r3vrse

Neat! I have wondered how much of a foothold "retrograde" tech will take in the next 10-20 years.

Decision fatigue, nostalgia, attenuation — call it what you will. At some level we're tacitly acknowledging that the vast ocean of content and complexity we've created is beyond what is desirable or even healthy to effectively evaluate.

A very modern malaise. Excuse the armchair philosophizing.

My 6yo has an iPhone which arrived OOTB with a News widget, accessible by a single swipe, including similar "breaking" content. No sign-in required. Just an internet connection. What does she want for Christmas? An iPhone 14 Pro Max. I kid you not.

Literally everyone she goes to school with has TikTok and are talking about content in that app day in and day out.

Do I like this? No. Are you a million miles from reality for pre-teens? Yes.

A song and dance about how this is a somehow simply a treatise on the decline of Microsoft is naive at best and highly disingenuous at worst. I really don't want to sound vitriolic but do y'all live in the real world? I wonder sometimes.

Convey a singular point with intent. Below is first paragraph rewritten. Just my 2¢.

---

Essays should be persuasive. But we can aim for something more ambitious: that an essay should be useful.

Useful writing makes a strong claim without resorting to falsehoods.

It is more useful to say that Pike's Peak is in the center of Colorado than somewhere within.

Precision and correctness are like opposing forces. Useful writing is bold and true. It tells people something important, that they might not have known, without resorting to manufactured surprise or equivocality. This is formative of fundamental insights.

Any idea will not be novel to all, but may still have impact for the many.

In argument: be correct, be important, be strong. This will ensure usefulness.

Anecdotal: was setting up some Hisense TVs at work the other day and the unit came up with a message that "all Network features" would be disabled if you declined the EULA.

Immediately thought "works for me".

I wonder if any other manufacturer offers that choice.

Edit: commercial signage panels are about as close as you get to dumb TVs these days. Rarely include any smart features, can get in quite large sizes. Not OLED or anything but if you just want a decent display...

Dipping into whimsical analogies: this is a digital abattoir where the meat = content.

Now, as before, no-one wants to see how the sausage gets made. Especially those selling it.

Can't kill demand or bear the visceral truth. So instead we'll pretend the seedy underbelly doesn't exist. Paper over dissonance with ethical codes and platitudes.

Not new. Just a context shift in production of sustenance for the collective, insatiable gaping maw.

Also have a professional proofread your posts. 'Around the bend' is not the connotation you were looking for.

Just static route Google DNS back to your gateway. Works fine for me.

As others have said though, who buys a Google device thinking it's not gonna talk to Google?

Ironic that participants were initially contacted via FB ads.

In light of the recent "Research" app disclosure, and that in both cases a fee was paid for participation, it makes me wonder what people won't do for a few extra dollars in their bank account given a similar scenario.

The NYT article is almost apologetic about its inconclusiveness. I might wonder - should I happen to be wearing my tinfoil hat - that it is designed as a means of placation, an ode to the status quo, rather than a deterrent for the average consumer.

Every now and then I rise above the temporal miasma of popular web culture and think: why is this surprising?

BBS, AOL, Netscape, MySpace, Tumblr, FB, Insta, Snap...

Why are we surprised by this progression? All "good" things go bad. The same lessons, rinsed and repeated. Power, money corrupts. We burn effigies and mark their passing. We move on.

Tempted to say a little more history and psychology instead of fiscal fixation would make a difference. Tempted, but no. It's not how humans work.

Honest feedback: I don't see how this succeeds without integration with existing applicant workflows. The cognitive overhead of another app to store data, manually update status etc is high.

If e.g. Monster or Indeed launched this as a value-add to existing functionality it would be big, but i'm not going to make the effort you're asking for in isolation.

Unfortunately, in the Enterprise space, this setup is likely to be a zero sum game, as the challenge email would get dinged 90% of the time for spammy wording like "quarantine" and links to unknown domains (and/or blocked entirely, because inbound filtering != outbound filtering).

Large-scale email in its current form sucks, even with the Office 365 ATP tools or similar equivalents.

No. This won't fix anything. It is flying in the face of social norms and basic, narcissistic inclination. What is verboten will become desirable, and circumvention will be lauded by peers.

We live in a digital world. That isn't going away and will only become more pervasive.

Teach responsible usage. Make it like BYOB in enterprise. Require device enrollment. Block access to unproductive sites within a campus environment. Channel the compulsion to check/update/respond into something positive.

This is basic human psychology. We can't afford to be so blindly granular and willfully devoid of historical context and the obvious implications.

It surprises me in a way that "big internet" (AT&T, Verizon, Comcast etc) and associated large enterprise interests have not been more staunch proponents of IPv6, at least for fixed consumer connections.

It would be trivial in that circumstance to blow away any kind of NAT and the pseudo-anonymity/plausible deniabililty it provides and make client devices performing illegitimate activity directly identifiable.

I wonder if such a ruling might be different in that context. It's a perturbing thought.

While this sentiment is applicable (and agreeable) now, I can't help but think it is a little short-sighted.

Can we really say <insert_megacorp_name_here> will do or not do 'X', or has some immutable policy 'Y', with any reliability? Historically, have we not seen that these policies change with the direction of the wind, and/or are applied inconsistently to suit narrative 'Z'?

What is true today may not be true tomorrow. There is no bastion of moral decency in cloud infra, and to make decisions based on a current stance is facile and probably pointless.

I'm far more interested in what awareness the GitLab folks have of this issue, and procedures in place to mitigate it, if any.