Somebody who a) directs DDOS attacks and b) abuses random visitors' browser for those DDOS attacks is never the victim.
You don't know their motives for running their site, but you do get a clear message about their character by observing their actions, and you'd do well to listen to that message.
The character is completely irrelevant to whether they are a victim of doxxing.
They might be the worst person ever but that doesn't matter. People can be good and bad, sometimes the victim sometimes the perpetrator.
Is it morally wrong to doxx someone and cause them to go to jail because they are running an archive website? Yes. It is. It doesn't matter who the person is. It does not matter what their motivations are.
There are plenty of cases where the operator of archive.today refused to take down archives of pages with people's identifying information, so it's a huge double standard for them to insist on others to not look into their identity using public information.
Irrelevant to a determination of fact, yes. But very relevant to the question of whether or not I care about any of this. Bad thing happened to bad person, lots of drama ensued, come rubberneck the various internet slapfights, details at 11. In other news, water is wet.
this is grey text from tailwindcss.com, I wouldn't call it easy and readable.
<div class="relative before:absolute before:top-0 before:h-px before:w-[200vw] before:bg-gray-950/5 dark:before:bg-white/10 before:-left-[100vw] after:absolute after:bottom-0 after:h-px after:w-[200vw] after:bg-gray-950/5 dark:after:bg-white/10 after:-left-[100vw]"><p class="max-w-(--breakpoint-md) px-2 text-base/7 text-gray-600 max-sm:px-4 dark:text-gray-400">Because Tailwind is so low-level, it never encourages you to design the same site twice. Some of your favorite sites are built with Tailwind, and you probably had no idea.</p></div>
In my editor this looks like this, with an extension like Tailwind Fold or Inline Fold:
<div class="...">
<p class="...">
Because Tailwind is so low-level, it never encourages you to design the same site twice. Some of your favorite sites are built with Tailwind, and you probably had no idea.
</p>
</div>
There's nothing in Tailwind that makes the craftsmanship dead, and your proposed solution with scoped styles somehow a revival of said craftsmanship.
Note how your solution literally depends on a build tool (Vue) to work. Whereas Tailwind can work with no build tools (tailwind build tools removes unused classes, and that's mostly it).
And then you go:
--- start quote ---
Juniors still come along and just do margin: 13px. In tailwind, they do m-[13px]. No difference. At least with CSS its centralized.
--- end quote ---
When your scoped CSS example is literally decentralized per-file CSS that has `margin: 5px` in it. That gets compiled into a meaningless `class-678x8789g` by the build tool.
> The people I've seen who are most excited over tailwind are generally those that would view frontend as something they have to do, not something they want to do.
You don't need to access (or even have access to) the DB server itself (e.g. to read the query-log), you can do everything by just setting a different host to connect to.
He might have, and my experience is that you cannot teach inconsiderate people, they lack social object permanence: as soon as you don't stand in front of them, they become unaware of your existence and thus are also unaware that their music at two in the morning might be annoying to you.
Better windows don't help either - but they're great for noise outside. The only thing that helps against horrible neighbors is moving. If you've never learned that lesson, you've never had horrible neighbors.
"The only thing that helps against horrible neighbors is moving. If you've never learned that lesson, you've never had horrible neighbors."
Having lived next to a terrible neighbour for over 20 years, I can confirm a horrible neighbour never changes into a considerate one. And often they're the ones that never sell or move (why would they, they're having a great time..).
Almost all the neighbours properties around here have been sold a few times, but not him.
Lucky we've been lucky with our other neighbours who are (currently, and most of the owners of the past too) all very nice people.
We'd love to move, but we really like the location, house and garden. That and anything similar is priced out of our range.
We used to think we got really lucky with the price of our place, but maybe no one bought it because they knew the neighbour that lived there.
But yeah, if you can move, move. Don't hang around hoping things will get better, they usually don't.
I stood my ground once against an awful neighbor. The neighborhood was a fishbowl and he already had a bad reputation that he wanted to pretend didn’t exist. My spouse and I put up a fence on the property line and nowhere else, which really embarrassed him. And at one point we figured out he was eavesdropping on us. I found out he had a record and so I started talking with my spouse in the room he eavesdropped on about getting a restraining order and about his record. It took about 3 months but he eventually packed up and left.
There's a guy in my neighborhood driving a 20yo BMW with a modified exhaust. He also has a motorcycle. If I tried to move to a more expensive area, I would have a guy driving a 5yo BMW with a modified exhaust - the building two blocks away is literally that - 40% more expensive, asshole in an M3 flooring it every time he drives out.
A friend of mine had a prolonged conflict with a neighbour who lived off of his dad's money and who would pound his Porsche at any time he would feel like it.
It's true that the recipient of the protest might be different, but that's no reason to be quiet.
China in Tibet, China's treatment of the Uyghurs, Russia's war against Ukraine, Kony 2012 etc, there are lots of causes where the local government in whichever country you look at isn't actively involved, yet there was a lot more public noise and campaigns.
I don't know what the answer is, but "my government doesn't deliver weapons to them" hasn't been a reason before, so I don't see why it would be now.
US government policy is completely aligned with the goal of stopping Iran from doing this, there is no reason to protest the US government on this issue.
It's not always a protest against government, sometimes it a campaign of lobbying, sometimes it's international attention.
The US government wasn't a friend of Kony in 2012. Before Trump 2, the US were not that friendly with Russia, yet people protested in many places around the world to show support for Ukraine and to voice their opposition to Russia's imperialistic wars, being aligned with their governments' position.
It's different with Iran. Some of that is likely to be Iran's lower profile, but not all -- it's not like media outlets are not reporting on it at all and you have to get your information from niche sources to hear about events in Iran.
China in Tibet manifestation were mostly thanks to the Dalai Lama. Without a spiritual chief in exile, no one would have cared.
The Uighur is easy: Nike and a lots of western brand used Chinese work camps. In my neighborhood that's what people protested, not really Chinese treatment of their minority, but the fact our brands used slave labor. Nike and all no promised they wouldn't use slave again, the Uighur are still discriminated and forcefully sterilized, no one care anymore in the West.
Russia war against Ukraine is very different, it's the first war in Europe since the 90s, and the first "real" war in europe since 45 (I guarantee you if Ukraine folded in 3 days, no one would have said much). Also, Europe is financing the Russian war economy, which is easy to protest.
Westerners treat Tibetans like pandas, which is why China has travel restrictions into Tibet proper for foreigners. Most westerners don’t know the Uighurs exist, and anyways they are Muslims. Accordingly, China doesn’t bother with travel restrictions into Xinjiang. The fact that they have any attention from westerners at all these days is kind of amazing.
I disagree. Build for your target audience and your targeted application. We don't need for every vehicle to be off-road-capable when you're expecting to deliver cargo on paved roads. We can do that, but it will make things more complex and more expensive.
I'm not saying that nobody should ever consider "the state cuts off the internet" as a criteria when deciding what to do, but making that a foundational requirement is like starting out with "handle google-scale" as a requirement when you have zero reason to believe you will.
There are plenty of good reasons for local first apps, but "build for darkness" is pretty far down the list for me.
The sad thing about continuing development of existing technologies is that all reliability, robustness, and multi-purpose capabilities get optimized away over time. In the ideal world, companies wouldn't even sell you hardware or software, they'd just charge for magically doing the one thing you want at the moment, with no generality and no agency on your end.
It's a miracle we still have electric outlets in homes, and not just bunch of hard-wired appliances plugged in by vendor subcontractors.
As opposed to what? Everyone pays the overhead and price of apps designed for things like local-first Bluetooth sync?
This is a situation where the market will prevail and people would go toward (and therefore pay for) apps designed to fit their needs, not apps designed around rare and unusual scenarios.
Build specific tools for specific situations. You won’t get anywhere trying to get all general purpose apps to focus on niche requirements.
At which point do you cross the line? Somebody who murders to take someone else's money is ultimately just too lazy to provide value in return for money, so they're not evil?
What's your estimation for how much more expensive it would be for DTAG to peer at Decix instead of only doing dedicated private peerings that they get paid for?
Because I don't believe it's about any additional cost -- it's only about additional revenue that could be extracted. That's a behavior you don't like to see from a state-owned ex-"Only Offer Allowed" monopolist that is still dominating the market while the government entities tasked with regulating the market are closing both eyes.
You don't know their motives for running their site, but you do get a clear message about their character by observing their actions, and you'd do well to listen to that message.
reply