advisedwang

> why would VLC or any online company stay in France?

IIRC all the people involved with VLC are French and live in France. They might want to stay in their native country where they speak the language, have families, have the right to remain and vote etc etc.

Yeah the headline is a bit glib and misleading. But the point still stands. Statins are dirt cheap too.

Google's SRE was always about building infrastructure to make things reliable, and started in a world where LAMP on bare-metal + DNS load balancing was common. It makes sense to have a separate org/team/role responsible building real load balancing with health checks and failover, figuring out how to do zero-downtime updates, etc.

When these problems because largely solved with off-the-shelf software SRE became either a bureaucracy (ensuring reliability through policy and enforcement) or just deploying other people's code and holding the pager.

Fighting in the US war of independence was a crime too, but those people are considered patriot heros.

Are there actual national security concerns though? Or is that just an excuse for protectionism? I suspect the latter, and in europe politicians may make the calculation that cheap cars > car manufaturing jobs.

The people upvoting the slop may not be the same people complaining about slop. With no downvoting, a subset of the population that doesnt' like a topic doesn't necessarily bury it.

Additionally, even those that dislike slop may still upvote a security issue that they think is important.

> Google highlights that it “prioritize[s] surfacing authoritative election information directly within results” including “direct links to official resources.”

A reasonable policy. Perhaps all search results should be in the form of links to sources.

very VERY few people judge tools like this by the language used to develop them.

Wyden is the ranking D member of the intelligence committee (ie would be chair under a D senate). He's not some maverick bucking his party, this is the expression of the party position.

They don't want the public to see the big green "APPROVED" rubber stamp that the FISC uses.

The article talks about classification but this isn't really about classification or national security. It's about who has the fundamental rights over the documents after all that is sorted out. It's about can congress or the public force documents that embarrass or incriminates the president (after sufficient time and declassification has happened)

Is this supposed to be highlighting poor quality of modern data presentation?

What do "regular" writing systems do when different dialects use different sounds for the same word? Do different people write the same word differently? Or are people forced to confirm to a standard dialect? Both seem bad.

The DA can file the charges and drop the case right before (or even during) trial. No loss on their books

The redfin stuff is in the text of the article, which certainly was written by a journalist.