Law is only as useful as your ability to enforce it. Would you have the legal means (and will) to go after a random foreigner who still scraped ypur site after accepting the terms? Multiply by 1,000 times a day.
That's cool. Hopefully you never post any remotely interesting, because in my very human 2010's way of doing things, I cannot even select and copy some text to my personal notes.
This goes well beyond accessibility and bots. I guess the Reader mode, a basic web browser feature meant precisely to read articles, wasn't an expected use case either?
We'll come full-circle when web authors provide custom-made glasses to decipher their sites, as the plain rendering will be obfuscated to prevent OCR too.
What's up with train services reliability in Europe? In my european corner here, I always have to give this advice to people who are new to the city: do NOT use the commute train ever if the deadline is serious and absolute (you got a work interview, a flight, a funeral). Trains get stopped in the middle of the trip, get delayed, or get cancelled all the time!
The solution is to lose even more of your time (as if public transport wasn't slow enough already) and be at the station already for the previous schedule of what you'd ideally need to take. But at that point, sometimes it's just better to go a longer route by subway, or if traffic is not bad, go ahead by car for those occasions.
It's actually kind of the opposite with DB [1]: Regional trains are decently on-time, and commuter trains even more so because they usually have dedicated tracks. Long-distance trains and cargo trains are the ones with abysmal punctuality, the former because the schedules are so tight that a random passenger coughing at the wrong time can fuck everything up, and the latter because they have to yield when a late passenger train has to make up time.
Cert lifetimes are such a burden. I wanted to provide pre-configured server examples of my WebRTC project, something that was download-and-run without any more prior knowledge (an important point), which users could access from their LAN e.g. to test the examples from their phones (not from the useless localhost exemption that exists for secure contexts), for which a self-signed cert embedded in the examples was fine. New users could run them, new concepts (such as security and certificate management in production apps) could be learned at an apropriate time.
Until web browsers started to believe that no, that was too much of a convenience, so now long expiration certs became rejected. What's the proposed solution from the "industry"? to run a whole automation pipeline just to update a file in each example folder every few months? bonkers. These should be static examples, no reason to having to update those any earlier than every few years, at most.
If I understand it right they bundle a publicly trusted shared cert and want to allow their users to get running on vanilla devices without having to provide a domain.
A certificate is a binding of a cryptographic key, along with an attestation of control of a DNS record(s) at a point in time. DNS changes frequently. The attestation needs to be refreshed much more frequently to ensure accuracy.
> From what I see of the pricing options in your business model, having your code released under a FOSS licence would make no difference to how you make money.
Except that making their client FOSS would help a lot to replicate the APIs and create a FOSS server, which would definitely make a difference on how they make money.
Say some young folk is coming back home very wasted after a good night party, and mistakes his house. The fact that it depends on the good or bad judgement of his neighbor to end up dead that night, is objectively not something that makes society better. Why are people even allowed to wield a gun without due process and frequent psycho-technical test evaluations? (so as to not get into the "why at all" question). My instinct here (as a non-american) is that if you're allowing citizens to have firearms, it ought at least to be only for those best prepared to evaluate conditions and situations, not anyone who's been watching YouTube videos as a poor-man's replacement for proper training.
Americans have this thing called the Constitution which states citizens have the right to bear arms. Now, when you allow government to make subjective decisions about who can own and who can't, it's no longer a right and nobody can have guns but criminals somehow always find a gun. If you know anything about what happened, you will find the shooter is actually a very normal person and not some gun nut so any amount of psych testing wouldn't have found anything. What happened was wrong and both sides could have done better to avoid such a situation. Doesn't really matter because shooter is going to jail. And many state do background checks when selling firearms so it's not like a felon can just walk in and buy a gun. But when you're not a felon, how do you predict a person's future behavior by some magic questionnaire?
We should potentially revisit the second amendment, considering gun deaths. The Constitution is a living document, and perhaps enough unnecessary deaths are occurring to warrant a fix. Maybe it should be a privilege versus a right.
The 2nd amendment is different from the Castle doctrine. You can have the 1st one without the 2nd one.
A militia to deter occupiers is different from protecting one's own house. And cases like this go beyond the Castle doctrine. This made had no legit fear for his life. Wiggling keys in a door and jiggling door handle don't equal legit fear. You have to at least identify a threat. This shooter was irresponsible and wrecked it for many other responsible people. Government will use this to weaken individuals' 2A rights.
Got to love this argument from Americans. It's okay for us to have stupid as fuck gun policies that kill tens of thousands of people a year because we have a Magic Document that says we have to have a stupid as fuck gun policy that leads to tens of thousands of deaths per year and absolutely nothing can be done about it!
decades ago, this scenario occured with a highschool hangaround.
he was drunk and high, came back from a party, actually broke in through his nieghbours door, 3 doors away, and encountered a 70 some year old cowering man who fearedfor life and safety, stabbed him and nearly killed him.
police closed the "case" and both parties charges were dismissed.
it would have been different if the door wasnt breached.
in the case in topic, it would have been different if both parties announced themselves, and cleaner took the hint from google map inconsistencies.
Even if a building, is suppossed to be empty, or unoccupied, Always confirm with your client you are at the right place, Announce Yourself, and avoid costly mistaken jobsite identification.
the blame goes all around here.
we have similar stand your ground laws where i am, and we call people, or call out while "walking up on someone"
we are also not allowed to carry on someone private property unless explicit, and enduring permission is given by the owner/controller of the property.
A man shoots through a closed and locked door that no one is actually knocking down, and you think the housecleaner fumbling through keys on the porch is at all to blame for her own death? He was a paranoid coward who probably would have killed a neighbor kid one day if he hadn't killed her first.
> we have similar stand your ground laws where i am, and we call people, or call out while "walking up on someone"
You actually shout this when walking down the street behind someone? What a terrible place you must live in.
its called alaska, and as i said, the blame goes all around, its called a swiss cheese failure, in HN parlance.
numerous mistakes by numerous parties combine, to culminate in failure and consequence.
here in alaska, you dont just assume, you have the right place, you take measures to be sure you are where you actually think you are.
that means when you walk onto private property not your own, you call out to make contact, and you dont carry a firearm onto property unless given specific permission to do so.
In the rest of the country, we usually call shooting unarmed people who happened to go to the wrong house and killing them "murder". She was not breaking into the house, she was not armed, she was not threatening him in any way. He lived in a neighborhood (look at the photo of the house). People go to the wrong house all the time in neighborhoods, the normal response is not to shoot them (I doubt this is even normal in Alaska as you seem to be saying it is). The normal, not paranoid coward, response is to ignore them or turn them away.
After the shooting, Andersen told investigators he had previously watched videos about what to do if someone tries to enter your home and had devised a plan for a potential break-in, according to court records.
Convinced that was happening, he did not approach the door, turn on a light or call out, court records state. Instead, he allegedly moved to the room he called his “safe room,” unlocked a Pelican case and loaded his Glock pistol.
Note: he did not approach the door, turn on a light or call out, court records state.
All he had to do was yell out loudly, turn on the lights or do something to let whoever was outside know that somebody was inside and armed. Instead he just shot without any notice.
All he had to do was yell out loudly, turn on the lights or do something to let whoever was -inside know that someone was outside looking for a jobsite.
for that matter when you try to enter someone elses house with a key, it normally starts with
'knockknock/ringring "hello smalltime cleaning service im looking for 123 circle boulevard to mop and dust, joe gave me keys, is any one home?"
we have housecleaners up here too, and they are very big on a prolonged contact attempt, when its a "walk-in job" thats because if you dont, you are doing what home invaders do, and all you have to do is attempt verbal contact even if you think noone is there, and you have the right place. its seatbelt simple.
same the other way, " i dont know you, i didnt ask for service your acting like a burglar, go away from my door, and leave"
thats how we do it up here, police are hours, sometimes days away from responding to emergency calls
The pair found work as contractors for a cleaning service. On Nov. 5, they were tasked with cleaning the windows of a recently constructed model home that is part of a new housing development directly east of Andersen’s house, court documents say.
Shortly before 7 a.m., Ríos Pérez de Velásquez and her husband were standing on the front porch of what they believed was the house they were meant to clean, court records say. Given that it was a model home, the records say, they thought no one was living there and observed no lights on inside or cars in the driveway. The pair started trying the keys.
Note: Given that it was a model home, the records say, they thought no one was living there and observed no lights on inside or cars in the driveway.
They were told it wasn't occupied and were given keys to enter and clean. Those were the instructions they followed.
never attempt to enter a house that isnt yours, without announcing your presence.
regardless of assumptions. never give deficient instructions to your employees.
BTW this is more like manslaughter than murder. read the statutes before you comment on legal matters.
all you guys that do housecalls should learn from this incident, always check your status, the situation can change suddenly espescially in a stand your ground state.
you, yourself are the first and foremost safety stop.
no one of any reasonable sort, closes thier eyes, and walks across traffic to cross the street.
if you want to get into the habit of attempting entry into a home, that isnt yours, without onsite confirmation, at 7am without announcing yourself, in a stand your ground state, go ahead.
they had the wrong house, thx google maps, as ive said before, the blame goes all around here. its swiss cheese.
You are again condoning and excusing Murder by victim blaming. As i have clearly pointed out from the article which quotes from the court records itself;
1) The House was said to be a "Model House" and no one living in it.
2) Because of the above, they were given keys to explicitly open, enter and clean the house.
3) When they arrived at the house, there were no lights, no cars, no dogs etc. all consistent with the signs of an unoccupied house.
4) So they started trying the keys one-by-one in order to do their job.
The above sequence is perfectly logical and that is what most of us would have done in a similar situation.
The guy did not fire randomly (i am almost sure that racism must be involved here given the current anti-immigrant sentiments roiling the US) but must have seen the victims through a peep-hole/windows and then must have opened fire deliberately. He aimed at one of them squarely with a handgun. No warnings etc. were given. It is murder pure and simple.
“We cannot, as a society, have people deciding literally to shoot first and ask questions later,” said Jody Madeira, a law professor at Indiana University.
every thing that went wrong would have been nullified, with one phone call, a phone call that is common place practice when making housecalls.
everything that went wrong could have been nullified by heed the reality that actions or inactions have consequences.
providing wrong map info, trusting sketchy information sources, lack of clear communication of purpose, and intent. lack of contact, with humans to confirm or verify.
its more than a victims contribution, there are second and third parties to look at.
Guy in Scotland gets drunk at a party and stumbles back into the wrong house and falls asleep on their couch. Greeted in the morning by strangers offering him coffee and a cigarette and everyone having a laugh about it. That's much more like the world I'd prefer to live in than whatever the fuck is wrong with this country and 40% of its population.
> That's much more like the world I'd prefer to live in than whatever the fuck is wrong with this country and 40% of its population.
Agreed, when I had this happen to me (once with a dorm in college, another time in an apartment) I just kicked the guy out, didn't give him coffee. Unlike rolph, my first thought wasn't, "I know, I should shoot this guy sleeping on my couch." What a sad world some people exist in and want to spread to the rest of the world.
What about running Docker inside a Proxmox LXC container? Is that a common practice? Intuitively doing that would have a lower baseline resource usage than using a full-blown VM for Docker containers.
Maybe the license structure could allow for proprietary extensions. I don't think there would be many people willing to put the work of writing many deep and good quality integrations with banks for free.
But why one or the other? Don't get me wrong, I appreciate a curated list of suggestions, but it would really be useful to have some tips or comments on the experience of each one, their shortcomings or advantages. Otherwise, it's not much better than just checking out a list of names from Google :)
I will use hledger if I'm handling someone else's money, like as a trustee. Double entry accounting is nice for being precise about things. But for my own accounts it's too much overhead to deal with reconciliation. Don't have time for that.
A lot of it is going to be needs & vibes based. Some of them have more in-depth and niche features in certain areas, like transaction splitting or categorization and others are just simple and clean UI to go for ease of use.
I'm sitting in the beach with no data connectivity whatsoever, much less any WiFi network anywhere close; my partner just asked me to send a copy of the photos we just took with my phone 10 mins ago. That's the use case. Not outside reach of a WiFi or 4G network much for you, then?
Another easy example of use case is wanting to share a file during a flight or while being overseas on a boat.
reply