deadbytes

>You will only ever get name calling, knee-jerk responses and purely emotional, speculative arguments here

Thank you for so perfectly proving my point

>Also, there should be more ways to "praise" a project.

Maybe github should implement a "feedback" tab where people can post their experiences of using the project. Perhaps some of those experiences would be negative too, but it would also allow people to give you neutral or positive feedback on what they like about the project, how they are using it, and what they have achieved with it.

I would encourage all developers to download a Commodore 64 emulator and spend some time learning 6502 assembly.

There is no memory protection and no software abstractions. You display graphics on the screen by writing directly to video memory.

Programming for the C64 made me have innumerable lightbulb moments and significantly changed my perspective on what a computer really is.

I think programmers need to start taking a lot more responsibility for what we release into the world.

If you don't think your software solves a real problem, or will improve people's quality of life, then why release it?

There are already too many distractions in the modern world. I don't want to create more. Any software you release that doesn't solve a real problem is just another distraction that takes time away from people's lives.

You are just making this up. Nowhere in the article is there any mention of them requesting data of 1,000 users to find one criminal.

What the article actually says:

>From January 2020 to June 2020, Google received nearly 40,000 requests for user information from law enforcement

There were 185,884 deportations by ICE last year, which is around 92,942 in the same time period. They are making 0.5 requests for information for every person they deport.

I am greatly opposed to mass surveillance, especially when justified by some immaterial bogeyman such as "stopping terrorism".

However in this case, illegal immigration is a legitimate problem in the US with actual statistics to prove so, and it seems that they are only targetting individuals that they actually suspect of being criminals.

If law enforcement has genuine belief that I am a criminal then why would I be opposed to giving them data to absolve myself?

And yes of course this has the potential to be abused, but is there any proof of this in the article? It seems like one specific individual was targetted, and they had the courtesy to notify them that this was happening.

>Google hands over data of criminals to law enforcement

What is the story here?

>calls for the killing of babies if they where jewish, black etc.

How is this in any way equivalent? Being jewish or black are not disabilities. Downs syndrome is a horrible condition that greatly impacts your quality of life.

I personally think abortion is horrible, but aborting babies who are going to enter life with awful disabilities is the least objectionable form of abortion there is.

You should be outraged at the millions of perfectly healthy babies that are aborted every year just for convenience. Not this.

When I looked into doing this before I think the ultimate issue was that the C specification doesn't even give you any way to check the overflow flag.

So even if you knew your specific C implementation handled overflow properly there is no way to check the flag afterwards anyway.

This is scary to think about.

The upside of third-party trackers is that you can completely block all of them by just blocking third-party javascript. What are we going to do once all of this tracking code starts getting served from the first party domain instead? Or even served inside the same source files as site code?

I imagine we will start seeing a new class of privacy extensions that behave more like anti-virus. Checking for known hashes of tracking scripts, monitoring for certain patterns of behaviour during execution.