm not sure what you mean by language redefinition and history rewriting, otherwise.)
It's not the "dominant political current'. This is a ripple cause by loudmouths. The dominant current is moving in the direction of actually getting work done.
This is a legal hypothetical advocated by Jordan Peterson and not actually ever demonstrated in reality / tested in court / etc., right? (That is, neither Peterson nor anyone else has said that they were compelled to speak in a certain way and there are no legal proceedings against anyone who has refused to speak in a certain way, right?)
I'm not sure if the compelled speech was actually adopted into law. I'm referring to Jordan Peterson's interview and senate hearing in relation to the law.
I'm somewhat confused about the TV media landscape, as there are cable news channels, Fox / CNN / MSNBC, but there are also the big 3 networks, ABC / CBS / NBC, which also air news and are also available on cable.
Seattle has 600,000 people. In a given year there are 30 murders and 300 rapes. One can collect 175,200,000 amateur camera footage of 'an hour in the life of the average Seattle-ite' until one encounters an hour with a murder, or 17,520,0000 such peaceful one hour videos until one captures a rape on camera.
Does the presence of overwhelmingly peaceful footage of average people going by their average days make Seattle at large an Utopia with no crime? Is that footage in itself sufficient evidence to abolish the police and the court system, because, look, there are 17,520,000 hours of peaceful footage before something terrible happens to someone?
It is incredibly difficult to build an accurate image of a large scale group of people judging by a few hours of direct experience. 1000 harder if through footage selected by people with their own agendas. Media coverage, especially audio-visual coverage, is wild because media coverage is simply an inappropriate way to depict such phenomena.
