I don't have the link, but I also remember reading this story. I tried googling but didn't have any luck either. I just wanted to let you know that you're not misremembering!
IMO the HN search isn't even worth using -- it's way too strict. Google's a lot better at finding relevance without the exact keywords.
And also, HN's title policy is unfortunate :( I wish we had the editorial freedom to give articles better, more meaningful titles... but the guidelines actively discourage that.
For a while I've wanted to build a big red "Ship it!" button (think emergency stop button). When slammed, it runs `git add -u . && git commit -m "Shipped!" && git push`
Summary: Most valuable when bridging the gap between data science and software engineering. Expertise in broad spectrum of industries, and a passion for jumping into brand new problems. Have considerable expertise in genomics (CRISPR/TALEN gene editing on-target and off-target search) as well GIS development. Absolutely love solving problems that combine complexities of the real world with computer science.
Summary: Most valuable when bridging the gap between data science and software engineering. Expertise in broad spectrum of industries, and a passion for jumping into brand new problems. Have considerable expertise in genomics (CRISPR/TALEN gene editing on-target and off-target search) as well GIS development. Absolutely love solving problems that combine complexities of the real world with computer science.
Someone with more in depth knowledge can tell me why this isn't a good idea, but I'm pretty sure you can get something very close to this with graphql subscription query against hasura backed with postgres
One factor of this battle against trickle down economics is language. 'Trickle down economics' is term that is intuitive, explains itself well, and is easy to remember. It's a meme in Dawkin's original definition of the word.
The alternative term, 'bubble up economics', needs to the popularised more.
That but also value added economics would be a good idea to introduce, since not all companies, especially in the financial sector produce value to society. Like breaking apart successful companies for example.
I think it's hopeless. The HN crowd is relatively educated, but they just gormlessly use a slur in reference to a thing. Should I have confidence that they understand the thing itself, if they can't avoid attacking it with every mention?
What's curious is--when these policies came about under Reagan, the economy basically exploded upwards for 40 years. What the hell do you want? LBJ's Great Society back again? That's where we're headed right now. Inflation and destitution!
Can I ask how did you safely organise a tour like that without getting scammed/putting yourself in danger? How did you get in contact with your driver?
I googled “rental car Islamabad” and found a rents agency. I called them and worked out a deal to pay cash upfront with any special security deposit or insurance. They put me in touch with the driver. Basically I just went for it.
There are many travel startups now which specialize in organizing these trips to north for foreigners. I can’t think of a name but should be easily google-able.
If you want to go cheaper, search for rent-a-car services in Islamabad.
You probably wouldn’t be scammed or put in danger either way.
You can’t create a Discord account without doxxing yourself. Signups not from an IP that discloses your location demand a dozen captchas and a telephone number. Using a burner number is not supported, and your carrier number is reversible to name/address/location just as your IP is.
The main issue with this viewpoint and your (arguably sensationalist) article is that it just finger points & blatantly ignores the reason those protections are in place.
The number of people that consider Discord part of their threat model or an actual privacy risk is incredibly tiny compared to the number of users that get inconvenience by mass bot raids & people bypassing IP bans.
I help manage a medium-sized Discord guild and we were randomly targeted by a bot raid whereby ~100 bots joined in the span of 1 minute and proceeding to spam various channels and the DMs of our users. Enabling Discord's requirement for a verified phone number stopped the raid in its tracks and allowed us to clean up without further issue.
In the same way, Discord's automatic content scanning is designed to protect the large percentage of minors on the platform & proactively deal with potentially exploitative material + guilds (per https://blog.discordapp.com/discord-transparency-report-apri...)
Removing these features & restrictions in order to appease your extreme edge-case privacy views does not help the average Discord user in the slightest.
You're absolutely right when you offer that the majority of people are not directly harmed by practices that are discriminatory. Discrimination is almost always aimed at circumstances that affect a minority of people.
It seems that you believe that you benefit from Discord's gatekeeping. I'm glad it seems to be working out for you. If it wasn't, however, how would you know?
Sorry, but no, you don't get to play a discrimination card here, because if we do, we're almost mocking people who are under real discrimination.
You don't agree with Discord's practices and lack of privacy, something which, by the way, I agree with you, and as such, decide not to use it. They are not discriminating against you, you're the one deciding not to use their service. To me, it sounds the same as if you don't like McDonalds because it's unhealthy, then accuse them of discriminating against you because they won't serve you some lean chicken salad.
The people doing the discrimination are the groups that choose Discord as their communications tool.
They are excluding all users who can’t get Discord accounts, such as those who can’t agree to the Discord TOS, for example. Free software projects and other public benefit groups should not be discriminatory.
They’re also banning political cartoons within their group’s
communications, by implicit inclusion of the Discord TOS which bans several common, normal, reasonable types of communication.
I’m a paying member of a local nonprofit organization; they use Discord exclusively to communicate. I am excluded from all of the discussions as a result of my not being able to safely get a Discord account. That’s discrimination whether you like to acknowledge it or not.
But that's the thing: You CAN agree to the TOS, you just choose to not, unless I'm severely misunderstanding your situation and you're in real, physical danger if you create a Discord account. For the sake of a better argument, can you clarify if you're in danger, or physically unable to create an account, or if it's a privacy choice, please?
Let’s set aside my personal circumstances: why must someone be in imminent physical danger for it to not be discrimination? Everyone has a human right to privacy, regardless of whether or not they are a famous person with a stalker who wants to track them down.
The presence or absence of threats against one’s person does not legitimize or delegitimize their insistence upon personal privacy.
I agree that it doesn't delegitimize your insistence upon personal privacy, and in fact, I'm in your camp with that, privacy is vital. My issue with the term is that, when you think in historical terms about discrimination, it's people being forced out of places/positions/society because of who they are.
The difference, in this case is that you're not being forced out of participating in conversations because you're, let's say, black. Instead, you, on your own, are opting out of communication channels because of your own beliefs.
There are API services that let you identify the type of number provided by the user. VoIP lines don't identify the same way as landlines which don't identify the same way as actual SIM-backed mobiles. They blacklist lots of providers and number types.
My first account I was able to get was via a number I rented on dtmf.io. The account was suspended (across all "servers" in Discord) in a few minutes when I linked a few of my IRL friends in a Discord chat to that Discord article on my own website. I've not been able to sign up again since, despite having blown something like 40EUR on numbers from different countries/providers trying to get a new one.
Even when it works, it's at least 10 minutes of solving CAPTCHAs to log in, each and every time, and sometimes the Google CAPTCHA hits some other exit node rate limit and just tells you to fuck off entirely, making login impossible even with a working account.
