sxtxixtxcxh

i'm sorry, this is all going over my head... can i get this in libraries of congress over football fields?

i don't think there is a big difference. without their content[1], his app is nothing; the web browser is still a web browser.

[1]: it's irrelevant whether the school or the partner owned it, he did it without permission (and i highly doubt the reader has the license to do whatever they wanted with that data either).

since we've established the data is not public, and is in fact restricted and controlled, how is it anything "mostly like" hacker news? hacker news does not store your NYtimes username and password, scrape the NYTimes site for an auth token, make a login request on your behalf to copy that article and display it, in full text stripping out the NYTimes attribution and branding, on hacker news.

what would happen if they did is a thought experiment i'll leave up to you.

really? you honestly don't see how a school allowing their students to sell their technical partner's (not public[1]) content is relevant?

[1]: pre-emptive reply: no, it's not public, half the article is talking about how he's circumventing their authentication system. this is NOTHING like a news aggregator.

but it is most certainly subverting the school's technical partner's revenue model.

how much do you pay for the use of that gateway? how much do you pay for the use of their data storage? their bandwidth?

sounds like it works out in google's favor though...

light, cheap, strong... pick any two!

> our notice told Vivint it was for unnatural/spammy links to their site. It's really not hard to find these spammy posts, so I'm not sure where the disconnect happened.

the disconnect probably happened because you feel that telling people through an internal tool is adequate.

web fonts were available in the late 90s... long before css3

"seems" is the operative word... here and in the quote you were talking about.

to prove a point

mission accomplished, probably.