Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | charles_f's commentslogin

I somewhat agree with your viewpoint on copyright, but what terrifies me is VCs like a16z or Sequoia simultaneously backing up large LLMs profiting from ignoring copyright and media firms where they'll use whatever power and lobby they have to protect copyright.

I don't think the content I produce is worth that much, I'm glad if it can serve anyone, but I find amusing the idea to poison the well


> you will have to support this stack, things will break as they always do and hardware is not free either.

Hardware is hardly the first thing that will break when you consider the number of pieces in that architecture, including a bunch that aren't self hosted.


I have used osmand for a long time, but one thing that really broke it for me is when Android removed the ability for apps to read other apps data, thus making it impossible to backup track records with folder sync

I think it can be fixed by configuring where to save these. But I find it interesting that one os change in the api can have a somewhat remote impact on feature use.


> Forcing Apple to change core tenets of iOS by legislative means would undermine what made the iPhone successful.

Successful for whom? If you're talking about the commercial success of apple through lock down behaviour, sure. But there is *nothing* that would prevent them from providing the exact same experience while adding a toggle in settings "allow sideloading". You want the "crisp" experience that comes from apple's strict review process, just use the official app store.

Looking at android till now, it is still possible to offer a "certified" os that is flexible enough for you to use foss stores. The argument pretending that removing sideloading is customer centric are borderline fallacious. I don't think that playing on semantics between hardware and OS changes any of that


Superb piece!

> People multitask because they’ve been assigned multiple unprioritized tasks. People are distracted and unfocused because day to day their managers and leaders value responding to distractions and interruptions over consistency and focus

This in particular rings so true, makes me think of a meeting not so long ago where, within a 15m bracket, one of the tied-up VPs was telling us "leaders" we needed to pay more attention to side-projects because devs were working on things that weren't mandated by the hierarchy. That was introducing too much distraction, and slowing down delivery. We need to foster innovation and make sure devs ideas are listened to. And also we need to make sure we don't leave any stone unturned and leave time in the schedule so that explorations requested by PMs are addressed faster.

It's terrifying. Sometimes I tell myself "they're just untrained, they don't know", but when you get higher ups requesting more focus, then immediately asking for breadth as well, it tells me they know, but they also don't care. They just don't want to give any priority, they shove every contradictory requirement down the line, set expectations that everything should be promptly worked on, and proceed to blame devs for their shortcomings.

Then set their LinkedIn tagline to "humane leader with high expectations for excellence".


I don't really get the point of hacking a synology to break this kind of protection. I understand why you'd take one so that you get everything setup for you, but if you're gonna invest time jailbreaking and hacking it, wouldn't you be better off using an old PC with your own linux/software setup as a server?

Actually easier to remove the license restrictions around their RTSP backup software than it is to set up an equivalent thing myself

(Edit: I have a very particular set of skills. Having put some time into making this work with tools I could put together myself and failing, I found that my Synology had a tool that did it perfectly and refused to do so for the number of cameras I had. I fixed that.)


Are there instructions or a GitHub on how I can remove their restrictions on the number of cameras allowed for DSCam?

No, it would likely be extremely illegal for anyone in the US to do so

> That's not a Gmail problem, and no reason to migrate.

It is a problem with Gmail, because they're helping themselves into your email, as was explained by the author in the sentence immediately after the one you quoted:

> Technically, Google can store every message you receive and know everything, and U.S. agencies can request access to that data


(If it's a problem) it is a problem with every Email provider. It is part of the design.


Yes but at least for the TOS, mailbox doesn’t do it, and I’m more relaxed also because I’m paying for the email (they don’t need to sell my data to other services) and the server are hosted in Europe and GDPR compliance.


> because they're helping themselves into your email

What, specifically do you mean by this?


> To send encrypted emails, you just select “Use PGP encrypted” when composing a new message, after importing your private key, of course.

I love the concept of PGP and how well it seems to be integrated. I also don't know a single person who uses it or a provider/software capable of decrypting it. I think that's the biggest issue with PGP. Short of asking someone directly, you don't know if they'd be able to receive a PGP encrypted email, so you wont send one.


The whole point of PGP is to actually communicate (out of band) with the party you want to sent mail to and receive his public key.

It's no big deal if you really need to send a private message.


If you own your own domain as many are suggesting, it's super easy to share your key. Simply publish it and share the link in your email signature.


Yes it’s very easy to use on mailbox, well I use pgp encryption with some friend and on Kraken (the crypto exchange)


I don't think this is what sets great managers apart. Communication is certainly necessary, but not sufficient. Empathy and care, technical relevance, decisiveness, honesty, ability to provide feedback, trust are all at least as important as communication.

At this point, I'd take someone somewhat capable and behaving like a human over most things.


God do I hate teams and systems with cute names. It's all cute and fun until you're the one from another team who needs to integrate with you and decode what Pikachu and Tyrion are responsible for, and discover that Fassbender is just a nickname for a Postgresdb maintained by the "It's over 9000" team. AuthService, CacheService, Db and EntrypointTeam are perfectly fine names. I don't care that namespaces are still aligned with 4 names ago, as long as I can somewhat infer what things do based on their names


The upside of having cutesy team names and mascots is that nowadays people just throw something into an AI image generator prompt, and you get a mascot that has clearly been trained on furry fetish art, and during Zoom meetings you get to look around and see who else is trying to stifle laughter when their slide comes up on a presentation.


How much I hate cute sprint names. How is "sweet summer breeze" better than 2023-03? At least I know if it's current or five years old


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: