decisiveness

And each time this happens, you get better about writing readable comments up front describing edge cases and difficulties so that future self can avoid steps 1 - 6 with a head start on refactor ideas / feasibility.

> Perhaps a site that's been around for over a decade and already has mass brand recognition might not get as many people googling it bare, since most people can just... go there directly.

It seems to me that googling for a popular site like reddit is actually pretty common. A couple of reasons:

1. Because google is often much better at returning relevant results for site:<site>.com <query> than searching for <query> in the site's search engine. I would think this to be the case even more so for types of sites like reddit simply because of such high total post / word count. In fact, brand recognition would seem to be more of a reason for people to google it. E.g. If you want to read a wikipedia article on some topic, you normally wouldn't visit wikipedia.org first to use its search, you'd google "wikipedia <topic>" or "site:wikipedia.org <topic>".

2. To avoid hitting enter after a typo and ending up on some malware site <domain with typo>.com.

My guess is that most companies decide to cut the cost of maintaining responsive web apps since they are already paying developers to maintain native mobile and desktop web. Because, in their minds "who wouldn't just use the app"?

To get around it, there are a few lesser known mobile browsers that allow you to modify the "User-Agent" header, in which case you can bypass by masking yourself as viewing on a desktop browser. Sleipnir is one.

>they can’t query anything on a specific user.

What exactly do you mean by "user"? Can they query DNS traffic by IP address / subnet? Exactly what are all of the restrictions there?

EDIT: Is there a whitelist of things they can query by or do you simply trust them to be good citizens, have a binding legal agreement, all of the above?

>APNIC gets to see the noise as well as the DNS traffic

>Huston emphasised that APNIC intends to protect users' privacy. "DNS is remarkably informative about what users do, if you inspect it closely, and none of us are interested in doing that," he said.

Maybe it is reasonable to take them at their word as they seem trustworthy, but we should at least consider the fact that at least some of this DNS traffic is indeed being analyzed.

I don't think knowing exactly what parent comment is talking about is required to see that they weren't suggesting we should do away with all visualizations just because there are some cases where they might not be the best tool for teaching.

I'm not sure what posting this accomplishes, but it certainly was not intended to shame the developers, though I can see how it might be perceived that way. I am more than satisfied and thankful for everything else that Mozilla provides me in Firefox (especially after the 57 update).

It was, more than anything, intended to offer a noticeable bump in hopes that I don't have to continue wasting 5 seconds finding and closing the window every time I open Firefox (as I have had to do since using this feature over the last hand full of years). I've probably spent (roughly) 2 hours of my life closing these duplicate prompts over time.

It's an annoying user experience that seems fixable which is why I'm surprised it still remains at "normal" priority. I would spend the time to read every comment, read through and understand the architecture of this legacy code, fix the bug and submit a patch only to have it code reviewed and have me resubmit or be forced to resign my attempt because political reasons or some other factor, but that would probably take me more than 2 hours so I refrain and hope that it gets fixed in the next 7 years.

Not intending to be snide, just a moderately inconvenienced user trying to stir action.

It looks like dmidecode also contradicts itself with the hyper threading flag:

    $ sudo dmidecode -t processor | grep -E 'Flags:|HTT|Status|Count'
    	Flags:
		HTT (Multi-threading)
	Status: Populated, Enabled
	Core Count: 4
	Thread Count: 4

Never rely on your ISP to provide great wifi equipment. This is not something specific to Comcast. Generally, it seems residential ISPs are only on the hook for providing quoted speeds via a wired connection to their gateway.

This is why I always either disable the wifi from my ISP's modem/router combo and branch off my own wifi router from the modem's LAN or request a modem only device from the ISP and use my wifi router's LAN. The downside to the former case is that your wifi devices are now double NATed (unless you use a wireless bridge) which can be annoying if you want to forward ports (you now have to do it twice). The modem/router combo might not support disabling its LAN to act as a bridge very well.