Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | hotshiitake's comments login

> I've heard people suggest you should split registrar and dns solution, but I don't really understand why that would be best practice.

Simplifies migration. If your DNS records are tied to the registrar, and you need to move the record (maybe selling or moving to another registrar), then you can run into a problem where the DNS records are not accessible while the name is being transferred. Not an issue if the nameserver record points somewhere else.

Anecdotally, many registrars I have worked with (including Namecheap/GoDaddy) have terrible DNS management consoles/APIs, and limited options for access control. I have also had issues with certain TLDs not being available to move to better registrars, though I'm not sure if that is still an issue. Either way, moving DNS to a separate, standard provider definitely makes things easier to manage, especially if you are working with a lot of domains across different registrars.


> I dislike the word and I also feel like we're already at the point where everything people don't like is just lazily called "enshittification."

Ah yes, the enshittification of "enshittification". Definitely did not see that one coming.


Metaphysical fecalmorphosis.


Stop gaslighting me about the meaning of enshittification.


"Gaslighting doesn't exist, you made it up 'cause you're f$%&ing crazy!"

/s


Why does this comment deserve downvotes? It demonstrates perfectly what the parent comment was joking about and makes it clear that it's also just a joke.


My hypothesis is that everyone here is at least intelligent enough to understand it's a joke, but they downvote it because either they feel it's a low quality / low effort joke, they don't get the reference, or because that style of humor makes them feel uncomfortable.


The fact that you're misusing the term in that very sentence is either pretty stupid or supremely clever :)


A few people here are.

Apart from being obnoxious and immature, "enshittification" doesn't communicate any concept beyond "something turning into shit." Being both vague and emotionally charged, semantic drift is inevitable.


It at least conveys that there's an active process going on, which implies that somebody is INTENTIONALLY turning something into shit. That's important. It's true that it doesn't do a good job of conveying the exact process it means.


I wouldn't say that qualification of it being a process necesarily communicates intentionality, and I don't think any of the uses I have seen exclude it from being a process.


Counterpoint - I get the same spiel from SEO marketing people trying to justify why every website in the org (including LoB web apps, intranet sites, etc.) needs to be a WordPress instance with 50 or so insecure plugins each. "But it's so popular!".


> And a chat app is very much not out of place in an office productivity suite. I have to say, I don't understand the merits of this case at all.

The article talks about M365/O365, but I suspect the bigger issue might be that Microsoft includes Teams Personal (WebView) in Windows 11. From what I understand this version will eventually reach feature parity with Teams for Work & School (Electron)

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/microsoft-teams-version...

It's not clear to me if Teams Personal will be kept as a separate app, or if the new features will just be subscription-gated from that version. Either way I can see why competitors and regulators might be a bit concerned about it.

Side note - I really hate Microsoft's product naming. Finding resources about all these different versions of Teams is such a pain, not to mention how confusing it is for end users.


> It's not clear to me if Teams Personal will be kept as a separate app

It's pretty clear if you use the Teams preview version. It already is a unified app in the Preview. You can sign in with a work and a personal account at the same time.


Yes, this is pretty much how it played out in other countries as well. Involuntary commitment has a very nasty history associated with it - rampant abuse, suicides, forced sterilization and lobotomies, untested electroshock therapy, unethical medical experimentation, pretty much every horrible human rights abuse that you can think of, up to and including genocide. By the 70s it had become socially untenable, and by the end of the century most countries had shuttered their publicly-run mental health institutions.

What is fascinating to me is that you can plainly see this evolution of thought play out in books, music and film. The portrayal of involuntary commitment slowly shifts from something that is normalized and somewhat necessary for society at the beginning of the 20th century, to something that is unabashedly evil by the end of it.


And it's so obvious as to why/how in retrospect

Everyone knows sending an innocent person to prison is really bad. But if you throw "they're not well..." in front of it and you have all the green lights you need.


I think so. I suspect part of the reason for this is that, for many people, "AI" has become a meaningless marketing buzzword. And companies have been overpromising on the capabilities of their "AI" technology ever since home computers were a thing. So now we actually have something really cool and possibly revolutionary, but no one cares because they are tired of being scammed.


> I also noticed that in recent years many subreddits have increasingly been taken over by memes and other low quality posts and so users looking for more substantial content have already moved elsewhere.

New Reddit needs to have a better way to sort this content out. Maybe extra arrows for funny/not funny?


> Yes, I've come to the conclusion that it's better to bury most plastic waste.

Alright, here is a controversial hot take - we should probably just burn plastics - and most garbage actually - as fuel. Done properly, incineration is a simple way to limit environmental contamination caused by plastics and other waste materials. The extra GHG production would be partially offset by savings from simpler logistics for processing (no more shipping barges of waste plastic going to overseas dumps) , and significantly reduced methane emissions from landfills. And - depending on how cost-effective incineration is - we may be able to take savings from waste processing and double-down on removing emissions from other industries (e.g. Energy, transportation).


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

Search: